Americans for Prosperity, Backed By Big Telecom, Is Back With More Net Neutrality Opposition

[Looking for more great examples of industry-backed dollar-a-holler front groups opposing Net Neutrality? Just click here and set your scroll wheel on turbo because we’ve compiled some examples you won’t believe!]

Americans for Prosperity's claim that grandma will face a $300 broadband bill will only become reality if Internet providers get away with Internet Overcharging schemes that would triple the price you pay for broadband service.

Americans for Prosperity, the group that harassed residents of Salisbury, North Carolina last year with push polls and recorded phone messages opposing municipal broadband, is renewing its effort to sign up the tea party crowd to oppose Net Neutrality reforms.

Ostensibly representing those favoring “less government,” AFP is actually a corporate front group founded by oil billionaire David Koch but also backed by telecom interests.  The group shills for large phone and cable companies to keep them deregulated, and opposes consumer reforms.  The group’s spokesman on Net Neutrality is Phil Kerpen — a regular on Fox News — appearing on Glenn Beck’s program to nod in agreement to wild claims that Net Neutrality is Maoist.

Now the group has unveiled a new advertisement opposing Net Neutrality and is spending $1.4 million dollars in its first ad buy.  The 30-second ad targets legislators with wild claims about Net Neutrality that don’t pass even the most rudimentary truth tests.

Comparing Net Neutrality with Washington-directed bailouts of banks and the auto industry, the group claims Washington wants to “spend billions to take over the Internet.”  Apparently the Internet is available for purchase on eBay.

In reality, the only group with the deep pockets is this debate is America’s telecommunications companies, who are among the biggest spenders for lobbyists, astroturf campaigns that claim to represent consumer interests, and writing big campaign contribution checks to state and federal elected legislators.

Establishing Net Neutrality protections doesn’t cost billions.  Fighting against establishing Net Neutrality might.

In fact, the biggest expense the Federal Communications Commission faces in its efforts to adopt Net Neutrality reforms will come from legal expenses brought about by continuous provider lawsuits.

[flv width=”480″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Americans for Prosperity Dont Regulate the Internet Ad 5-2010.flv[/flv]

Americans for Prosperity’s anti-Net Neutrality advertisement claims Washington is spending “billions” to “take over the Internet.”  (30 seconds)

An amateurish animated video accompanying the ad on AFP’s YouTube channel extends the lies into the ionosphere:

  • The video claims the government is preparing to take over the Internet, which is false.
  • It implies the majority of Americans oppose Net Neutrality, also false.
  • The video suggests that businesses will be prohibited from purchasing faster broadband, because under Net Neutrality, everyone will share the exact same broadband speed, both of which are totally false.
  • Grandma, who “only uses the Internet to check e-mail,” will be prohibited from buying cheaper access under Net Neutrality.  More deception.

The video ends with a bleeped expletive.  Real professional.

[flv width=”641″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Americans for Prosperity Animated Anti Net Neutrality Video 5-2010.flv[/flv]

Americans for Prosperity’s animated anti-Net Neutrality video makes wild claims that don’t come close to being h0nest with the viewer. [Warning: Loud Video — Turn Down Volume Before Playing] (1 minute)

Let’s Get Real.

FACT: If anyone is trying to “take over the Internet,” it’s a handful of corporate providers who won’t agree to common sense regulations that guarantee they will not block or impede web traffic.  If they have no intention of engaging in bad behavior, why spend millions of dollars to fight the regulations?

FACT: Americans favor Net Neutrality protections that guarantee net freedom and keep providers from further increasing your broadband bill by monetizing every aspect of the Internet.

FACT: Americans buy broadband based on speed tiers.  Net Neutrality does nothing to change this model.  Any business seeking faster service can continue to acquire it, if they can find a provider to sell it to them.  What Net Neutrality prohibits are Internet Service Providers artificially slowing down your website traffic unless and until you agree to protection payments to take the speed throttles off.

FACT: Most providers sell “Lite” broadband service to those seeking cheaper access or who only need the Internet for basic web browsing or e-mail access.  Some communities even offer basic Wi-Fi access to the Internet for free, and the Obama Administration is proposing to modify the Universal Service Fund to help economically disadvantaged Americans obtain basic web access at a more affordable price.

FACT: The only way a broadband bill is going to achieve the $300 price tag found in this video is if providers are permitted to run roughshod over their customers with Internet Overcharging schemes.  Some earlier proposed broadband “pricing experiments” would effectively triple the price for broadband service Americans pay, but that has nothing to do with Washington.  That can be laid directly at the feet of the same broadband providers who are writing enormous checks to astroturfers like Americans for Prosperity to hoodwink Americans into supporting things directly opposed to their best interests.

Don’t be Americans for Prosperity’s sucker.

Consumers Discover “Required” Data Plans Dramatically Increasing Wireless Phone Bills

WTTG's "Ask Allison" segment answers a question about unwelcome mandatory data plans

Ever wonder why your cell phone bill seems to keep increasing when you renew your contract?

American wireless phone companies have discovered that subjecting an increasing percentage of customers to required data plans can create a revenue bonanza for companies, whether customers use many data services or not.

Many customers are just learning of new, mandatory data plans now required by all four of the country’s major carriers.  Verizon, AT&T, Sprint, and T-Mobile now compel customers upgrading to new “smartphones” — designed to be used for accessing online services — to also choose an extra add-on plan to cover their data usage.  In some cases, that can add an additional $30 a month to monthly cell phone bills.

Some Verizon customers have learned about this the hard way when they tried to buy a new phone at the end of their two year contracts.  For those longstanding Verizon customers grandfathered on service plans developed five or more years ago, being forced to switch to one of Verizon’s current plans carries quite the sticker shock, especially for those who only occasionally send text messages or use data features.

The insistence by Verizon that Smartphone owners commit to their $29.99 unlimited data usage add-on plan adds considerably to monthly bills.  Many Verizon customers don’t care about increasing sizes of calling allowances — Verizon customers already enjoy free night and weekend calling and free calls to other Verizon Wireless customers (of which there are many — Verizon is now the nation’s largest wireless provider).

Here is a comparison between two near-equivalent Verizon Wireless calling plans, ones from 2005 and the other currently in effect.  There is a dramatic difference in pricing, particularly for those who would find a 250 text message allowance, and data usage counting against your minutes allowance more than sufficient to meet their needs:

AMERICA’S CHOICE II FAMILYSHARE PLAN (2005)


Plan Details

Includes Two Lines
Monthly Price: $60.00
Monthly allowance minutes: 700 general
Per minute rate after allowance: $0.45  peak ,  $0.45  off-peak

Promotion details

UNLIMITED N&W MINUTES, UNLIMITED VERIZON-TO-VERIZON CUSTOMER CALLING, MOBILE WEB – WEB USAGE COUNTS AGAINST MINUTE ALLOWANCE

Additional features

250 MESSAGE TEXT PLAN, INCLUDING TEXT AND VIDEO ($5 PER MONTH)

NATIONWIDE FAMILY TALK & TEXT SHAREPLAN (2010)


Plan Details

Includes Two Lines
Monthly Price: $99.99
Monthly allowance minutes: 700 general
Per minute rate after allowance: $0.45 peak , $0.45 off-peak

Promotion details

UNLIMITED N&W MINUTES, UNLIMITED VERIZON-TO-VERIZON CUSTOMER CALLING, UNLIMITED TEXT, PICTURE, AND VIDEO MESSAGING

Additional Features

REQUIRED UNLIMITED DATA PLAN (SMARTPHONE) ($29.99 PER MONTH)

Before taxes, fees, and surcharges, Verizon Wireless customers holding onto their legacy FamilyShare plan from 2005 would pay $65.00 per month for two lines sharing 700 minutes of calling, with one line also getting 250 text, picture, or video messages, and a data plan that ate from your minutes allowance, instead of charging you per megabyte.

Today’s plan costs far more — $129.98 — more than double, for most of the same features.  The only difference is that Verizon Wireless doesn’t presently limit your data usage or messaging on their SharePlan.

No wonder consumers are getting sticker shock when upgrading their phones.  The paradigm shift to a “required data plan” forces customers away from older service plans onto new ones.  The result is a much higher monthly bill.

All this and the same companies that have figured out how to effectively double your cell phone bill in five years are also contemplating taking away the “unlimited” part of the required data plan.

[flv width=”640″ height=”500″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WTTG Washington Is It Legal to Require A Phone Data Plan 5-7-10.flv[/flv]

WTTG-TV’s “Ask Allison” feature recently answered a question from a viewer who just discovered the “mandatory data plan” as an unwelcome part of her new phone purchase.  The Washington, D.C. viewer wants to know if that’s legal.  Allison educates viewers in the nation’s capital that isn’t the only trick or trap cell phone companies have in store for you.  Bottom line: maybe you don’t want that new phone after all.  (3 minutes)

Verizon Asks New York Public Service Commission to Stop Automatic Delivery of White Pages

Phillip Dampier May 11, 2010 Consumer News, Verizon, Video Comments Off on Verizon Asks New York Public Service Commission to Stop Automatic Delivery of White Pages

Verizon, like AT&T, is seeking to eventually make the printed White Pages telephone directory a thing of the past.

Last Friday, the company appealed to the New York State Public Service Commission to cease automatic delivery of the directory to residents in New York State.  It is the first among 40 phone companies serving New York to do so.

Verizon cites a Gallup study that suggests only 11 percent of households still use the printed White Pages, with the rest going online or using directory assistance to obtain listings.

New York State telecommunications law requires that all phone companies provide a free set of telephone directories to every subscriber in the state.  While phone companies earn millions from Yellow Pages advertising (which is why Verizon is not seeking to stop automatic delivery of those books), they technically lose money on residential listings found in the White Pages.

Verizon claims New York White Pages consume more than 5,000 tons of paper per year and that they are unwanted by many customers.

What the company does not say is that consumers can already request that automatic delivery of telephone directories be stopped.  Few consumers select to opt-out of directory delivery, however.

Verizon, like AT&T, proposes an opt-in system where a copy of the White Pages will only be dropped on New York doorsteps if a subscriber specifically requests one.  It will also be available on a CD-ROM or online.

Verizon is so confident of its forthcoming success with the Commission, it even included pre-written press releases in its filing announcing the imminent demise of the printed listings.

The prospect of the end of the New York White Pages made news in some pages of a different kind — in the New York Times:

In its petition to regulators, Verizon is emphasizing the environmental benefits of the move. Most of the cost savings would be realized by SuperMedia, the publisher of the directories, which once was a division of Verizon but is now a separate company.

Scott W. Klein, the chief executive of SuperMedia, which is based in Dallas, declined to say how many directories his company estimated it would still deliver in New York if distribution was no longer mandatory — or how much it would save. But, he added, “We’re not talking about millions and millions of dollars.”

SuperMedia would continue to print and distribute the real money-maker, the Yellow Pages, which charges businesses that want prominent display, and the business White Pages, which also generate revenue from display advertising, he said. Those directories would include listings for government offices.

Verizon’s proposal reflects technological progress and a new way of thinking in the telecommunications industry, Mr. Klein said.

Not long ago, he said, the industry’s attitude was, “By gosh, we’re going to deliver this book to you whether you want it or not.” Even if the Public Service Commission rejects Verizon’s proposal, New Yorkers who do not want the White Pages can notify the company that they want delivery halted.

“We made a conscious decision to make it easy for people to not get the book,” Mr. Klein said. “We only want to create and provide products that people want to use.”

Of course, the one group that never realizes any savings from an end to telephone book distribution are individual ratepayers.

Verizon has a similar request before telecom regulators in New Jersey.

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WICZ Binghamton No More White Pages in New York 5-10-10.flv[/flv]

WICZ-TV News in Binghamton was among several TV newscasts telling viewers across the state that the White Pages may be an endangered species.  (1 minute)

Ripoff: AT&T’s “Home Cell Tower” Helps AT&T’s Congested Network While Eating Your Calling Minutes

AT&T has discovered marketing gold.  What do you do when you run one of America’s worst-rated mobile networks — the one that drops your calls, doesn’t provide uniform reception and is often woefully overloaded — and don’t want to spend what it takes to upgrade?  How about developing a “Home Cell Tower” device that helps solve AT&T’s problems, but adds to yours by charging you $150 for the privilege of owning one.

AT&T’s 3G MicroCell shouldn’t need to exist.  If AT&T had reliable coverage, nobody would need to own a device that helps their bottom line far more than yours.

The MicroCell is sold to customers who are stuck walking their AT&T mobile phone over to the nearest window in order to get a signal from AT&T.  The unit, manufactured by Cisco, plugs into your home broadband connection and effectively creates a tiny “home cell tower.”  Suddenly, you now have five bars of reception indoors and can make and receive calls and reliably use the data features of your smartphone.  AT&T effectively moves your service off their own congested, weak-signal mobile network,  and routes everything over your Internet connection instead.

AT&T 3G MicroCell

It’s a win-win for AT&T.  They get to charge you a substantial markup for a device that costs far less than $150 to manufacture and reduces the urgency to commit to needed upgrades to solve congestion problems.

But AT&T’s marketing department has also figured out a way to earn an even bigger bonus along the way.

Customers who do not choose a special added-cost AT&T MicroCell add-on plan (a ludicrous $19.99 per month plus a $1.25 monthly bill-padding-“regulatory recovery fee”) will be shocked to discover AT&T deducts minutes from your calling allowance even when using the MicroCell to provide you with service.  It takes a special kind of nerve to charge customers for making and receiving calls that don’t even use the company’s mobile network.  It’s like AT&T setting up a kiosk in front of the nearest Verizon payphone and charging you $1 for the privilege of paying Verizon 25 cents to make a call.  The $20 a month add-on plan doesn’t even cover data usage, which means AT&T charges you for accessing data and text messages sent and received over your own home broadband connection.

The Associated Press reviewed AT&T’s 3G MicroCell and seemed unimpressed.

Despite marketing claims it will deliver more bars in more places within 5,000 square feet, the AP found the MicroCell only managed a less impressive 40 feet. AT&T admits concrete or brick walls can also reduce coverage. For all practical purposes, don’t expect the device to provide much help out in the yard.

AT&T also claims MicroCell users can initiate calls from the MicroCell and have them “seamlessly” transferred to AT&T’s mobile network when they walk out of range.  The AP found more times than not, AT&T simply dropped the call, forcing the customer to start a new call.  Even worse, customers initiating a call on AT&T’s mobile network will find the MicroCell can’t take over when they arrive home, making the primary reason for getting the device irrelevant the moment you walk in the door and risk dropping the call.

The only good news is that introductory promotions can knock down the upfront price.  Customers committing themselves to the $20 MicroCell add-on calling plan qualify for a $100 rebate when purchasing the MicroCell.  If you also sign up for new AT&T DSL or U-verse service when buying the MicroCell, you can get an additional $50 rebate, effectively making the MicroCell free to own.  AT&T broadband customers will also get $10 off the MicroCell add-on calling plan.

There is nothing inherently wrong with offering customers these devices, known in the industry as femtocells, but companies like AT&T should be providing them at-cost and be grateful when customers use them.  Instead, the company treats these customers as nothing more than another profit center, ripping them off with a ludicrously priced add-on calling plan to avoid watching call allowances erode away, even when calls don’t travel over AT&T’s mobile network.

[flv width=”586″ height=”310″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/ATT MicroCell Demo.flv[/flv]

This video covers how AT&T markets their MicroCell device and accompanying add-on plan and also includes a brief tutorial on how the device works.  (4 minutes)

[flv width=”480″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/AP ATT’s Home Cell Tower Delivers an Added Cost 5-5-10.flv[/flv]

The Associated Press reviewed the AT&T MicroCell and ultimately wondered why customers had to pay for a device to improve service you already pay to receive.  (2 minutes)

[Updated 2:30pm — Coverage area correction made.]

Vodafone UK Dumps Unlimited Mobile Broadband, Overcharges ‘Pay Monthly’ Customers Who Already Pay Plenty

Coming this June, Vodafone will introduce an Internet Overcharging scheme for its “pay monthly” mobile customers, dropping “unlimited” smartphone broadband service in the United Kingdom.

From a post on the company’s support forum:

We are planning to introduce Out Of Bundle charging for Pay Monthly customers from 1st June 2010. The reason we’re introducing these charges is to make it fairer for everyone, and to protect our network from data abuse. We’re introducing a real-time notifications service to be completely transparent about these charges and keep customers in control of their spend. No Out Of Bundle charges will happen this month but they will take effect from 1st June. The messages you’ve received this month were sent in error and no more will be sent out from today.

The charging will be as follows:

Monthly bundle customers will pay £5/$7.43 for every 500MB after the first 500MB
Customers without a monthly bundle will pay 50p/$0.74 for every 10MB after the first 25MB

Whilst you’ve all previously been used to there not being any Out Of Bundle charging, the current information available online is clear in explaining that we could introduce such charging at any time. The Vodafone Mobile Internet costs page does state:

We’ll keep an eye on things and let you know your options if it looks like you’ll go over your 500MB Flexi or Value Pack limit.

Our Pay Monthly Terms and Conditions already state that we reserve the right to charge for any usage beyond the Fair Usage limit.

At the same time Vodafone wants to punish customers for using their phones too much, the company continues to heavily market the very phones capable of  “data abuse.”

In addition to the iPhone, Vodafone now also sells a handful of Android phones — both of which are designed for their data service capabilities.

For consumers who believed Vodafone’s marketing and bought an iPhone or Android phone with an unlimited data plan, the rug is about to be pulled out.  Come June, those exceeding Vodafone’s arbitrary data allowances will begin receiving SMS text messages warning them their bills are about to rocket sky-high from excessive usage charges.

Search This Site:

Contributions:

Recent Comments:

Your Account:

Stop the Cap!