Slashdot Mirror
The Misleading Fliers Comcast Used To Kill Off a Local Internet Competitor
Jason Koebler (3528235) writes In the months and weeks leading up to a referendum vote that would have established a locally owned fiber network in three small Illinois cities, Comcast and SBC (now AT&T) bombarded residents and city council members with disinformation, exaggerations, and outright lies to ensure the measure failed. The series of two-sided postcards painted municipal broadband as a foolhardy endeavor unfit for adults, responsible people, and perhaps as not something a smart woman would do. Municipal fiber was a gamble, a high-wire act, a game, something as "SCARY" as a ghost. Why build a municipal fiber network, one asked, when "internet service [is] already offered by two respectable private businesses?" In the corner, in tiny print, each postcard said "paid for by SBC" or "paid for by Comcast."
The postcards are pretty absurd and worth a look.
These sort of things are legal now. Corporations are people, and people have free speech, and spending money is speech.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
A fine large enough to cover the costs of rolling out fibre in the 3 cities involved.
The money from the fine can then be used to roll out fibre to the 3 cities.
Everyone wins, except SBC and Comcast.
Why run for office when you can rent it for less?
The only broadband nightmare I have is the reality of continuous non-stop rate hikes of 10-15% every 6 months. No other "utility" even comes close.
What this means is that people have absolutely no idea what the internet is, how it works and how any of it affects them. Computers are still magic to most people. I used to hope that as more and more people grow up with computers, computer literacy would improve. Nothing of the sort happened. These people use computers more, but they accept them as quasi-intelligent/magic devices. They don't even understand the fundamental difference between Facebook/Twitter and the open web, even though that's hardly a technological thing. They perceive big businesses as relatively safe havens. Diversity and choice in a field where they can only make random decisions based on no understanding is plain scary. They don't want choice, they don't want freedom. They are not equipped to handle it.
My hometown has municipal broadband, it's had it since 2000. It works much better than Comcast, and they're much easier to work with.
No, I will not work for your startup
Maybe these fliers were honest, and Comcast just believes the investing in an ISP is a money-losing venture. It would explain some things.
I guess the only sensible response is to sell your stock in Comcast. They view their own business as a money-pit and a disaster waiting to happen.
This highlights the need for citizens who would set up municipal broadband to better understand the techniques of propaganda (marketing in the US) and communication - and to not forget to utilize those techniques to further their own agendas. A technique isn't evil or good - it's just a technique, and an advantage if it's a good one.
Some understanding of cognitive science and political science wouldn't hurt either.
http://www.unfocus.com/
Yeah, but why bother when you can just rent the current occupants and save the hassle of campaigning and having to actually show up in DC a few days a year?
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
FUD works folks, that's why you have spin doctors constantly shaping news headlines with press releases and carefully worded speeches. Couple that with a litany of non-profit organizations to get the word out and you have your own fact machine. Really, facts don't matter because people's perceptions are more important than mere facts. This might have been a great idea, a municipally based service without all the baggage that a big carrier brings to the table but hey, why let facts get in the way of myth?
Dirty tricks in business have been around for centuries and nobody should be surprised that Comcast and SBC(AT&T) did this.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Well, if you do it right (run for office), you aren't footing the bill, your supporters/constituents are.
"I have no special gift, I am only passionately curious." - Albert Einstein
The questions raised in the advertising are pretty good ones. If the city bungles the fibre network and loses a lot of money, you'll be forced to pay for it in taxes. If Comcast fucks up and their costs go out of control, you at least have a choice to opt out. As much as I don't like Comcast and AT&T, I have no faith in government to be an ISP.
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
You could make voting conditional on passing a test. Not a straight IQ test, although that should be a part of it.
Yeah, so the oh-so-trustworthy people in our government can have an easier way to oppress segments of the population. Also, IQ tests are absolute nonsense.
And I'm sure these tests would be perfectly unbiased, not at all ambiguous, and would vastly improve the situation. If we can't even get standardized tests right, how the hell do you propose we create tests that will determine whether or not someone gets access to a fucking fundamental right?
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
In theory, voter tests would rule out the gullible. In practice, voter tests would rule out the black / gay / poor / jew / undesirable-group-du-jour.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Batavia, Geneva and St. Charles Illinois. I was a member of the committee that worked on getting this initiative through each community. One of the members posted this interview with Broadband Reports back in the day....
http://www.dslreports.com/show...
Charter Member of The Committee Group For The Elimination And Eradication Of Repetitive Redundancy
> ...when "internet service [is] already offered by two respectable private businesses?"
Because it's not. Respectable, that is. And I could make arguments against "private", as they're a government enforced duopoly.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Only when they are designed to rule out those groups instead of ruling out people who have no business voting (for example, people who don't understand how plurality voting can lead to someone getting elected with a minority of the votes).
Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
People didn't look, or think, they just reacted from their gut. Sounds like perfectly trained American voters/consumers.
Who's the villain here?
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
I don't remember exactly but I seem to recall that I participated in at least five debates with these two groups. Again, TFA refers back to 2003 and some things are lost in a decade. We did fairly well with the referendums but ultimately, comcast and SBC spent around $2.1 mil in advertising IIRC and we were only able to raise around $40k for our side. It was a good fight but we just couldn't overcome the robo-calling with do you still beat your wife type questions and the full page ads in the local papers etc.
Charter Member of The Committee Group For The Elimination And Eradication Of Repetitive Redundancy
My local DMV gets me in and out of the office in a few minutes. I've never encountered any time when their computers weren't functioning properly. I could, of course, use the BMV website instead of going into the local office, but I'm old fashioned that way. What state do you live in, so I can make sure never to move there?
All: Feel free to hit me up with any questions. Either here, via email, or phone. Pete Collins I.T. Manager City of Geneva, Illinois pcollins@geneva.il.us 630.232.1743
"I have no faith in government to be an ISP."
I have no faith in the federal government to run an ISP. They would be worse than Comcast, and would probably never get it running until they have spent a year's GDP.
I have slightly more faith in a state government to run one. Not as many people to pay-off around most state capitols as there are around DC.
I would have a lot of faith in a local or city government to get it done. They live right there amongst their customers, typically have to work within a budget, and have a vested interest in doing it right the first time.
If you take people who believe that government doesn't work and put them in charge of a government and it doesn't work, you haven't proven that government doesn't work.