Price Bias Hides Platform Harms

Updated: 2025.09.11 1M ago 2 sources
Courts and media are primed to detect monopoly abuse through price changes. When dominant platforms are 'free,' safety and quality degradations—like algorithms funneling minors to flagged groomers—get dismissed as ancillary in antitrust and draw muted coverage. This creates an accountability gap for ad‑supported monopolies. — It suggests antitrust and oversight must formalize non‑price harms or risk leaving the most consequential digital abuses untouched.

Sources

The Antitrust Cases That Matter
Joel L. Thayer 2025.09.11 70% relevant
The article argues Big Tech’s market power affects information distribution and speech—quoting that 'speech and the censorship of speech can be downstream of [tech companies’] market power'—which aligns with the idea that antitrust should recognize non‑price harms in dominant platforms.
Tyrants of the Algorithm: Big Tech’s Corrosive Rule and Its Consequences
Matt Stoller 2025.08.20 100% relevant
Judge Jeb Boasberg labeled Instagram child‑safety exhibits 'ancillary' in Federal Trade Commission v. Meta, and Meta PR limited press pickup to a few outlets despite internal evidence of algorithmic grooming facilitation.
← Back to All Ideas