This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Economics Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Internet Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 11 January 2022 and 4 March 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Connorcwa (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Paige5678.

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2019 and 4 January 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): JanellM.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:04, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 August 2020 and 14 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mattbaranello.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:04, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2021 and 13 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tu22.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:04, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_economy#Impact I'd like to kick start and ask for help to work this out: e.g. I see a lot of numbers and % in this publication: http://www.mckinsey.com/features/sizing_the_internet_economy but they're not clear enough to me: e.g. "

The Internet accounts for 3.4 percent of overall GDP in the 13 nations studied. More than half of that impact arises from private consumption, primarily online purchases and advertising. An additional 29 percent flows from investments by private-sector companies in servers, software, and communications equipment. The Internet economy, now larger than that of Spain, surpasses global industry sectors such as agriculture and energy."

What is the 29%? I have to add that to the 3.4%? So that's the size of the internet economy. But how much growth does it help leverage? It doesn't say anything about that, right? I'm downloading the study to see if I can find more. I have high hopes, the title is: "Internet matters, the net's sweeping impact on growth, jobs and prosperity." Help is appreciated. --SvenAERTS (talk) 13:14, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I did a complete rewrite to give this article a new start. Please take it for what it is: a start, and please feel free to develop it further. I used some key reference documents, but there is infinitely more. Thanks Rmarsden (talk) 21:51, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Singh has reviewed this Wikipedia page, and provided us with the following comments to improve its quality:

I have found the term "digital economy" used in a 1991 book. Tapscott may have popularized the term, but I do not think it can be claimed that he coined it. Indeed, the first paragraph is simply marketing for the book, rather than an objective introduction. The Mesenbourg (2001) classification is also obsolete, and the following sentence only hints at what the scope of the term can be. The Negroponte reference is important, and almost should come first, and be better integrated. Overall, the first section is poor. The second and third sections are also quite poor.

We hope Wikipedians on this talk page can take advantage of these comments and improve the quality of the article accordingly.

Dr. Singh has published scholarly research which seems to be relevant to this Wikipedia article:

• Reference : Jake Kendall & Nirvikar Singh & Kristin Williams & Yan Zhou & P.D. Kaushik, 2007. "Network Economics and the Digital Divide in Rural India," Working Papers 07-29, NET Institute, revised Sep 2007.

ExpertIdeasBot (talk) 02:54, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@CNMall41: expressed an objection to include the following. This is a discussion on the matter of antitrust vs labor violations issue within gig economy.

Present argument states: "since these workers are considered independent contractors, these companies are not responsible for giving its workers benefits packages like it would for regular full-time employees."

This is false. Two-sided online platforms serve gig workers and consumers as user groups. companies such as Uber do not actually hire workers as either contractors, or employees, they serve them in a vertical relationships platform to user Source: https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/atr/legacy/2011/05/12/270430.pdf

The proposal is to change the flawed statement above to read as following:

Since gig workers are considered third-party users of two-sided platforms, digital marketplaces typically do not employ gig workers. However, what many gig workers want is what platforms promise, but don’t deliver: genuine independence and control over their own work. Prohibitions on vertical restraints, such as dictating the prices that gig workers charge to customers places gig economy into multiple cross-hairs of antitrust regulations that prohibit exercise of control by a non-employer over a third-party. The vertical restraints that are typical of the gig economy are aimed at preventing multi-homing and platform competition on the take rate, whereby the take rates that platforms charge are no longer subject to competition from other platforms, or new entrants.^{[1] [2]} Litesand (talk) 21:19, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - Based on sourcing and editorializing. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:51, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @CNMall41: The content is taken almost entirely verbatim from https://lpeproject.org/blog/the-antitrust-case-against-gig-economy-labor-platforms/ which is a reliable source by a reliable author. Is there a specific element you disagree with? A better proposal? It's not clear if you disagree with the format of the proposed edit, or the merit behind the fact that gig platforms do not hire any workers, but instead connect users as groups. Please clarify so that we can figure this out based on facts and references. As it stands, the current statement has no reference at all - just something someone said because they feel like it. Litesand (talk) 17:50, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  As a prime source we can reference ToS from Uber (the most well-known two-sided marketplace for hailing gig drivers) that states: "Uber is not a common or motor carrier and does not transport you or your goods. ... Your ability to request, and if applicable, obtain third-party services from third-party providers in connection with the use of the services does not establish Uber as a provider of anything other than the services. Independent third-party providers are not actual agents, apparent agents, ostensible agents, or employees of Uber in any way. ..." (Source: https://www.uber.com/legal/en/document/?name=general-terms-of-use&country=united-states&lang=en) Independent third-party providers calssify themselves as contractors, but Uber does not consider them as agents of Uber, but merely users of the mobile device application.

  Litesand (talk) 01:28, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just a couple items of note. We do not take things "almost entirely verbatim," we summarize what a source says instead. What the entry does is attempt to paint a picture from a personal point of view instead of summarizing what the sources say. It also uses primary sources which can only be used sparingly. What you have done is considered WP:OR. There is no "better proposal" as this is something you wanted to add. --CNMall41 (talk) 02:13, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]