Is Google’s dominance actually dangerous? – Charlotte Bowyer argues NO in City AM

Head of Digital Policy at the Adam Smith Institute, Charlotte Bowyer, argues that Google’s online prominence isn’t something to worry about in the CityAM Forum Debate:

There’s no denying that Google’s empire is vast. But the question is whether the prioritisation of its own services within search is actually bad for consumers. Many rival facilities exist, yet despite heavy investment and the promotion of services like Yahoo’s Bing, EU consumers just aren’t that interested. This suggests that people simply find Google’s search function superior, or enjoy the efficiency of its integrated services. But the way in which we access information and entertainment is evolving. Personal Assistant services like Siri are designed to compete with traditional search, while consumers are increasingly turning “in-app” to services like Facebook, Instagram and even Snapchat for news and recommendations. Many once-popular services and tech companies fall out of favour with time. With so many alternatives out there, there’s no reason to assume that Google’s current dominance is anti-competitive, or even guaranteed to continue.

Read the full article here.

Kate Andrews argues against minimum alcohol pricing on BBC The Big Questions

Head of Communications at the Adam Smith Institute, Kate Andrews, appeared on BBC One’s The Big Questions to debate whether drinkers need to ‘pay their way’. She argued that drinkers are already paying their way and that increasing the price of alcohol serves as a regressive tax that hurts the least well-off and contributes to the cost of living crisis.

Watch the full episode here. (Segment on minimum alcohol pricing starts 22:50)

The ASI’s reaction to UKIP’s Manifesto features in City AM

The Adam Smith Institute’s comments on Ukip’s pledge to ban unskilled immigrants from the UK for five years were featured in City AM:

A key pledge made by Nigel Farage as Ukip launched its manifesto, designed to rouse voters at the General Election in May, has been slammed by one think-tank within hours.

Plans to crackdown on immigration by unskilled workers has been described as breaking with “evidence, common sense and moral decency” by the Adam Smith Institute.

Read the full article here.

Press Release: UKIP’s crackdown on unskilled immigrants goes against all economic sense

For further comments or to arrange an interview, contact Head of Communications Kate Andrews: kate@adamsmith.org | 07584 778207

Commenting on UKIP’s pledge to ban unskilled immigration to the UK for five years, Director of the Adam Smith Institute Dr Eamonn Butler said:

UKIP’s crackdown on unskilled immigrants breaks with evidence, common sense, and moral decency. Low-skilled immigration does not affect the number of jobs available to natives; in fact, immigrants demand goods and services, which means new jobs are created to supply those services and community needs.

Immigrants prop up the welfare state, paying more in taxes overall than they consume in services or benefits. The best evidence suggests that low-skilled immigration only has a small and temporary negative effect on native wages, and this effect does not compare to the wealth they generate for the UK.

UKIP’s pledge to ban unskilled immigration for five years goes against all economic sense. It is only supported by a dogma that is both intellectually and morally bankrupt.

Notes to editors:

For more information, read ASI briefing paper “The Ties that Bind: Analysing the relationship between social cohesion, diversity, and immigration“, which finds no conclusive evidence that diversity within UK communities creates a negative impact on social cohesion.

The Adam Smith Institute is an free market, libertarian think tank based in London. It advocates classically liberal public policies to create a richer, freer world.