The first category focuses on the welfare of consumers, emphasizing that "killing" damages the interests of consumers - through more accurate and detailed pricing of personal information, the platform transfers all the welfare originally belonging to consumers into its own hands, resulting in the former from There are fewer benefits from the transaction. This kind of view holds that since the competition regulations of various countries emphasize the protection of consumer welfare, the above behavior of reducing consumer welfare should naturally be curbed. Compared with the first type of argument, the second type of argument is more "platform-oriented", emphasizing the advantages of precise price discrimination in terms of efficiency . Due to the "winner-takes-all" nature of the Internet age, many emerging industries are dominated by a few oligopolies or simply close to a monopoly. Compared with the efficiency loss caused by monopoly pricing, full price discrimination can instead Fax List maximize the total social welfare. That being the case, it might as well allow platforms to engage in this type of price discrimination. After that, through redistribution tools such as taxation, society can achieve reasonable distribution results. However, the above two types of methods have a common disadvantage: the assumption is that consumers are "frightened". Among them, the platform can freely choose the pricing strategy, and consumers can only react passively. However, many research results in recent years have allowed us to see a more complicated side of this problem: consumers sometimes play cards not according to "rationality", but according to "emotion"; a careful pricing strategy can increase profits in the short term, In the long run, it will lead to a "lose-lose"; businesses that seem to benefit from discrimination may eventually join forces to demand the passage of an anti-price discrimination bill. The above paradoxes may seem confusing at first glance, but they are actually well-founded.

The first sentence is " marketing is communication, communication is marketing ", this is the marketing guru, father of integrated marketing Fax List communication Don Schultz said. The second sentence is "the medium is the message ", which was said by the most famous media theorist and thinker of the 20th century, Marshall McLuhan. The third sentence is "to imitate is to spread ", which is said by Tilde, a well-known Western psychologist and one of the three founders of French sociology in the 19th century (as famous as Comte and Durkheim). Before I start, let me ask you a question - Anyone who understands marketing knows that there is a basic framework and elements in marketing, that is, the 4Ps. The 4Ps include Product, Price, Place, and Promotion . The word Promotion is translated as "promotion" by some people, including some marketing textbooks, which is wrong. Because our Fax List conventional interpretation of "promotion" refers to sales activities with price concessions such as buying gifts and discounts, and Promotion refers to all the means used by enterprises to promote sales and promote sales, including advertising, public relations, ground promotion, Promotions, live broadcasts, e-commerce, and more. So Promotion should be translated as "promotion" or "sales promotion", which includes "promotion". Here we see that 4P is the basic element of marketing, and advertising communication is one of the 1P "Promotion" subordinate to the 4P. Advertising is a small branch of marketing. So here comes my question - why aren't the advertising departments Fax List and advertising majors in the university under the marketing department? Why not just start a professional course in advertising under the marketing department, but set up an independent major? Friends who study advertising in universities know that advertising majors are generally set under the School of Journalism and Communication in colleges and universities. According to the regulations of the Ministry of Education, marketing.