優步如何爲自己提供政治導航
Everybody loves disruption, except the people who are being disrupted. As Uber, the app-based ride-hailing service, has spread rapidly from its San Francisco home to cities around the world, it has repeatedly faced resistance from incumbent taxi operators, who are often politically influential. Regulators and legislators from Brussels to Beijing have moved to restrict Uber’s operations.
每個人都熱愛破壞，除了那些受到破壞影響的人。隨着基於應用的叫車服務優步(Uber)迅速從其大本營舊金山擴張至全球各地，它也不斷面臨來自通常擁有政治影響力的現有出租車運營商的抵制。從布魯塞爾到北京的監管者和立法者已開始對優步的運營加以限制。
Some of the fiercest opposition has come in Europe, where the culture clash between the remorseless competition of the US tech industry and the locals’ respect for tradition and deference to established interests is especially stark. While Uber’s operations give rise to legitimate questions about safety and congestion, the public interest issues used as pretexts for cracking down on the company are often spurious. The proposed new restrictions in London, which would put Uber at a competitive disadvantage against the city’s black cabs, are a case in point.
優步面臨的一些最強烈的反對來自歐洲，在那裏，美國科技業的冷酷競爭與當地對傳統的尊重和對既得利益的順從之間的文化衝突尤其明顯。儘管優步的運營引發了關於安全性和交通擁堵的合理問題，但那些被用作打擊優步之藉口的所謂公衆利益問題常常站不住腳。倫敦新提出的限制就是一個典型的例子，這些限制使優步相對於倫敦的“黑色”出租車陷於不利的競爭地位。
Uber has often not helped its own cause. Concerns about the company’s use of data on customers’ movements, allegations that an executive had talked about smearing unfriendly journalists and complaints about its tax planning have made it harder for Uber to win the battle for hearts and minds.
優步卻常常自毀長城。人們對該公司利用顧客出行數據的擔憂、關於一名高管談論搞臭不友好記者的指控、以及對其稅務籌劃的抱怨，使優步更難在這場人心爭奪戰中取得勝利。
It has been seeking to bolster its soft skills by hiring experienced political operators and has sharpened up how it presents its arguments. London is a chance to show that the investment has been worthwhile.
優步一直在努力通過僱傭老練的政治操手提升自己的軟技能，並已改進了提出論點的方式。倫敦是一次證明優步的這些投資物有所值的機會。
As in other cities, the proposals of Transport for London, which regulates the city’s taxis, are dressed up as measures to protect public safety. The details of the measures reveal how flimsy those justifications are.
與其他城市一樣，管理倫敦出租車行業的倫敦交通局(Transport for London)的提議被粉飾爲保護公衆安全的措施。措施的具體細節表明了這些理由是多麼不堪一擊。
For example, one idea is to make riders wait at least five minutes before being picked up after hailing a ride through Uber or another similar service, even if there is an available driver close by, an obstruction that will provide nothing but irritation for passengers. Another suggestion is that drivers should be allowed to use only one ride-hailing app, which would impede one of the most effective checks on any abuses by Uber: competition between a number of different services.
例如，其中一個主意是讓通過優步或其他類似服務叫車的乘客在被接上之前至少等待5分鐘，即使可提供服務的司機就在附近。這種障礙除了激起乘客的憤怒什麼作用也沒有。另一個建議是司機只應被允許使用一種叫車應用，這隻會使遏制優步的任何過度行爲最有效的方式之一——讓多種不同叫車服務展開競爭——受到阻礙。
In this somewhat random set of ideas, it is hard not to see an attempt by Boris Johnson, London’s mayor, to restore relations with the city’s black cab drivers. Many of them backed him when he was voted into office in 2008, and plenty are natural supporters of his Conservative administration, but his perceived reluctance to clamp down on Uber has led to angry protests against him.
在這套或多或少有些隨意的想法中，不難看出倫敦市長鮑里斯約翰遜(Boris Johnson)試圖與該市出租車司機修復關係的想法。2008年約翰遜當選倫敦市長時很多出租車司機投票支持他，而且很多司機是其保守黨政府天然的支持者，但約翰遜卻給人以不願打壓優步的印象，結果招致了憤怒的抗議。
Transport for London has opened a consultation on its proposals, and may not adopt any of them. For an ostensibly pro-market Conservative administration, it will be hard to justify restraints on innovation simply because it creates losers as well as winners. Uber has right on its side — consumers, not regulators, should decide which transport options are best for them — but that may not be enough. Its campaign to block the proposals has started well: an online petition had by this weekend received more than 132,000 signatures. But while its business relies on a technological solution for navigating a city’s streets, there is no such fix for finding a route through its politics.
倫敦交通局已經就其提議啓動了諮詢，但或許不會通過其中任何一條提議。對於表面上爲親市場派的保守黨當局來說，很難找到合理的理由僅僅因爲創新同時產生了贏家和輸家就加以限制。優步手握一定的正義——應該由消費者（而非監管者）來決定何種交通方式是最好的——但這或許不夠。優步阻撓這些提議的活動已經打下了很好的開局：一項網上請願到上週末已經收集到了逾13.2萬個簽名。但是，儘管優步的業務依賴於提供城市街道導航的技術解決方案，但它沒有同樣的解決方案爲自己提供“政治導航”。
If it wants to continue to grow in London and around the world, Uber needs to be able to persuade politicians that it is worth facing down the established taxi operators who are resisting change. If vested interests prevent its innovations in service from reaching their full potential, it would count as an enormous missed opportunity.
要想在倫敦及全球各地繼續增長，優步需要說服政客相信，挫敗那些抵制改變的現有出租車運營商是值得的。如果既得利益最終阻止優步的服務創新實現其最大潛能，優步將錯過一次巨大機遇。
