IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/recjxx/v19y2023i2p261-284.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Who (and why) gets cited by the Commission? The role and quality of expert knowledge in Google antitrust saga

Author

Listed:
  • Joanna Mazur

Abstract

The aim of this article is to examine the role that expert knowledge plays in the Commission’s decisions concerning digital economy. I propose a typology of functions served by these types of sources based on an analysis of references in the Commission’s decisions against Google: first, providing evidence about the history of technological development and the changes on digital markets; second, explaining the way digital technologies and markets work; third, justifying authoritative claims about digital technologies and digital markets’ characteristics; and fourth, illustrating the story with data on the usage of digital technologies and the shape of digital markets. While these types of sources are important in building “the body of evidence” which helps the Commission to tell the story of competition harm in the area of digital economy, there are situations in which their quality raises concerns in the light of the requirements for evidence.

Suggested Citation

  • Joanna Mazur, 2023. "Who (and why) gets cited by the Commission? The role and quality of expert knowledge in Google antitrust saga," European Competition Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(2), pages 261-284, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:recjxx:v:19:y:2023:i:2:p:261-284
    DOI: 10.1080/17441056.2023.2195330
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/17441056.2023.2195330
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/17441056.2023.2195330?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:recjxx:v:19:y:2023:i:2:p:261-284. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/recj .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.