Users dislike ads-> competing for users platforms limit ads with higher fees. With less competition (post-merger big or small), platforms care less about users and allow more ads by lowering fees. If no new entrants restore competition, fees stay high long-run. See Anderson&Peitz(2020) for details.

𝗕𝗼𝗻𝘂𝘀 𝗰𝗼𝗼𝗹 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘂𝗹𝘁: Mergers between fierce competitors are more likely to benefit advertisers than between highly differentiated firms. Relevance to the rumored TikTok sale in the U.S.? Curious? Check out: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

Ergo, 𝘁𝗮𝗹𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝘆, we need to consider innovation effects in merger control for ad-funded platforms.

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘄𝗲 𝗯𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲: Even the advertisers' side can be harmed. After a merger, reduced innovation leads to fewer consumer interactions. Advertisers dependent on consumer attention could be worse off, despite lower fees.

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘄𝗲 𝗸𝗻𝗼𝘄 𝘀𝗼 𝗳𝗮𝗿: At least advertisers are better off - Ad-funded platform mergers create a "see-saw" effect: reduced competition lowers ad fees, benefiting advertisers, but increased ads harm consumers (Anderson & Peitz, 2020).

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘄𝗲 𝗱𝗼: We introduce innovation to the discussion of ad-funded platform mergers.
𝗪𝗵𝘆: Assessment of merger effects in these markets is especially hard given the zero prices charged to consumers, making innovation a crucial element to consider.

Older generations didn't read as well and waited for the movie/series. AI just takes on the role of summarizing, making it faster and more efficient, potentially covering a broader literature set.
That said, a summary omits nuances for in-depth understanding, independent of how it is generated.