By Olaf Storbeck
The author is a Reuters Breakingviews columnist. The opinions expressed are his own.
The Justice Department sued to block AT&T's $39 billion deal to buy T-Mobile USA because eliminating T-Mobile as a competitor would be disastrous for consumers and would raise prices, particularly because the smaller provider offers low prices, the lawsuit said. The lawsuit is a serious attempt to halt a "fundamentally flawed" deal, not a tactic to wring out-sized concessions from AT&T, a source familiar with the lawsuit said.
But there is already a bit of a backlash, and a new awareness that the world wide (open) web may compare favorably to the walled gardens available on the iPad and other tablets.
News and views on the asset management industry from Reuters and elsewhere:
It's not hard to see why newspaper companies, saddled with plunging circulation and big iron presses , are so ecstatic over tablet devices. They bring a form of hope that hasn't crossed this industry's path since newspapers dominated classified advertising in the 1980s and 1990s making them fat with revenue and profits. Tablet computers, like Apple's iPad and Samsung's Galaxy Tab, just might spark renewed interest in wilted newspapers among consumers and help ease the legacy costs of paper and ink.
Some people hate The New York Times and some people love The New York Times -- but everybody wants to read The New York Times for free. That will largely end in 2011. You probably read that today on the Internet, and you probably read it for free.
I wrote an analysis on Monday about the possibility that News Corp might take its news search results away from Google and list them on Microsoft's Bing search engine instead. My conclusion: This one isn't such a hot idea. Then I read John Gapper's Financial Times item about how it *could* be a hot idea.