Praise
The below edit and critique earned this comment from the customer:
Hi... my name is XXX and I have used your services four times during the proce of a lying to XXX as an undergraduate busine major. I am pleased to say that I was succe fully admitted based on a strong a eal. I want to thank you VERY much for all the hard work that your staff put into helping me reach this very important goal in my life. I am the first in my family to go to college and I feel very fortunate to have had the a istance and su ort that your services have provided to me. In many ways, I feel indebted beyond the scope of payment for services rendered. The editing proce not only helped me to gain admi ion, but it vastly improved the way in which I saw my own writing abilities. I feel my communication has been much clearer through the proce of your staff's editing a istance, which will serve me well into the future. Again, I feel very fortunate to have had the o ortunity to engage in this unique busine and please let me know how I can be of any help to your staff. I will a olutely recommend this site to people in my circle both at my community college and at XXX, that is a guarantee.
Unedited Version:
Question: With on-line tra actio 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 di erse co umer information at their own discretion? Should on-line privacy be regulated by governmental mandate, or is co umer protection the re o ibility of the corporatio and/or their customers?
Given the Internet’s borderle nature, many e-commerce companies are facing inco istencies in the marketplace when is comes to regulatio over online co umer privacy. Over the past decade, numerous surveys have been conducted internationally only to have found co istent and majority concer about co umer 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 Commi ion, of major e-commerce sites found that roughly 20% met FTC standards for protecting co umer privacy. The i ue of online privacy seemed to reach peak levels when the European union expre ed deep concern last year that the U.S. standards of securing online privacy was too low. While the single-i ue privacy concer may be posting of privacy policies, freedom of co umers to limit use of their personal data, or the secure handling of all information given voluntarily or through the use of ‘cookies,’ the i ue of online privacy is crucial to the development of the e-commerce industry. The Clinton administration has long been strongly advocated a lai ez-faire a roach de ite 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 eech 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 co umer’s grou 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 redre 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 re o e to the threat of co umer uprise and government regulation has been significant in the efforts of the bigger corporatio . Grou such as CPEX, Customer Profile Exchange, created a coalition of Internet companies that will try to a ure privacy advocates and co umers that they will protect the information co umers share and companies exchange. Corporatio such as Microsoft, AOL, AT&am T, Dell computer, and Time Warner proposed model international rules designed to make Internet sho ing more secure. Last year, the Better Busine Bureau launched its new program for certifying and monitoring the collection of personal data online, which was a su tantial attempt to link the go between co umer’s privacy interests and busine ’s practices. The program gives qualified companies an electronic seal for their We ite, which verifies that they adhere to their stated practices about what information they collect from co umers and how it is used. The first company to di lay to the seal was Dell Computer. Among other industry attempts to deal with the privacy i ue was the development of software products that help co umers evaluate the privacy policies of individual we ites. For example, YOUpowered ™ not only hel co umers evaluate the privacy policies of individual we ites 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 imme ely as investors eculated whether the government would become more intrusive than before.
On May 22, 2000, three of the five FTC commi ioners favored new laws to protect co umer’s privacy online. While the FTC has recognized that the majority of large busine es have been getting the me age of co umers and government interest, there are many more problems that arise with the inco istencies of the smaller companies, and the overall distribution and sale of personal information to third parties. While wide read inco istencies such as DoubleClick’s acquisition of Abacus are very hard to ignore, many smaller and struggling Internet companies could find it detrimental to their succe to comply with new rules. De ite all of the industry’s attempts to self-regulate the co umer privacy i ue, much of their findings are based upon the failure of sites to give co umers acce 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. Co umer advocates have also expre ed di atisfaction for those companies where, in companies that state their statements of ‘Privacy policies,’ that the language of these cautio as ambiguous and confusing. For those that are also clear, the warnings and i tructio are not standardized.
Clearly, we need laws that regulate the truth in Internet communicatio between co umer and e-commerce without threatening or intruding on the rising e-commerce domai . In writing such laws, they need to balance both the First and Fourth amendment, the right of people to “be secure in their perso , houses, papers and effects,” agai t the rights of corporate free eech. On one hand, I believe that if what a co umer has told about themselves has a market value beyond the immediate web tra action, then he/she deserves be explicitly aware of those intentio 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 re ect the newne and entrepreneurial visio of the e-commerce companies as they make their way into the new mille ium. Overall, If the public continues to look to e-commerce as su icious of false or misleading privacy i ues, in the form of cookies or the sale of personal information to third parties, then the entire busine 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 re ect the integrity of the free markets while securing the public’s concern for their privacy, in order to prevent any more disasters or compromising situatio 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 ace and resolution for the rest of the mille ium to flourish with i ovative e-commerce busine and personal products.
Critique
Click Here for the Edited Version.
XXX,
You have written a strong and detailed e ay with many interesting points, and have structured your argument well. The e ay’s major flaws were its length and some scattered grammatical and stylistic problems. We cut the e ay to the required 1000 words, removing about 200 words. In order to make your e ay 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 po ible. We also removed portio of sentences if we thought they were u ece ary or that they cluttered your ideas. On the other hand, we i erted some phrases and even entire statements to clarify your thoughts. Since you expre ed di atisfaction 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.
There was a segment of the e ay 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 tra action indeed take place in 1999? At a later point in the e ay, you refer to it again as though it did take place? Yet this quoted segment is confusing. If the tra action 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 e ay carefully and choose the changes that best suit you.
We hope you continue to use our profe ional editing services, and we wish you the best of luck in your a lication proce .
Edited E ay:
Significantly improves each e ay using the same voice as the author. The only way to evaluate editing is to compare the original e ay with the edited version. We significantly improve e ays both for clients who write poorly and for clients who write exceptionally well.
Given the Internet’s borderle nature, many e-commerce companies find themselves facing inco istencies in the marketplace regarding co umer privacy regulatio . In the past decade, numerous surveys throughout the world have found wide read privacy concer among co umers. For example, Westin (1998) found that 81% of Internet users expre a rehe ion about entering personal data online. Moreover, a recent survey by the Federal Trade Commi ion revealed that only a roximately 20% of major e-commerce sites met FTC standards for protecting co umer privacy. This i ue seemed to reach peak levels when the European union expre ed deep concern last year that the U.S. standards of securing online privacy were too low.
The i ue of online privacy, whether it concer the posting of privacy policies, the freedom of co umers 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 lai ez-faire a roach, de ite a stringent new European union privacy directive that threate to disrupt electronic commerce between the United States and Europe. Clinton did, however, state in a commencement eech 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 co umer grou and the government are wary of most online privacy statements, mainly because they are contradictory, hard to find, and subject to change, which weake mechanisms of enforcement or redre by the law. If protecting co umers is to be a priority among online merchants, significant, industry-wide change must take place in their privacy policies.
The e-commerce industry maintai 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 corporatio have indeed re onded to customer and government concer . Grou such as Customer Profile Exchange (CPEX) have created a coalition of Internet companies that promise to protect the information that co umers share and companies exchange. Corporatio such as Microsoft, AOL, AT&am T, Dell Computer, and Time Warner have proposed model international rules designed to make Internet sho ing more secure.
Last year, the Better Busine 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 We ite, which verifies that they adhere to their stated practices about what information they collect from co umers and how it is used. The first company to di lay the seal was Dell Computer. Another industry attempt to heighten security was the development of software products that help co umers evaluate the privacy policies of individual we ites. For example, YOUpowered ™ aids co umers 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 eculated that the government would become increasingly intrusive on busine privacy i ues.
On May 22, 2000, three of the five FTC commi ioners favored new laws to protect co umers’ privacy online. While the FTC recognizes that most large busine es have begun catering to the privacy i ue, many problems remain among smaller companies and the overall distribution and sale of personal information to third parties. While wide read inco istencies such as DoubleClick’s acquisition of Abacus are difficult to ignore, many smaller Internet companies could find it detrimental to their succe to comply with new rules. De ite the industry’s attempts to self-regulate co umer privacy, much of their findings are based upon the failure of sites to give co umers acce 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. Co umer advocates have also expre ed di atisfaction with companies whose ‘privacy policies’ are ambiguous and confusing. Moreover, those that are clearer lack standardized warnings and i tructio .
Clearly, we need laws that regulate security in Internet communicatio without threatening or intruding on the rising e-commerce domai . Such laws must balance both the First and Fourth amendments, the right of people to “be secure in their perso , houses, papers and effects,” agai t the rights of corporate free eech. I believe that if a co umer’s personal information has a market value beyond the immediate web tra action, 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 re ect the newne and entrepreneurial visio of e-commerce companies in the new mille ium. Internet advertisers must remember, however, that if the public continues to su ect e-commerce of false or misleading privacy i ues 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 co umer privacy concer . Government action would put co umers at ease and allow e-commerce to flourish with i ovative busine and personal products in the new mille ium.