Slashdot Mirror


Cable Lobby Tries To Make You Forget That It Represents Cable Companies (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: The U.S. cable industry's biggest lobby group has dropped the word "cable" from its name in a rebrand focusing on its members' role as providers of both Internet and TV services. The National Cable and Telecommunications Association (NCTA) will henceforth be called NCTA-The Internet and Television Association. NCTA will be maintained in the name as a nod to the group's past, even though the initials no longer stand for any particular words. "Just as our industry is witnessing an exciting transformation driven by technology and connectivity, NCTA's brand must reflect the vibrancy and diversity of our members," NCTA CEO Michael Powell (a former Federal Communications Commission chairman) said in today's announcement. The group's "mission to drive the industry forward remains the same," he said. This isn't the NCTA's first name change. The group began as the National Community Television Council in 1951 and then became the National Community Television Association in 1952, according to the Museum of Broadcast Communications. Despite dropping the word "cable," the NCTA's name change announcement makes reference to how cable companies are dominating the broadband market. Powell noted that the NCTA "represent[s] an industry that is America's largest and fastest home Internet provider." As it goes forward, the NCTA won't be the only telecom lobby group initialism that no longer stands for anything. The CTIA -- previously known as the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association and then the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association -- is now just "CTIA-The Wireless Association."

33 comments

  1. No Big Deal by Kozar_The_Malignant · · Score: 2

    A pig in a dress is still a pig. The only real question is whether it's a cross-dressing pig.

    --
    Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
    1. Re:No Big Deal by wierd_w · · Score: 1

      Better be careful!

      The Jim Henson society will serve you with a libel suit!

      Ms. Piggy was always a sow, and never underwent gender reassignment surgery! Her upper body strength comes from carrying her heavy purse all day, and certainly not from having high testosterone levels!

      Rest assured, the lobby group mentioned in the fine article will petition to have standards and practices reinstated, clarifying this situation, to avoid any further libel against Ms. Piggy.

    2. Re: No Big Deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Naaa, you got it wrong.
      They aren't pigs, they are luddite apper cows.

    3. Re:No Big Deal by GrumpySteen · · Score: 1

      There's also the question of whether David Cameron stuck his dick in it or not.

    4. Re:No Big Deal by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      Nah, that story was overblown... no way in hell would Miss Piggy have said yes to sucking of David Cameron. She has standards... not high standards but higher than Cameron.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
  2. That's cable TV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Doesn't know what it wants, doesn't know what it stands for, and doesn't realize that none of it matters at all anymore.

  3. market share of cable is a pittance by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 2

    kind of like the kerosene lobby as the market contracted

    changing the name won't change that basic fact

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  4. Suck it up, cabletards and teletards by jenningsthecat · · Score: 2

    (NCTA) will henceforth be called NCTA-The Internet and Television Association

    Just change the acronym to TITA, and get used to us all shortening it to "TIT".

    --
    'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
    1. Re:Suck it up, cabletards and teletards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow. That was... yeah...

    2. Re:Suck it up, cabletards and teletards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, change Association to Syndicate, and the internet will rally behind it, saying "TITS or GTFO". ;)

    3. Re:Suck it up, cabletards and teletards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't normally drink milk, but when I do it's duos titas!

  5. Re:No Big Deal (totally OT) by bmo · · Score: 4, Funny

    And also what really matters is what bathroom the pig goes into in North Carolina.

    Cross-dressed pig or not, at least it's more dignified than Pat McCrory.

    --
    BMO

  6. The Internet Television Symposium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    TITS

  7. Outlaw Lobbying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Lobbyists get face time with politicians and funnel money via campaign financing. Do the citizens of the US get lobbyists to represent their needs on equal face time? No, of course not, therefore it should be illegal. Their only interest is profit and citizens interest is to affordable products and services. Sometimes there is a disconnect due to politicians only hearing one side of an argument. Not to mention conflict of interest such as an former FCC chairman working as a lobbyist (bought and paid for shill). The entire political process can be easily corrupted by either personal or industry driven greed.

    1. Re:Outlaw Lobbying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do the citizens of the US get lobbyists to represent their needs on equal face time?
       
      NRA, AARP, NCAA, AFL-CIO... do any of these organizations ring a bell to you? Each is made of millions of members. Each has a lobbyist arm.

    2. Re:Outlaw Lobbying by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      Lobbying, in some form, is as old as government. It's a matter of picking your poison.

      If you close the lobbyists down, they'll be replaced something else.

      And there really is no point in voters getting their "own lobbyists", because lobbyists are there to allow government leaders to know how voters can be made to vote. And in a way, special interest groups *are* lobbyists for the voters... their voters... who can also be manipulated themselves into doing what the group wants.

      Bear in mind that campaign finance money is important, but many special interest groups have something more important: lists of donors and members who can be counted on to do what the special interest group wants and vote who they say to vote for. Those groups pay in the currency of voters, not merely money, in return for their legislation being passed.

      Indeed, the lobbyists are mostly there to provide the text of legislation that the special interests wanted enacted into laws. Getting rid of them means the legislator now will cast about for some other method of figuring out how to write laws and get information using the relatively small amount of money they get for a staff. And that will just cause lobbying to appear in some other form.

      So, I don't think they should be illegal. They should simply be made as transparent and regulated as possible. If they have something to say to a legislator, it should be public knowledge and only under certain conditions.

    3. Re: Outlaw Lobbying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would say those groups represent themselves first, their high dollar donors second, and the common citizen last.

    4. Re:Outlaw Lobbying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except the law is completely opposite of what you're saying. It's been litigated many times, and no court upholds your interpretation.

    5. Re: Outlaw Lobbying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're made out of the common citizen. If these groups part with the will of their membership then it's up to the member to reform the group or unfund it.

      You brought nothing to the table but you're trying to discredit a great concept by what you "think." My guess is that you don't think a lot but your knee jerks pretty good.

    6. Re: Outlaw Lobbying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, and if you're going to go down that path, I guess I can drop any funding from the EFF as well since they are a lobbyist group that represents themselves first, by your reckoning. Right? So the EFF is just another corrupt group and their own interests come first? Maybe we don't need that kind of thing anymore.

    7. Re:Outlaw Lobbying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well we already know AARP sold out its members to the insurance companies over Obamacare. NCAA? They support big time college sports and could care less about the actual athletes. AFL-CIO is all about keeping power in the hands of the guys who run the unions. You know they people who haven't actually worked any of the jobs their members work in at least twenty years, if ever.
      NRA seems to do a pretty decent job supporting gun owners. So one out of four ain't bad, except that it is.

  8. I'd like to make them not exist, if they can help all the better.

  9. A rose by any other name by buss_error · · Score: 1

    is still a rose.

    s/rose/screwing/g

    --
    Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
  10. Heh by Beeftopia · · Score: 1

    This is like the "American Trial Lawyers Association" (ATLA) renaming itself to the "American Association For Justice". And it wasn't really trial lawyers to begin with, but specifically plaintiff lawyers.

  11. no surprise.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    their members disguise bogus fees on bill, among other things. it's what they do: lie, cheat and deceive the public..

    damn almost sounds like politicians. i bet they could take over congress and we'd never know the difference.

  12. Maybe if we can outlaw bribery by Beeftopia · · Score: 1

    The way politicians work is via quid pro quos. A large donor gives them (specifically a shell organization) money or other enticements, and they provide favorable legislation for the donor. I don't think there were entities large enough to rival countries back in the days of the Constituion, so this threat to the republic is a new one. There was that Oxfam study earlier this year which stated 62 people own as much wealth as the poorest half of the world. WalMart has more revenue than Norway's GDP, for example.

    So, I don't think the Founders saw this coming. Might need a carefully crafted amendment to deal with this issue.

  13. Corn Sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they don't want to be associated with scumbag companies, then maybe the shouldn't lobby for scumbag companies.

  14. Clinton Foundation has a new donor by Danilushka · · Score: 1

    they'll get great "pay-to-play access" to HRC and she'll have even more emails to delete and need more IT staff. Plus there will be more for Wikileaks to hack. HRC growing the economy, creating jobs.

  15. Once Cable is dropped, will never look back by cboslin · · Score: 1

    Now my preference is FTTH, true FTTH, where the Fiber line goes back to my home and I OWN IT along with my HOUSE.

    FACTS:

    • FTTH costs from $1,500.00 to $3,000.00 to run to most homes in a community.
    • FTTH adds $5,000.00 value to the price of the home when you sell, if the FTTH line is owned by the home owner and sold with the home.
    • With FTTH, it costs providers less than $0.50 cents per GB of bandwidth per month. So for 10 GB, the company's cost is ONLY $5.00 per month. (per NTT Exec, where Japanese consumers have had 100MB/100MB, no throttling, for $55 per month or less since the year 2000) The point is the companies that provide Fiber, FTTH, can still make a hell of a profit without the need for throttling.
    • When FTTH comes to a community, Cable prices drop...it is the only time that they do drop. They have to, to compete.

    Since less than 30 cities have this in the USA, hint Verizon is not true FTTH, just becaue they say 'Fiber' does not make it the way it should be, just the way they did it....

    Since less than 30 cities have FTTH in the USA and since 'they' use ALEC to pass anti-competitive legislation to prevent FTTH....to move away from CABLE requires DSL not controlled by a Cable company or TELCO...many locations just DO NOT HAVE even a decent DSL alternative.

    DSL's unthrottled 786KBps upstream is better than any CABLE UP TO PROMISE that is throttled back. Always will be, that is why many of us dump cable...they throttle.

    If you see a spinning symbol, indicating what you are attempting to watch is 'spooling' your UPSTREAM BANDWIDTH is being throttled to less than 768KBps period. To prove this is simple, purchase a WRT-dd, Tomato or OpenWRT firmware supported firewall/router and you can see your bandwidth in REAL TIME. Every day, every hour, all the time.

    Every Cable company that I have had, throtlles bandwidth 99% of the time. The only time they do not throttle is when you run the SPEEDTEST, than that PIPE opens all the way up. The millisecond the speed test ends, you are immediately throttled. This proves a few things:

    • you are THROTTLED
    • extra bandwidth exists, thus you DO NOT NEED TO BE THROTTLED...of course than the cable company could not charge you more for less.

    Locally owned Cable companies, owned by the town, or by a residential area, might be better, actually allot better than TWC, Comcast, Pioneer, etc..., but you are still throttled.

    Thus when I cut cable, and I will in the near future, I WILL NOT WANT TO GO BACK, unless I have no other alternative...this they know, thus they use ALEC to pass anti-FTTH legislation in many states (14 US States and counting have outright bands).

    You want freedom, jobs, improvements in your local economy, get FTTH. if you can not, well than your politicians are part of the problem, replace them or watch your area die economically.

  16. Been there, done that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the equivalent of the greatest marketing makeover in history: The re-branding of "The Department of War" to "The Department of Defense" in 1949.
    The populace was sick to death of War, but everybody likes DEFENSE don't they?
    Genius.

  17. Don't forget! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Our members are screwing over consumers on TWO fronts. Cable AND Internet!