A story in the Telegraph today focuses on the dominance of Google in the 'search engine market' and reports that 25 Labour MPs have signed an Early Day Motion (EDM) which urges ministers to “consider measures to prevent the monopolisation of the online search advertising market”
“A monopoly is unhealthy,” said Andrew Dismore, one of the Labour MPs backing the motion. “Google cornering the market is not good for competitive pricing or quality of service. The Government should recognise that there is a potential problem."
Just because Google may have increased its share of the market to nearly 90 percent must surely be due to the fact that users have a choice of search engines and consequently have made that choice.
How, Mr. Dismore, would you propose regulating which search engine is used? How would any monitoring system work and who would implement it? Welcome Big Brother?
If a monopoly is unhealthy, Mr Dismore, then what pray is the NHS if it is but a monopoly based on the fact we have no choice other than the NHS if we want free healthcare? A number of your colleagues, Mr Dismore, are reportedly 'up in arms' over the 'privatisation of Royal Mail; but what is Royal Mail, if privatisation does not go ahead, but a monopoly?
What, Mr Dismore, are political parties if not monopolies as only members of a party can select their candidates as prospective parliamentary candidates? To follow your argument Mr. Dismore, then it would be necessary that open primaries are held for the selection of any prospective parliamentary candidate whereby anyone, regardless of political beliefs, could have a vote.
It would appear, Mr. Dismore, you have caught the affliction of your Great Leader - you haven't a clue what the hell you are talking about!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
You are quite right to point out that the state is a natural monopolist, and agents of the state are guilty of very great hypocrisy if they complain about others having a monopoly.
Post a Comment