2. 考研
  3. Although no company is mentioned by name, it is very clear which American internet giant the European Parliament has in mind in

Although no company is mentioned by name, it is very clear which American internet giant the European Parliament has in mind in

admin2022-07-06  55
问题     Although no company is mentioned by name, it is very clear which American internet giant the European Parliament has in mind in a resolution that has been doing the rounds in the run-up to a vote this month. One draft calls for "unbundling search engines from other commercial services" to ensure a level playing field for European companies and consumers.  This is the latest and most dramatic outbreak of "Google panic" in Europe.
    The parliament touches on a question that has been raised by politicians from Washington to Seoul and brings together all sorts of issues from privacy to industrial policy. How worrying is the dominance of the internet by Google and a handful of other firms?
    Google is clearly dominant, then; but whether it abuses that dominance is another matter. It stands accused of favouring its own services in search results, making it hard for advertisers to manage campaigns across several online platforms, and presenting answers on some search pages directly rather than referring users to other websites. But its behaviour is not in the same class as Microsoft’s systematic campaign against the Netscape browser in the late 1990s: there are no e-mails talking about "cutting off" competitors’ "air supply". What’s more, some of the features that hurt Google’s competitors benefit its consumers. Giving people flight details, dictionary definitions or a map right away saves them time. And while advertisers often pay high rates for clicks, users get Google’s service for nothing—rather as plumbers and florists fork out to be listed in Yellow Pages which are given to readers free, and nightclubs charge men steep entry prices but let women in free.
    The European Parliament’s "Google panic" looks a mask for two concerns, one worthier than the other. The disappointing one, which American politicians pointed out, is a desire to protect European companies. Among the loudest voices lobbying against Google are two German media giants. Instead of attacking successful American companies, Europe’s leaders should ask themselves why their continent has not produced a Google or a Facebook. Opening up the EU’s digital services market would do more to create one than protecting local established enterprises.
    The good reason for worrying about the internet giants is privacy. It is right to limit the ability of Google and Facebook to use personal data: their services should, for instance, come with default settings guarding privacy, so companies gathering personal information have to ask consumers to opt in. Europe’s politicians have shown more interest in this than American ones. But to address these concerns, they should regulate companies’ behaviour, not their market power. Some clearer thinking by European politicians would benefit the continent’s citizens.
Which of the following can be inferred from the last two paragraphs?
选项 A、Europe agrees with American politicians on "Google panic".
B、Privacy is the issue worthy of European politician’s attention.
C、Europe is unable to produce a Google or a Facebook.
D、Politicians should ask consumers to opt in to address the concerns.
答案B
解析 最后两段讲述了欧洲议会两大“顾虑”，作者暗示一个是令人失望的(disappointing)，另一个是更有价值的(worthier)。由最后一段首句的good reason可知，作者所说的worthier是指privacy“隐私问题”，故B项正确。A项根据第四段的which American politicians pointed out作干扰，实际上欧美并未就“谷歌恐惧症”达成一致意见。第四段末只是“欧洲尚未出现Google或脸书这样的巨头”，但并不代表欧洲一定不能做到这一点，故C项错误。文中所说的是保护稳私的措施，与解决政治的顾虑无关，故排除D项。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/66g7FFFM
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)