AT&T Tricked Its Customers Into Opposing Net Neutrality Last week we noted how AT&T was widely mocked for "joining" the internet-wide protest against killing net neutrality rules, despite playing a starring role in trying to have those rules crushed. AT&T apparently wanted you to ignore AT&T's long, rich history of anti-competitive behavior on this front, as well as the millions it has spent to kill the popular net neutrality protections. AT&T's claim that it has a "proud history of championing our customers’ right to an open internet" was justly and routinely ridiculed by, well, everybody.

But AT&T's disingenuous effort went a little bit further, and involved AT&T tricking many of its customers into undermining both net neutrality and their own best interests. The Verge noticed that AT&T sent e-mails, text messages, and even on-screen set top box notices to DirecTV customers, urging them to head to an AT&T website, where they were (falsely) informed of AT&T's undying dedication to net neutrality. There, users were directed to sign on to a form letter to the FCC to "take action now!" The problem: the action AT&T wanted its customers to take directly undermined their best self interests, urging them to support gutting of the existing, very popular rules, and instead urging Congress to draft a new net neutrality law. From AT&T's form letter users were encouraged to sign: quote: I am writing today to urge you to work with your fellow members of Congress and the FCC to permanently preserve an open internet by supporting bipartisan legislation that would turn the principles of transparency, no blocking, no censorship and no discriminatory throttling into law once and for all. It’s vital that our country, and our citizens, have strong and permanent rules to ensure that internet regulation cannot change course depending on which political party is in the White House. Passing bipartisan legislation is a step toward protecting it for years to come. In an ideal world, having Congress write a net neutrality law is a good idea, in that it would codify the rules into legislation that couldn't be dismantled by the shifting partisan winds at the FCC. The problem: we don't live in an ideal world. We live in a world where Verizon, Comcast, Charter and AT&T wield incredible influence over both state and federal lawmakers. So much influence, in fact, that these giant companies are allowed to quite literally In an, having Congress write a net neutrality law is a good idea, in that it would codify the rules into legislation that couldn't be dismantled by the shifting partisan winds at the FCC. The problem: we don't live in an ideal world. We live in a world where Verizon, Comcast, Charter and AT&T wield incredible influence over both state and federal lawmakers. So much influence, in fact, that these giant companies are allowed to quite literally write many state and federal telecom laws without public input or any transparency. Laws that work to protect AT&T's monopoly and duopoly power over telecom markets, quite often to consumer detriment. Given that AT&T, Comcast and Verizon lawyers and lobbyists would be the one writing this net neutrality legislation, you can be certain they'd ensure their version of net neutrality protections would be so-filled with loopholes as to be arguably useless. And of course that's the goal: to replace the existing, popular, and relatively meaningful laws with the legislative equivalent of snot and wet tissue paper, allowing them to declare the issue "settled." And while another report at the Verge made this observation, the fact that Congress is too corrupt to adequately tackle this subject is a point many in the media repeatedly miss when they support (directly or indirectly) incumbent ISP calls for a "legislative fix" to the fifteen year debate. At the end of the day there's a much easier and simpler way to protect net neutrality: leave the popular, existing rules intact. At the end of the day there's a much easier and simpler way to protect net neutrality: leave the popular, existing rules intact.







News Jump California Defends Its Net Neutrality Law; AT&T's Traffic Up 20% Despite Data Traffic Actually Being Down; + more news Are The Comcast-Charter X1 Talks Dead In The Water?; AT&T May Offer Phone Plans With Ads For Discounts; + more news Europe's Top Court: Net Neutrality Rules Bar Zero Rating; ViacomCBS To Rebrand CBS All Access As Paramount+; + more news Verizon To Buy Reseller TracFone For $7B; 5G Not The Competitive Threat To Cable Many Thought It Would Be; + more news MS.Wants Records From AT&T On $300M Project; Google Fiber Outages In Austin, Houston, Other Texan Cities; + more news States With The Biggest Decreases In Speed; AT&T Hopes You'll Forget Its Fight Against Accurate Maps; + more news AT&T's CEO Has A Familiar $olution To US Broadband Woes; EarthLink Files Suit Against Charter; + more news 5G Doesn't Live Up To Hype, AT&T's 5G Slower Than Its 4G; Cord-Cutting Now In 37% of Broadband Households; + more news FCC Cited False Broadband Data Despite Warnings; ZTE, Huawei Replacement Cost Is $1.87B, But Only $1B Allocated; + more Cogeco Rejects Altice USA's Atlantic Broadband Bid; AT&T Is Astroturfing The FCC In Support Of Trump Attack; + more news ---------------------- this week last week most discussed

Most recommended from 24 comments



tyspeed29

Premium Member

join:2001-01-04

Simi Valley, CA 38 recommendations tyspeed29 Premium Member This is low even for ATT, Deception at its lowest I believe some legal action, maybe some sanctions are needed for this blatant deception, falsifying and misleading customers.



Again in my opinion.

camper

just visiting this planet

Premium Member

join:2010-03-21

Bethel, CT 21 recommendations camper Premium Member When you have to deceive blatantly in order to support your position... ... what does that say about the position you hold? rradina

join:2000-08-08

Chesterfield, MO 920.3 39.3

·Charter

16 recommendations rradina Member Congress Ratify Existing Rules? said by this article : At the end of the day there's a very easy way to protect neutrality: leave the popular, existing rules intact. Why not ratify the popular, existing rules in law so they cannot be changed? mikesco8

join:2006-02-17

Southwick, MA 4 recommendations mikesco8 Member Fortunately... Most people who support net neutrality and are vocal about it are smart enough not to trust AT&T, however this is disturbing none the less.

Anon853ff

@pacswitch.com 4 recommendations Anon853ff Anon AT&T has not earned a consumer friendly reputation yet "The problem: we don't live in an ideal world"



That's part of the problem. The other part is a business friendly republican controlled congress.



A company can't hide it's true nature. Eventually it will be seen.



To be fair at&t has done some positive things by offering unlimited postpaid WHPI,hotspots,and connected car plans.



But what about people with bad or no credit? Why not offer these potential customers a comparative or somewhat similar prepaid plan?



Could it be because at&t profit more from a customers deposit of $500.00 or more?



That is not a reasonable action of consumer friendly corporation but it is an action of a slick corporation . mdlund0

join:2011-08-02

Lawrence, KS 49.9 4.6

3 recommendations mdlund0 Member I like the current rules, but... IMHO, a law passed by both houses of congress and signed off on by the president is the will of the people (And yes, I believe that even in today's political reality, despite being an extremely leftist Democrat). The current rules are good, and I like them. Unfortunately the fickle nature of allowing whatever party's in charge of the executive branch to change the rules at any time will always be worse than having actual legislation in place. Sure, AT&T and Verizon might draft the original version of any legislation, but congress eventually answers to voters, and they'll have opportunities to take public comments and make amendments before the whole process works itself out. I have confidence in our ability as a community that cares about these things to move any legislation in the proper direction. Shouting loudly that we like the current rules but that we don't want a law regarding them is likely to wind us up with rules that we don't like and no meaningful way to do anything about it except to keep shouting.