From the Editors: May/June 2015
April 22, 2015
Apr 22, 2015
2 Min read time
There is much to applaud in the success of innovative online services such as Amazon, Uber, and Airbnb. But their rapid growth also invites new debate about economic regulation. Are Internet-based companies simply easing transactions—say, between a car owner and someone who needs to get home—or does their conduct call for public scrutiny?
In our lead article, Brooklyn Law School Professor Sabeel Rahman makes a case for public scrutiny. That conclusion, he argues, depends on a new understanding of regulation—more precisely, on reviving an older set of ideas that have been lost in recent analysis. Rahman observes that we now focus regulatory debates on market prices and consumer welfare. On that conception, it is hard to see how companies such as Amazon, Uber, and Airbnb raise any concerns. Their goods and services are cheap, after all. But if we return to a broader conception of regulatory purposes, rooted in Progressive Era ideas, we recognize the dangerous pressures excessive corporate power can impose on suppliers, workers, and consumers alike. In short, we should be focused on power, not simply prices—on politics, not simply markets. We find an important point of entry for this more expansive set of concerns in the FCC’s recent ruling on net neutrality. The FCC invoked the idea of a “common carrier” or utility—a private company selling public goods. By extension, Rahman argues, we should think of Internet-based companies as “platforms” with broad power over producers, consumers, and even the public and should regulate them in that light.
Respondents are not all convinced. Some urge a more serious enforcement of existing labor law. Some criticize Rahman for not recognizing the profound economic impact of the Internet; for them, history is the wrong place to look for insight. Others anticipate a flourishing of peer-owned or open-source alternatives to corporate power. As the forum underscores, we are already making, by act or omission, profoundly consequential choices. Thus the importance of the debate.
Two other essays focus similarly on the distribution of rewards brought by change. Reviewing Christopher Beauchamp’s Invented by Law, Graeme Gooday revisits Alexander Graham Bell’s “invention” of the telephone and the role of patent law in creating undeserved returns. And Sarah Hill looks at the beginnings of economic transformation in Cuba, where winners and losers are already emerging.
Finally, Marie Gottschalk reminds us of the limits of economic models in addressing moral issues. New bipartisan efforts to reduce the prison population are bound to fail, she argues, if they continue to serve the demands of cost-benefit analysis rather than human rights.
And don’t miss the winning poems from the 92nd Street Y’s “Discovery” contest on page 68.
Help fund the next generation of Black journalists, editors, and publishers.
Boston Review’s Black Voices in the Public Sphere Fellowship is designed to address the profound lack of diversity in the media by providing aspiring Black media professionals with training, mentorship, networking opportunities, and career development workshops. The program is being funded with the generous support of Derek Schrier, chair of Boston Review’s board of advisors, the Ford Foundation, and the Carnegie Corporation of New York, but we still have $50,000 left to raise to fully fund the fellowship for the next two years. To help reach that goal, if you make a tax-deductible donation to our fellowship fund through August 31 it will be matched 1:1, up to $25,000—so please act now to double your impact. To learn more about the program and our 2021-2022 fellows, click here.
April 22, 2015
2 Min read time