Showing 9 of 353 Publications in Innovation & the New Economy

Imposed Final Offer Arbitration: Price Regulation by Any Other Name

TOTM “Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in!” says Al Pacino’s character, Michael Corleone, in Godfather III. That’s how Facebook and . . .

“Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in!” says Al Pacino’s character, Michael Corleone, in Godfather III. That’s how Facebook and Google must feel about S. 673, the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act (JCPA).

Read the full piece here.

Continue reading
Antitrust & Consumer Protection

Journalism Competition and Preservation Act: Not What It Says on the Box

TL;DR Background… As leaders of the U.S. Senate work to pass the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) in the ongoing lame-duck session, some reports suggest that . . .

Background…

As leaders of the U.S. Senate work to pass the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) in the ongoing lame-duck session, some reports suggest that S. 673, the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act (JCPA), could be added to the legislative package. Approved in September 2022 by the Senate Judiciary Committee, the JCPA aims to boost the fortunes of traditional media companies by forcing “covered” online platforms to pay for digital journalism accessed via their services. The bill would require that platforms continue to display digital journalism, while setting out an intricate process whereby digital-journalism providers would collectively negotiate the price of content with platforms.

But…

This quixotic attempt to prop up flailing media firms will create legally sanctioned cartels that harm consumers, while forcing online platforms to carry and pay for content in ways that violate long-established principles of intellectual property, economic efficiency, and the U.S. Constitution.

Read the full explainer here.

Continue reading
Antitrust & Consumer Protection

Federal Trade Commission’s gig-economy crackdown threatens innovation

Popular Media When President Joe Biden named Lina Khan to chair the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the conventional wisdom predicted a focus on Big Tech. In practice, however, Khan has proven hostile not just to the tech sector, but to innovators generally, including those in the gig economy.

When President Joe Biden named Lina Khan to chair the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the conventional wisdom predicted a focus on Big Tech. In practice, however, Khan has proven hostile not just to the tech sector, but to innovators generally, including those in the gig economy. If the FTC continues down this road unchecked, there will be damaging and far-reaching repercussions that hurt consumers and imperil economic opportunities.

Read the full piece here.

Continue reading
Innovation & the New Economy

Ch. 11 Isn’t Twitter Creditors’ Only Hope Of Getting Paid

Popular Media On Nov.10, new Twitter Inc. owner Elon Musk reportedly told employees that bankruptcy was a possibility unless Twitter’s cash flow improved. But that cash flow . . .

On Nov.10, new Twitter Inc. owner Elon Musk reportedly told employees that bankruptcy was a possibility unless Twitter’s cash flow improved. But that cash flow already has been reduced considerably because advertisers are pulling away from Twitter.

Read the full piece here.

Continue reading
Financial Regulation & Corporate Governance

As Government Grows, Divisions Multiply

Popular Media America is deeply polarized, increasingly split into two, roughly equal, political camps. Each side blames the other for causing the situation. In a speech last . . .

America is deeply polarized, increasingly split into two, roughly equal, political camps. Each side blames the other for causing the situation. In a speech last week, President Biden accused Republicans of being a threat to democracy itself.

Read the full piece here.

Continue reading
Innovation & the New Economy

No Perfect Solutions for Market Imperfections

Scholarship Abstract Markets are imperfect, and the suboptimal results are frequently used to justify government regulation. Government regulation, however, is also imperfect, and the suboptimal results . . .

Abstract

Markets are imperfect, and the suboptimal results are frequently used to justify government regulation. Government regulation, however, is also imperfect, and the suboptimal results are, less-frequently, used to justify deregulatory efforts. Located between those poles is industry self-regulation, in which the industry is tasked with effectuating regulatory goals. Unfortunately, but perhaps not surprisingly, industry self-regulation is also imperfect. Industry members, when called on to engage in self-regulation, will face what Austrian economists call the knowledge problem, but at lesser severity than full government regulation. Industry members will also face a variety of public choice pressures, and those pressures may be more disruptive than under full government regulation. There are, therefore, no perfect solutions, and policy makers seeking solutions must weigh the relative tradeoffs on a case-specific basis, if they wish to obtain optimal outcomes.

Continue reading
Innovation & the New Economy

Inframarginal Externalities: COVID-19, Vaccines, and Universal Mandates

Scholarship COVID-19 vaccine mandates are in place or being debated across the world. Standard neoclassical economics argues that the marginal social benefit from vaccination exceeds the . . .

COVID-19 vaccine mandates are in place or being debated across the world. Standard neoclassical economics argues that the marginal social benefit from vaccination exceeds the marginal private benefit; everyone vaccinated against a given infectious disease protects others by not transmitting the disease. Consequently, private levels of vaccination will be lower than the socially optimal levels due to free-riding, which requires mandates to overcome the problem. We argue that universal mandates based on free-riding are less compelling for COVID-19. We argue that because the virus can be transmitted even after receiving the vaccine, most of the benefits of the COVID-19 vaccine are internalized: vaccinated individuals are protected from the worst effects of the disease. Therefore, any positive externality may be inframarginal or policy irrelevant. Even when all the benefits are not internalized by the individual, the externalities mainly are local, mostly affecting family and closely associated individuals, requiring local institutional (private and civil society) arrangements to boost vaccine rates, even in a global pandemic. Economists and politicians must justify such universal vaccine mandates on some basis other than free-riding.

Read the full paper here.

Continue reading
Innovation & the New Economy

How Not to Use Industrial Policy to Promote Europe’s Digital Sovereignty

TOTM The concept of European “digital sovereignty” has been promoted in recent years both by high officials of the European Union and by EU national governments. . . .

The concept of European “digital sovereignty” has been promoted in recent years both by high officials of the European Union and by EU national governments. Indeed, France made strengthening sovereignty one of the goals of its recent presidency in the EU Council.

Read the full piece here.

Continue reading
Innovation & the New Economy

COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness and the Evidence on Boosters: A Systematic Review (with Partial Evidence on the Omicron Variant)

Scholarship Abstract Background. The need for COVID-19 vaccine booster shots is controversial. When boosters were under active review in the U.S. in 2021, Krause et al.[1] . . .

Abstract

Background. The need for COVID-19 vaccine booster shots is controversial. When boosters were under active review in the U.S. in 2021, Krause et al.[1] and others have argued that need for a COVID-19 booster for all adults has not been sufficiently established. In late 2021, U.S. regulators initially limited booster eligibility, waited months before allowing boosters for all adults, and even longer before recommending them, with public health officials sending mixed messages on booster value. We conduct a systematic review of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) for primary and booster doses.

Methods. We conducted a systematic review of studies reporting COVID-19 vaccine efficacy or VE against four endpoints: any infection, symptomatic infection, hospitalization, and death for the four principal vaccines used in developed Western countries (BNT162b2, mRNA1273, Ad26.CoV2.S, and ChAdOx1-S), waning VE, and booster VE, during the period of Delta-variant prevalence. We reviewed all studies appearing on PubMed over Jan. 1, 2021 through March 31, 2022, supplemented with our own knowledge of other sources. 63 studies met defined inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Findings. The mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2, mRNA1273) had very high initial VE but experienced significant VE waning after approximately six months, including against severe disease and mortality, with BNT162b2 declining faster than mRNA1273. Both mRNA vaccines outperformed the Ad26.CoV2.S and ChAdOx1-S viral vector vaccines. Booster doses reduced symptomatic infection, severe disease, and mortality. Initial evidence supports booster value against the Omicron variant.

Interpretation. Strong epidemiological evidence supports waning VE for primary COVID-19 vaccination and the value of a booster dose, roughly 6 months after initial vaccination. The emergence of the Omicron variant strengthens the value of booster doses to recipients. Boosters also provide spillover benefits to others, both vaccinated and unvaccinated, by reducing downstream infections; reducing shortage risk for scarce COVID treatments; and reducing hospital overload.

Continue reading
Innovation & the New Economy