C
Anew commodity brings about a highly profitable,fast-growing industry,urgingantitrust（反垄断）regulators to step in tocheck those who control its flow. A century ago ,the resource in question wasoil. Now similar concerns ares being raised by the giants（巨头）that deal in data, the oilof the digital age. The most valuable firms are Google,Amazon, Facebook andMicrosoft. All look unstoppable.
Such situations have ledto calls for the tech giants to be broken up. But size alone is not a crime,Thegiants' success has benefited consumers. Few want to live without searchengines or a quick delivery, Far from charging consumers high prices, many ofthese services are free (users pay, in effect, by handing over yet more data).And the appearance of new-born giants suggests that newcomers can make waves,too.
But there is cause for concern. The internethas made data abundant, all-present and far more valuable, changing the natureof data and competition. Google initially used the data collected from users totarget advertising better. But recently it has discovered that data can beturned into new services: translation and visual recognition, to be sold toother companies. Internet companies’ control of data gives them enormous power.So they have a “God’s eye view” of activities in their own markets and beyond.
This nature of data makesthe antitrust measures of the past less useful. Breaking up firms like Googleinto five small ones would not stop remaking themselves: in time, one of themwould become great again. A rethink is required—and as a new approach starts tobecome apparent, two ideas stand out.
The first is thatantitrust authorities need to move form the industrial age into the 21stcentury. When considering a merger(兼并),for example, they havetraditionally used size to determine when to step in. They now need to takeinto account the extent of firms'data assets(资产) when assessing the impact of deals.The purchase price could also be a signal that an established company is buyinga new-borm threat. When this takes place, especially when a new-born companyhas no revenue to speak of, the regulators should raise red flags.
The second principle is to loosen the control that providers of on-line services have over data and give more to those who supply them.Companies could be forced to consumers what information they hold and how many money they make form it.Govemments could order the sharing of certain kinds of data,with users' consent.
Restarting antitrust for the information age will not be easy But if govemments don't wants a data oconomy by a few giants,they must act soon.
Why is there a call to break up giants?
细节理解题。根据关键词定位到第二段第一句，Such situations have led to calls for the tech giants to be broken up. But size alone is not a crime,...由such找到第一段第一句，urging antitrust（反垄断）regulators to step in to check those...可知因为这些巨头控制了数据市场，人们才呼吁解散那些巨头。故而选A。
What does the technological innovation inParagraph 3 indicate?
推理判断题。根据关键词定位到第三段最后两句，Internet companies’ control of data gives them enormous power. So they have a “God’s eye view” of activities in their own markets and beyond.可知网络公司对于数据的控制给了他们巨大的权利，它们甚至可以用上帝的眼光来看待它们的市场活动，这进一步加强了那些巨头的地位。所以选C。
By paying attention to firms’ data assets,antitrust regulators could
推理判断题。根据关键词定位到第五段前三句，The first is that antitrust authorities need to move form the industrial age into the 21st century. When considering a merger(兼并),for example, they have traditionally used size to determine when to step in. They now need to take into account the extent of firms'data assets(资产) when assessing the impact of deals. 可知反垄断组织以前一直是根据公司的规模来决定是否介入，而现在需要考虑那些公司的数据库的范围，所以答案选B。
What is the purpose of loosening the giants’control of data?
推理判断题。根据关键词定位到第六段可知，大公司要披露给消费者它们掌握了多少信息，政府也要根据消费者的满意度来决定。所以答案选D。