By Ramsi Woodcock (University of Kentucky)
Economists have long recognized that advertising has two main functions: to inform and to persuade. In the information age, the information function is obsolete, because consumers can get all the product information they want from a quick Google search. That makes virtually all advertising today purely persuasive in function. The courts have long recognized that purely persuasive advertising is anticompetitive, because it induces consumers to buy products that they do not really prefer, harming consumers and placing sellers of consumers’ preferred products at a competitive disadvantage. Antitrust enforcers must respond to the obsolescence of the information function of advertising by treating advertising as a per se illegal form of monopolization under the Sherman Act.
Featured News
EU Extends Support for Farms and Fisheries Amid Market Disruptions
May 5, 2024 by
CPI
Sony and Apollo Bid $26 Billion for Paramount Acquisition
May 5, 2024 by
CPI
Goldman Sachs Resolves Decade-Old Metal-Rigging Class Action Lawsuit
May 5, 2024 by
CPI
Italian Antitrust Ruling Puts Halt on Intesa Sanpaolo’s Fintech Ambitions
May 5, 2024 by
CPI
Google Antitrust Case: Closing Arguments Conclude
May 5, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Economics of Criminal Antitrust
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
Navigating Economic Expert Work in Criminal Antitrust Litigation
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
The Increased Importance of Economics in Cartel Cases
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
A Law and Economics Analysis of the Antitrust Treatment of Physician Collective Price Agreements
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
Information Exchange In Criminal Antitrust Cases: How Economic Testimony Can Tip The Scales
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI