商学院申请范文

Question: With on-line transactions being performed with ever-increasing frequency, hundreds of Web sites collect “personal” information about their customers on a daily basis. Do companies have an obligation to protect the privacy of their customers, or, conversely, do they have the right to collect and disperse consumer information at their own discretion? Should on-line privacy be regulated by governmental mandate, or is consumer protection the responsibility of the corporations and/or their customers?

Given the Internet’s borderless nature, many e-commerce companies are facing inconsistencies in the marketplace when is comes to regulations over online consumer privacy. Over the past decade, numerous surveys have been conducted internationally only to have found consistent and majority concerns about consumer online privacy. For example, Westin (1998) found that 81% of Internet users are concerned about threats to their privacy while online. While a more recent survey, by the Federal Trade Commission, of major e-commerce sites found that roughly 20% met FTC standards for protecting consumer privacy. The issue of online privacy seemed to reach peak levels when the European Union expressed deep concern last year that the U.S. standards of securing online privacy was too low. While the single-issue privacy concerns may be posting of privacy policies, freedom of consumers to limit use of their personal data, or the secure handling of all information given voluntarily or through the use of ‘cookies,’ the issue of online privacy is crucial to the development of the e-commerce industry. The Clinton administration has long been strongly advocated a laissez-faire approach despite a tough new European Union privacy directive that has threatened to disrupt electronic commerce between the United States and Europe. Although Clinton stated in a commencement speech at Eastern Michigan University last May, “We can’t let breakthroughs in technology break down the walls of privacy. We must be able to enjoy the benefits of technology without sacrificing our privacy.” Many online marketers have endorsed self-regulation, citing that federal intervention could ruin e-commerce entirely. In the effort of scrutinizing the existing ’self-regulation,’ it is clear that the consumer’s groups and government are still weary of most of the privacy statements of major Internet companies mainly because they are contradictory, hard to find, and subject to change which is deficient of any mechanisms of enforcement or redress by law.
A major concern of the e-commerce industry is that the difference of a normal company and an e-commerce one is the personalization that comes from knowing more about a user’s needs and wants. The industry’s response to the threat of consumer uprise and government regulation has been significant in the efforts of the bigger corporations. Groups such as CPEX, Customer Profile Exchange, created a coalition of Internet companies that will try to assure privacy advocates and consumers that they will protect the information consumers share and companies exchange. Corporations such as Microsoft, AOL, AT&T, Dell computer, and Time Warner proposed model international rules designed to make Internet shopping more secure. Last year, the Better Business Bureau launched its new program for certifying and monitoring the collection of personal data online, which was a substantial attempt to link the go between consumer’s privacy interests and business’s practices. The program gives qualified companies an electronic seal for their Website, which verifies that they adhere to their stated practices about what information they collect from consumers and how it is used. The first company to display to the BBB seal was Dell Computer. Among other industry attempts to deal with the privacy issue was the development of software products that help consumers evaluate the privacy policies of individual websites. For example, YOUpowered ™ not only helps consumers evaluate the privacy policies of individual websites but also gives an individual the option of sharing the information or not. However, all of these industry accomplishments could prevent a company called DoubleClick from acquiring Abacus Direct in November of 1999. Abacus is one of the country’s largest catalog databases companies and in the purchase, it was revealed that for the first time, an Internet advertiser could match names along with other personal info to be anonymously collected online. The stock market was quick to praise this financial move as such information would become extremely valuable to companies that wanted to pitch their products to an individual within a short amount of time. After the FTC began to investigate the company’s practices, the stock price fell immensely as investors speculated whether the government would become more intrusive than before.

On May 22, 2000, three of the five FTC commissioners favored new laws to protect consumer’s privacy online. While the FTC has recognized that the majority of large businesses have been getting the message of consumers and government interest, there are many more problems that arise with the inconsistencies of the smaller companies, and the overall distribution and sale of personal information to third parties. While widespread inconsistencies such as DoubleClick’s acquisition of Abacus are very hard to ignore, many smaller and struggling Internet companies could find it detrimental to their success to comply with new rules. Despite all of the industry’s attempts to self-regulate the consumer privacy issue, much of their findings are based upon the failure of sites to give consumers access to information that is collected about them. Both minor and major e-commerce companies have not entirely accepted this recommendation, in part because it is difficult and costly to implement. Consumer advocates have also expressed dissatisfaction for those companies where, in companies that state their statements of ‘Privacy policies,’ that the language of these cautions as ambiguous and confusing. For those that are also clear, the warnings and instructions are not standardized.
Clearly, we need laws that regulate the truth in Internet communications between consumer and e-commerce without threatening or intruding on the rising e-commerce domains. In writing such laws, they need to balance both the First and Fourth amendment, the right of people to “be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects,” against the rights of corporate free speech. On one hand, I believe that if what a consumer has told about themselves has a market value beyond the immediate web transaction, then he/she deserves be explicitly aware of those intentions and can therefore opt-in or opt-out with sharing of their information to protect their individual privacy. On the other, I believe that it is also in the interest of the government to respect the newness and entrepreneurial visions of the e-commerce companies as they make their way into the new millennium. Overall, If the public continues to look to e-commerce as suspicious of false or misleading privacy issues, in the form of cookies or the sale of personal information to third parties, then the entire business of Internet advertising might be forced to change on it’s own. By that time, the industry would take on the effect of doing ‘too little, too late.’ Much effort would have to be made in order to reestablish and secure the privacy interests of the public. It is far better to have a long-term standardization of privacy policies mandated by the government that will respect the integrity of the free markets while securing the public’s concern for their privacy, in order to prevent any more disasters or compromising situations to occur in the future. By requiring the industry as a whole to have clear and standardized privacy policies, as adopted by the FTC, the reduction in conflict will provide much needed space and resolution for the rest of the millennium to flourish with innovative e-commerce business and personal products.

Critique
Click Here for the Edited Version.
XXX,
You have written a strong and detailed essay with many interesting points, and have structured your argument well. The essay’s major flaws were its length and some scattered grammatical and stylistic problems. We cut the essay to the required 1000 words, removing about 200 words. In order to make your essay more smooth and compelling, we significantly revised much of the content; we made sure, however, to allow your own ideas and voice to remain intact.

Your own vocabulary is strong, and your words well-chosen, yet we tried to broaden your diction and use more suitable words wherever possible. We also removed portions of sentences if we thought they were unnecessary or that they cluttered your ideas. On the other hand, we inserted some phrases and even entire statements to clarify your thoughts. Since you expressed dissatisfaction with your thesis and conclusion, you will find that we made some changes there (although we felt the conclusion was relatively fine). Awkward sentences were revised, and we varied your sentence structure to keep the reader interested in the writing.#p#分页标题#e#

There was a segment of the essay that concerned us. You state “These industry developments could prevent a company called DoubleClick from acquiring Abacus Direct, one of the country’s largest catalog database services, in November of 1999. This acquisition would, for the first time, allow an Internet advertiser to match actual names with other personal information that is ‘anonymously’ collected online.” Did this transaction indeed take place in 1999? At a later point in the essay, you refer to it again as though it did take place? Yet this quoted segment is confusing. If the transaction did NOT take place, you should rewrite it as follows: “These industry developments prevented a company called DoubleClick from acquiring Abacus Direct, one of the country’s largest catalog database services, in November of 1999. This acquisition would have allowed, for the first time, an Internet advertiser to match actual names with other personal information that is ‘anonymously’ collected online.”

Please bear in mind that we have a bias to change things rather than to leave them the same. You should read the revised essay carefully and choose the changes that best suit you.

We hope you continue to use our professional editing services, and we wish you the best of luck in your application process.

Edited Essay:
Significantly improves each essay using the same voice as the author. The only way to evaluate editing is to compare the original essay with the edited version. We significantly improve essays both for clients who write poorly and for clients who write exceptionally well.

Given the Internet’s borderless nature, many e-commerce companies find themselves facing inconsistencies in the marketplace regarding consumer privacy regulations. In the past decade, numerous surveys throughout the world have found widespread privacy concerns among consumers. For example, Westin (1998) found that 81% of Internet users express apprehension about entering personal data online. Moreover, a recent survey by the Federal Trade Commission revealed that only approximately 20% of major e-commerce sites met FTC standards for protecting consumer privacy. This issue seemed to reach peak levels when the European Union expressed deep concern last year that the U.S. standards of securing online privacy were too low.

The issue of online privacy, whether it concerns the posting of privacy policies, the freedom of consumers to limit use of their personal data, or the secure handling of all information given voluntarily or through the use of ‘cookies,” is crucial to the development of the e-commerce industry. The Clinton administration has long been a strong advocate of a laissez-faire approach, despite a stringent new European Union privacy directive that threatens to disrupt electronic commerce between the United States and Europe. Clinton did, however, state in a commencement speech at Eastern Michigan University last May, “We can’t let breakthroughs in technology break down the walls of privacy. We must be able to enjoy the benefits of technology without sacrificing our privacy.” Many online marketers endorse self-regulation, citing that federal intervention could ruin e-commerce entirely. Yet close examination of the existing ’self-regulation’ reveals that consumer groups and the government are wary of most online privacy statements, mainly because they are contradictory, hard to find, and subject to change, which weakens mechanisms of enforcement or redress by the law. If protecting consumers is to be a priority among online merchants, significant, industry-wide change must take place in their privacy policies.

The e-commerce industry maintains that the difference between a normal company and an online one is the personalization that comes from knowing more about a user’s needs and wants. The larger e-commerce corporations have indeed responded to customer and government concerns. Groups such as Customer Profile Exchange (CPEX) have created a coalition of Internet companies that promise to protect the information that consumers share and companies exchange. Corporations such as Microsoft, AOL, AT&T, Dell Computer, and Time Warner have proposed model international rules designed to make Internet shopping more secure.

Last year, the Better Business Bureau launched its new program for certifying and monitoring the collection of personal data online. The program gives qualified companies an electronic seal for their Website, which verifies that they adhere to their stated practices about what information they collect from consumers and how it is used. The first company to display the BBB seal was Dell Computer. Another industry attempt to heighten security was the development of software products that help consumers evaluate the privacy policies of individual websites. For example, YOUpowered ™ aids consumers in evaluating privacy policies while giving each individual the option of sharing the information or not.

These industry developments could prevent a company called DoubleClick from acquiring Abacus Direct, one of the country’s largest catalog database services, in November of 1999. This acquisition would, for the first time, allow an Internet advertiser to match actual names with other personal information that is ‘anonymously’ collected online. The stock market was quick to praise this financial move, for such information is extremely valuable to companies that want to pitch their products to an individual within a short amount of time. After the FTC began to investigate the company’s practices, its stock price fell as investors speculated that the government would become increasingly intrusive on business privacy issues.

On May 22, 2000, three of the five FTC commissioners favored new laws to protect consumers’ privacy online. While the FTC recognizes that most large businesses have begun catering to the privacy issue, many problems remain among smaller companies and the overall distribution and sale of personal information to third parties. While widespread inconsistencies such as DoubleClick’s acquisition of Abacus are difficult to ignore, many smaller Internet companies could find it detrimental to their success to comply with new rules. Despite the industry’s attempts to self-regulate consumer privacy, much of their findings are based upon the failure of sites to give consumers access to information that is collected about them. Both minor and major e-commerce companies have not entirely accepted this recommendation, in part because it is difficult and costly to implement. Consumer advocates have also expressed dissatisfaction with companies whose ‘privacy policies’ are ambiguous and confusing. Moreover, those that are clearer lack standardized warnings and instructions.

Clearly, we need laws that regulate security in Internet communications without threatening or intruding on the rising e-commerce domains. Such laws must balance both the First and Fourth amendments, the right of people to “be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects,” against the rights of corporate free speech. I believe that if a consumer’s personal information has a market value beyond the immediate web transaction, then he/she deserves to be explicitly aware of and in control of the sharing of this information. On the other hand, it is also in the interest of the government to respect the newness and entrepreneurial visions of e-commerce companies in the new millennium. Internet advertisers must remember, however, that if the public continues to suspect e-commerce of false or misleading privacy issues in the form of cookies or the sale of personal information to third parties, any efforts that the industry takes to win back the public’s trust may be ‘too little, too late.’ It is far better to launch a long-term, government-mandated privacy policy than to stifle e-commerce with consumer privacy concerns. Government action would put consumers at ease and allow e-commerce to flourish with innovative business and personal products in the new millennium.