AT&T enlists employees to oppose Net neutrality
Advocacy groups say AT&T has gone too far in its lobbying efforts to oppose the Federal Communications Commission's new proposed Net neutrality regulations.
This week AT&T's top lobbyist Jim Cicconi sent a memo to managers urging them to encourage their families and friends "to join the voices telling the FCC not to regulate the Internet."
Over the past few weeks, the battle over Net neutrality has heated up as the FCC is set to start the ball rolling on a process that will make the agency's existing open Internet principles official regulation.
AT&T has been one of the biggest opponents of the new regulation, along with Verizon Communications and cable company Comcast. On the other side of the debate are consumer advocacy groups and large Web-based technology companies, such as Google and Amazon.
The phone companies have rallied support among some congressional leaders, both Democrat and Republican, who have sent letters to the FCC opposing new regulation. And the advocacy groups and big Internet companies have done the same.
But many advocacy groups say that AT&T has crossed the line by suggesting to its employees that they use their personal e-mail addresses to post comments opposing Net neutrality regulation. These groups believe that AT&T is deliberately trying to create the appearance that average citizens oppose the Net neutrality regulations.
"AT&T is practiced in spending money on so-called astroturf groups to give the appearance there is widespread support for their agenda," said Timothy Karr, campaign director for the advocacy group Free Press.
AT&T defended its actions by saying that it is merely rallying support for its cause.
"We were providing important information to our employees," said Michael Balmoris, a company spokesman. "And it was up to them to respond personally. If they use their company e-mail that is fine, too. It was not a mandatory business request."
Balmoris argued that groups such as Free Press and Public Knowledge also mobilize people on the Web. They send e-mails to thousands and provide talking points and even form letters that they can send to congressional leaders or post as comments.
This is true. But Karr argues the main difference is that Free Press and other advocacy organizations do not pay the people who post those comments and send those letters. What's more, their Web campaigns are built around people who have specifically asked for information on the subject and are generally already in support of Free Press' positions.
"Our activists aren't on our payroll," he said. "And they come to us looking for information. When a letter like this is sent to every manager from one of the company's most senior executives, it's hard to imagine AT&T employees thinking the memo was merely a suggestion."
Art Brodsky, a spokesman for Public Knowledge, another advocacy group supporting Net neutrality, also took issue with AT&T's letter to its employees. Brodsky said that not only are the talking points AT&T uses in its memo questionable and debatable at best, but he said that AT&T is subtly threatening employees by describing the FCC as "poised to regulate the Internet in a manner that would drive up consumer prices, and burden companies like ours while exempting companies like Google."
"When you send a letter to employees and say that our business will suffer if you don't do this, it's very misleading especially in this economic environment," he said. "People are afraid of losing their jobs. But the fact of the matter is that AT&T has already laid off 20,000 employees , and it's had nothing to do with Net neutrality."
The FCC is expected to begin the process of creating rules for Net neutrality regulation at its monthly meeting on Thursday. The FCC has extended the period for receiving comments until Thursday.
Marguerite Reardon has been a CNET News reporter since 2004, covering cell phone services, broadband, citywide Wi-Fi, the Net neutrality debate, as well as the ongoing consolidation of the phone companies. E-mail Maggie. 
There. I'd like my check now, AT&T.
(I'm joking to the extent you are - I hope you were being sarcastic.)
Everyone let's all complain about AT&T lousy service!! Now we have a chance!!!
Here's what I posted to the above site (please put in your own words and post away!):
It is really this simple. Net Neutrality ensures the future of the Internet. If you want the Internet to turn into AOL or Compuserve, then join AT&T, Comcast, etc. in opposing Net Neutrality. If you want the Internet to be a place where you can CHOOSE THE CONTENT YOU WANT, then join the fight for Net Neutrality.
ISPs should be providing the pipe, not the content! The USA (and Canada which generally follows suit on this kind of thing) are WAY behind in Internet connectivity because the big ISPs can?t seem to understand this. They want to produce and sell their own content (or make partnerships to do so) in order to fill their investor?s pockets with $$$. The reason they oppose Net Neutrality, is because then, to become content providers, they would actually have to be good and competitive. Example: If they have their way? say you want a video. If you buy from AT&T they will probably waive your ?cap? and give you max DL speed. If you buy from Apple, Amazon, etc. they include it in your monthly cap and give you poor DL speed. That?s the goal behind opposing Net Neutrality for them.
The American people have already paid a LOT of money in tax relief deals to these major ISPs to have FAR better Internet connectivity (45 Mbps, bi-directional) than pretty much anyone in the USA currently has, and it was supposed to cost $40 / mo. according to the deals these companies made with the government to get the tax breaks. They have never delivered? they just pocketed the money. Now they want more and want to further restrict the Internet to their own favor. Don?t let them do it!
ATT is the worst thing about the iPhone.
What a crap company. Verizon has fiber to the home...ATT has U-verse LOL
for the clueless who don`t get the analogy.
What surprises me is that the CWA (or whatever union represents there now) didn't throw a FIT about this.
BTW: Wireless traffic needs to be subject to net neutrality rules as well because it will become ubiquitous and be a bigger market than wireline data.
Yeah..., the phone companies do suck huh?
Can you imagine of our internet highway system had toll-ramps in different areas owned by the Car companies. If you live in a Ford area and come along with a Chevy, they charge you a much higher toll. That is basically the idea AT&T, Comcast, etc. want to have happen, and why they want to defeat Net Neutrality.
Here's a great idea. Get your employees to stand on street corners with a computer and offer people money to sign a form email and send it off on AT&T's behalf.
Another huge corporation with no sense of morality.
From what I've heard they are probably the worst ISP ever and I hope that's only a rumor because if it is true then hell, they don't have much more time left.
THE NET MUST REMAIN UNREGULATED (think of it as free speech on steroids).
FYI, I personally don't agree with the company's stance and made it known to my colleagues and management and everything I said was received with real conversation, so don't make this situation out to be such a crime ... the email was phrased so that it was obvious the company paycheck has no bearing.
Also, NO ONE is talking about the real issue at hand: this so called "Net neutrality" issue. It sure SOUNDS good doesnt it? But do ANY of you know what is really behind it? Or are you being sold a bill of goods.... AGAIN.
WAKE UP PEOPLE!!!!!
It cracks me up how entitled people in America feel nowadays. The internet isn't "free". It doesn't run on magic, it runs on a network infrastructure that is paid for, owned, and maintained by AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon in the United States. They offer you a product. If you don't like the product, go buy it somewhere else.
https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml
- by burff October 28, 2009 2:00 PM PDT
- I'm just tried of all the lies. I had a cell phone from one of these companies and couldn't make a call from my living, when I called to complain I was put on hold. Switched cable companies because I was lied to and over charged. Can't tell what your buying anymore, there's no customer service at all. The printed word is meaningless.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(33 Comments)The FCC is as much at fault as the ISP's, there is no enforcement. FIne them out of existence, warning the public of the bad and illegal practices, in some government paper nobody will see but on the front page of the newspaper. But everyone is in somebodies pocket.
Net neutrality is the tip of the iceburg. What's the old saying "Write your congressman."