hce_nthu
113年
英文
第 27 題
📖 題組：
Reading 2 The Justice Department and 38 states and territories on Tuesday laid out how Google had systematically wielded its power in online search to cow competitors, as the internet giant fiercely parried back, in the opening of the most consequential trial over tech power in the modern internet era. In a packed courtroom at the E. Barrett Prettyman U.S. Courthouse in Washington, the Justice Department and states painted a picture of how Google had used its deep pockets and dominant position, paying $10 billion a year to Apple and others to be the default search provider on smartphones. Google viewed those agreements as a “powerful strategic weapon” to cut out rivals and entrench its search engine, the government said. “This feedback loop, this wheel, has been turning for more than 12 years,” said Kenneth Dintzer, the Justice Department’s lead courtroom lawyer. “And it always turns to Google’s advantage.” Google denied that it had illegally used agreements to exclude its search competitors and said it had simply provided a superior product, adding that people can easily switch which search engine they use. The company also said that internet search extends more broadly than its general search engine and pointed to the many ways that people now find information online, such as Amazon for shopping, TikTok for entertainment and Expedia for travel. “Users today have more search options and more ways to access information online than ever before,” said John E. Schmidtlein, the lawyer who opened for Google. The back-and-forth came in the federal government’s first monopoly trial since it tried to break up Microsoft more than two decades ago. This case — U.S. et al. v. Google — is set to have profound implications not only for the internet behemoth but for a generation of other large tech companies that have come to influence how people shop, communicate, entertain themselves and work. A government victory could set limits on Google and change its business practices, sending a humbling message to the other tech giants. If Google wins, it could act as a referendum on increasingly aggressive government regulators, raise questions about the efficacy of century-old antitrust laws and further embolden Silicon Valley.
Reading 2 The Justice Department and 38 states and territories on Tuesday laid out how Google had systematically wielded its power in online search to cow competitors, as the internet giant fiercely parried back, in the opening of the most consequential trial over tech power in the modern internet era. In a packed courtroom at the E. Barrett Prettyman U.S. Courthouse in Washington, the Justice Department and states painted a picture of how Google had used its deep pockets and dominant position, paying $10 billion a year to Apple and others to be the default search provider on smartphones. Google viewed those agreements as a “powerful strategic weapon” to cut out rivals and entrench its search engine, the government said. “This feedback loop, this wheel, has been turning for more than 12 years,” said Kenneth Dintzer, the Justice Department’s lead courtroom lawyer. “And it always turns to Google’s advantage.” Google denied that it had illegally used agreements to exclude its search competitors and said it had simply provided a superior product, adding that people can easily switch which search engine they use. The company also said that internet search extends more broadly than its general search engine and pointed to the many ways that people now find information online, such as Amazon for shopping, TikTok for entertainment and Expedia for travel. “Users today have more search options and more ways to access information online than ever before,” said John E. Schmidtlein, the lawyer who opened for Google. The back-and-forth came in the federal government’s first monopoly trial since it tried to break up Microsoft more than two decades ago. This case — U.S. et al. v. Google — is set to have profound implications not only for the internet behemoth but for a generation of other large tech companies that have come to influence how people shop, communicate, entertain themselves and work. A government victory could set limits on Google and change its business practices, sending a humbling message to the other tech giants. If Google wins, it could act as a referendum on increasingly aggressive government regulators, raise questions about the efficacy of century-old antitrust laws and further embolden Silicon Valley.
Based on the passage, why did the Justice Department’s lead courtroom lawyer portray Google’s business maneuver as a “feedback loop”?
- A He believed that Google has tremendous power in shaping our imagination.
- B He wanted to reach a compromise with Google so that the company can peak in the global market.
- C He wanted to suggest that Google is a well-oiled machine in churning out workplace creativity.
- D He sided with the public and views Google as one of the most innovating search engine companies.
- E He aimed at criticizing Google for dominating the search engine market.
思路引導 VIP
想像一下，如果有一家實力雄厚的公司，因為已經賺了很多錢，所以能支付鉅款讓所有商場都只能擺放他們的商品，而這又讓他們賺到更多錢來維持這種地位。當司法部的律師在法庭上將這種循環形容為一個『迴圈』時，你認為他的初衷是在稱讚這家公司的運作效率，還是在指控這種模式對其他競爭者不公平呢？
🤖
AI 詳解
AI 專屬家教
掌握訴訟立場：批判性的回饋迴路
做得好！你精確地捕捉到了文章中檢察官的觀點。這題考驗的是對文章細節與語氣的判讀，你能從這篇關於科技巨頭反壟斷調查的長文中，精確鎖定美國司法部（Justice Department）律師的訴訟立場，表現得非常出色。 文中提到律師 Kenneth Dintzer 將 Google 的商業手段描述為**「回饋迴路」（feedback loop）**，這是一個關鍵的比喻。他指出 Google 每年支付高達 100 億美元給蘋果等公司，以換取預設搜尋引擎的地位；這種龐大資金帶來的地位，進一步轉化為更多的數據與優勢。律師用這個詞是為了強調這種機制如何讓 Google **鞏固其搜尋引擎霸權（entrench its search engine）**並排擠對手，因此選項 (E) 指出他在批評 Google 壟斷搜尋引擎市場，是最精準的解讀。
▼ 還有更多解析內容