Comcast-Time Warner Deal May Hinge On Low-Cost Internet Plan 114
techpolicy (3586897) writes "Comcast Corp.'s proposed $45 billion purchase of Time Warner Cable Inc. has brought the issue of the digital divide and the federal government's failing policies to decrease it back onto center stage, according to an article by the Center for Public Integrity. Comcast has told the Federal Communications Commission that it will offer its discounted Internet program for low-income customers to residents living in Time Warner Cable's service areas — if the FCC approves the purchase. Comcast offered FCC the same deal in 2011 when it bought NBCUniversal. But the low-cost program, called Internet Essentials, has signed up only 12 percent of the 2.6 million families eligible for the service since it was launched nearly three years ago. While the FCC and other federal agencies have spent billions of dollars trying to provide broadband access and training programs to the poor to close the divide, so far the policies haven't worked much. The percentage difference between Americans earning below $30,000 who have an Internet connection in their home and those earning $75,000 or more who have an in-home connection has narrowed only 4 percentage points from 2009 to 2013. As the Comcast purchase moves through its regulatory approval process, the center reports that it may be time to revisit the policies that will get more poor Americans connected, especially because to function in society today you have to be online."
Fuck Comcast (Score:5, Insightful)
People say "six of one, a half dozzen of the other", but I'll still take Google fiber of anything relatd to Comcast. And don't fool yourself, all broadband providers track and profile their users, I might as well get decent high-speed out of the deal.
Re:Fuck Comcast (Score:5, Informative)
Privacy can be controlled (e.g. VPN), so the lesser of two evils is still Google Fiber.
*sigh* - if only I could just use the fiber and be my own ISP with one single IP and firewall. Too bad they only do blocks for that sort of thing (IIRC).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually there is a name for this behavior (Score:5, Insightful)
It's called empty promises. The primary purpose of this merger is not nor will it ever be to take care of the poor. It merely serves to unhook the approval process that would create an internet oligarchy.
Cheap internet for anybody is the last thing that these guys want.
Re: (Score:2)
So, what's the 'discounted' price, and how many of them have even heard about the 'discount'?
Re: (Score:3)
It's $10/mth, and you have to have a child eligible for free/reduced cost meals, and not have had Comcast service for 90 days. So if you dont take advantage right away, you'll have to cut off service for three months to become eligible.
Re: (Score:3)
It's $10/mth, and you have to have a child eligible for free/reduced cost meals, and not have had Comcast service for 90 days. So if you dont take advantage right away, you'll have to cut off service for three months to become eligible.
And you have to know about this, as they will go out of their way to not promote it. And you will have to find a customer service representative that knows about it and is willing to fill out the additional 7 forms to qualify for this. Yes, I've heard this song before played after another big ISP merger.
Re:Actually there is a name for this behavior (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
When Comcastula gets its virgin fetus guarantee, they offer to do the government's job, and protect the best interest of its third world citizens. Never mind the fact, as was stated, that they fail to deliver as promised.
Stop paying Co
Re: (Score:3)
The Internet Essentials program Comcast offers is $9.95/month, and to be eligible, you have to have a child who participates in the Free and Reduced Lunch program. No kids? Not eligible.
So Comcast clearly feels that for anyone under the age of 18, the internet is important.
For everyone else, get off your wallet you can't afford and pay me full price.
If it's so critical to "be online" in today's society, they should stop dividing it even further within the poor.
Oh, and 2009 - 2013 was not exactly the best time to be interviewing anyone to find out why they haven't blown money on wireless routers, laptops, and high-speed internet when people were losing their jobs left and right, so the stat
Re: (Score:2)
So out of curiosity... any idea on the speeds this gives? I make too much to qualify myself, but as a foster parent we regularly have kids in the house we take care of that would qualify... We take advantage of some things the WIC checks offer like discounted museum memberships, since the food checks don't even come close to covering what kids eat.
If it is a decent speed this would be interesting to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, and 2009 - 2013 was not exactly the best time to be interviewing anyone to find out why they haven't blown money on wireless routers
Hell, I'm still using a WRT54G.
Re: (Score:2)
It's called empty promises. The primary purpose of this merger is not nor will it ever be to take care of the poor. It merely serves to unhook the approval process that would create an internet oligarchy.
Cheap internet for anybody is the last thing that these guys want.
Yes, it's one hell of a bribe (let's call it what it is), and I hope the FCC can see the statistics through the trees to call them on their bullshit.
Not sure I'd put that much faith in the government to be that intelligent or anti-corrupt. Comcast already has several monopoly areas. I fail to see how this would ever pass on those grounds alone, but we no longer give a shit about monopolies. Corruption rules.
And when Comcast gets their way that will be validated once again.
Happy voting.
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't call it a bribe. More like a distraction. They're trying to make a fundamentall
Re: (Score:2)
It's called empty promises. The primary purpose of this merger is not nor will it ever be to take care of the poor. It merely serves to unhook the approval process that would create an internet oligarchy.
Cheap internet for anybody is the last thing that these guys want.
Remember the AT&T 768Kbps $10.00 a month naked internet service that was almost impossible to find. It was the short term bribe to get the BellSouth merger passed the regulators. This is Comcrap's version of the same three card monte.
Re: (Score:2)
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me ... how many times is it now that this was promised?
"you have to be online" (Score:1)
Tell that to the Amish. See how far you get. I fucking dare you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:"you have to be online" (Score:4, Informative)
It depends on the specific group, but they generally have a council that decides on the acceptance of new technology and any restrictions on use based on two criteria: Self-sufficiency and the impact on communal lifestyle. They may approve internet use for business purposes if they deem it essential, but they'll also set strict rules to prevent it creeping into non-business use, like requiring the computer be located in an office area and not permitting them in residences.
It won't matter (Score:2)
So much bad is going on now (Score:3)
I love the USA. I love our education system. I love the people you get to meet and make friends with. I just wish we didn't have legalized bribery of politicians.
Jesus H. Christ, I hate Comcast (Score:5, Funny)
You shoot the CEO twice.
Re:Jesus H. Christ, I hate Comcast (Score:4, Funny)
Hitler and Stalin are already dead. Might as well make sure the CEO joins them.
Re: (Score:2)
You would kill Hitler and Stalin you dope.
If an interviewer starts to ask you a question which begins with a tortoise on its back, flip the table and run like hell, man.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Jesus H. Christ, I hate Comcast (Score:4, Funny)
That reminds me of a joke by John Mulaney, where he told his friend how he wasn't sure if he believed in the death penalty. His friend goes (This is all a rough paraphrase, couldn't find a transcription "So you're telling me, if you saw Hitler walking down the street, you wouldn't kill him? You wouldn't kill Hitler?"
"Well, what do you mean by Hitler? Do I see some guy who looks like Hitler walking down the street, with the uniform and mustache and everything? Then I would assume it's just a guy on his way to a costume party. I wouldn't kill that guy. His costume is a little insensitive, but nothing worth killing him over. Or do you mean like, an old version of Hitler? Like an old man that I think might be Hitler? I wouldn't kill him either, because I'm often wrong."
"You killed this man!"
"He looked like Hitler!"
"Yeah a little, what's wrong with you?"
Re: (Score:2)
No. You shoot Stalin and Hitler in the head, just to be safe.
Then you pistol-whip the CEO to death with the heated muzzle.
MUCH more emotionally satisfying! =)
Re: (Score:2)
Internet at library (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Internet at library (Score:5, Insightful)
Have you ever tried to do this? Without your own car? Perhaps with a disability? Are you lucky enough to live in a city that has a library? How far is it to walk to it from where you live? Do you have cold winters there, or hot and humid summers? Is there public transportation that goes from near your house to the library? If so, how many buses does it take? What's the fare, and how much does that add up to if you do it once a day? How long does the ride take? Do you have someone to watch your kids while you do it, or do you bring them along? Did it even occur to you to consider any of these questions?
WEP and Nintendo DS (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Let me give you a whole bunch of personal information: I currently don't have a car. I have a disability in the sense that years ago I used Indiana's vocational rehabilitation services. Indiana weather has both "cold winters" and "hot and humid summers". A monthly pass on the bus service here costs $45 per month* but is useful for things other than Internet access, such as getting to and from work and the supermarket. I just wanted to know whether the convenience of not having to commute to a library was a
Re: (Score:2)
If we have to bend over backwards for every single rare instance of some ultra-hard-luck case... we will never have anything nice.
Does that poor person with no car, no legs, living in an area with -74 degree winters and no way to get to a public internet location (such as a library) get to the store to get food? Could that resource also stop a community center, library, city hall, etc to use a computer?
There will always be a hard luck case.
Re: (Score:2)
What if your library doesn't have internet access available?
Which library might that happen to be?
Re: (Score:2)
Some don't, the smaller the library the less likely they have it.
Could it really be about Content Delivery Network? (Score:2)
With such a huge number of customers (competition aside), the resulting company would become a huge CDN player. Maybe the biggest?
Would Netflix or anyone else need Akamai or others?
I have a better idea: (Score:5, Insightful)
How about Comcast has to offer the low cost internet plan to any of their customers that wants it.
Re: (Score:3)
How about Comcast has to offer the low cost internet plan to any of their customers that wants it.
(Comcast support, 3 hours later...)
"Ah, yes, I see you're on our fuck-you-very-much plan. Oh, you say your speeds are horrendous? It feels like dial-up? Wow, I can't imagine why, but if you're unhappy with your plan, you can always upgrade..."
Re: (Score:2)
Comcast would make a lot less money.
Granted, they would still be profitable, but they would make less money.
The speed for the plan isn't too terrible, either. 5 Mbps down and 1 Mbps up. That's usable for everything except HD video streaming.
Re: (Score:2)
Already here? (Score:3, Insightful)
Time Warner Cable already offers 2MBps service for $14.99 across its footprint.
It isn't hard to find, it's right next to all the other speed options on their web site.
Customers can buy their own modem from Best Buy or wherever or they can lease a TWC modem for $6 a month.
I have a feeling that most customers who need a $9.99 or $14.99 internet plan probably aren't going to front $300 for Google Fiber to be installed, or even own the place they would be paying for it to be installed in.
Re: (Score:2)
...if you own your own home, which the majority of Americans do not.
Re: (Score:1)
Time for ObamaNet (Score:3, Insightful)
Make purchase of Comcast internet a mandatory thing for all americans.
Now the poor have internet, and are only somewhat more poor!
Hey, it worked for the insurance industry and healthcare policies.
Although to be fair the analogy is not really complete unless you also make all americans purchase HBA/Showtime/MLB packages.
Re: (Score:2)
"In my country, it is not free! Not free! I finally decide, it is not right! No way I'm paying for Internet access!"
Remember NetZero. NetZero used to be free.
Yeah, NetZero was "free", if you enjoyed dial-up speeds and didn't mind your browser being reduced to the size of a game boy screen due to ads.
In other words, it was about as free as you are from being tracked today with any other "free" shit.
Low cost. (Score:3)
So, basically, instead of making Comcast, y'know IMPROVE THEIR FUCKING NETWORK AND PEERING, we're going to go for a "cheap internet plan".
Oh boy. A 1mbit/1mbit plan for $20 a month! WOO!
Oh, in the fine print. Going over the 5MByte cap more than twice in a 6 month period gets you upgraded to the more expensive basic plan!
Oh, and at any point did anyone discuss the problem with Comcast's horizontal monopoly being extended to a few million more people? Yes, even if they spin those people off, it's still majority owned by Comcast. All their competitor is doing is getting a revenue share to shut them the fuck up.
No.
No.
NO!
Re: (Score:1)
Meantime every ass-hat website is adding more and more bloatware (advertisements) which makes websites feel SLOWER than dial up.
Has anyone truthfully tried to use dial up recently? It's awful. Websites have gotten so bloated that you need broadband just to have a functional web browsing experience.
Internet essentials requires a child in the house (Score:2)
So it's no good for poor seniors living on social security and the unemployed.
Re: (Score:2)
Do they come to your house to see the child? What are they, pedophiles?
Do they come to your house to see the child? What are they, pedophiles?
No, they would likely do it a much easier way, with tax records.
Kids may be home-schooled, so the school records may not find them, but chances are you're not going to find too many parents hiding them when the taxman comes around.
This has to be offered to third parties (Score:3)
For this actually work, comcast hast offer these rates to third parties using their lines. That is, comcast must offer a discounted rate to third party providers that are offering content to low income or poorly served areas.
If it only goes through comcast directly then comcast has the ability to control costs by limiting service.
And you know that would be fine only they seem to be offering congress this deal to pay for their monopoly rights. Well, I don't want them to be a monopoly and I'd just as soon tell them to screw themselves. However, if they are going to get their monopoly rights then at the very least we should get them to pay for it with what they SAY they're going to pay.
If congress doesn't force this as an open provider policy then they've been suckered.
Re: (Score:2)
If they don't like the divide, it's time for them to pick up a shovel and start filling it in on their own. I'm tapped out.
Here's an idea, we'll eliminate Comcast and AT&T so you can have your basic internet and cable for free, just like the poor.
That's what I want to hear from our political campaigns. Don't elect anything less - demand more. The worst company in America should get jail time, not market guarantees. Kill this malignancy of corporate cancer.
The poor just don't use land lines (Score:3)
From what I've seen, people on a tight budget get a smart phone with a data plan and use that to get online, not a landline cable or DSL connection. That way they hit two birds with one device: phone service and internet.
Sure it's not as "good" as a landline internet connection with a good computer. But it is far cheaper -- at least at first.
Re: (Score:2)
If the poor can't maintain a valid ID, they'll just be issued one (shaped like a phone). We can just call it an alibi for the innocent, or for those guilty, a witness for the prosecution.
Re: (Score:2)
"History repeats the old conceits. The glib replies. The same defeats.
Keep your finger on important issues, with crocodile tears, and a pocket full of tissues..."
E.C. Beyond Belief 1982
File comments with the FCC here (Score:5, Informative)
If anyone cares to take the time write up a comment that may assist the FCC in evaluating or deal or possible concessions to be demanded of Comcast, the link to file those comments is here:
http://www.fcc.gov/mergers [fcc.gov]
Two types of comments can be productive. It can be helpful to file a well-written comment that includes.numbers, citations showing exactly how Comcast's position has been detrimental. It can also be very helpful to file a comment with a suggestion for a compromise that mitigates bad effects from allowing the deal to go through. For example, a comment posted three weeks ago suggesting that they be required to keep TWC's discount program could have been helpful. What doesn't do any good are "fuck Comcast" or "fuck the FCC" comments. Those only make it look like those opposing the acquisition don't have any articulable reason for doing so.
Yes, it's a bit like a homework assignment, to be effective you need to either cite your sources or present a new idea that the FCC hasn't already thought of. That involves more work than writing "fuck Comcast", but such is life in the real world, where grown-ups are making grown-up decisions.
Re: (Score:2)
FUCK COMCAST FUCK COMCAST FUCK COMCAST
I just can't give that up. That's the only payoff we get so don't tell me to stop
FUCK COMCAST just feels so right!!
mmm competition (Score:2)
Here's an idea.
Rip up all the local monopoly deals and enforce (via legislation) meaningful competition.
That'll bring prices and service more into line with the rest of the developed world.
That'll get people (even the poor) signing up.
poor adults not eligible (Score:2)
This "Internet Essentials" program might help some poor people, but it's only available to people with children (eligible for school lunch programs). It's a typical example of how we consider children who live in poverty to be "innocent victims", but adults who can't work due to disability or lack of jobs are treated as if they were unworthy of assistance. In this case, internet access could make a huge difference for them in terms of quality of life and/or additional cost savings (giving access to low-entr
Pentagon Spending (Score:1)
With the first internet we had waste fraud and abuse.
The government should own it all. We would pay as much and get as much. With a government "service plan" you get bloviating politicians at no extra cost. (Funny is guaranteed)
In a for profit system shareholders demand increasing returns and care nothing about "suitability for purpose" it's a race to divide services and collect revenue. The "Useful" parts are increasingly claimed. fenced and charged for until everyone not in on the scam throws up
Netflix deal should mean no merger (Score:5, Insightful)
But by forcing the Netflix deal, Comcast has turned every Internet site out there into a (potential) customer. Netflix has to pay Comcast = Netflix is a customer. In the market for access deals with web sites, Comcast and Time Warner are competitors (Netflix does not need to make deals with both of them, and can leverage the better service on one ISP to pressure the other into making a cheaper deal). Therefore, a Comcast and Time Warner merger reduces competition.
There is going to end badly for everyone. (Score:1)
Bait and switch (Score:2)
uhhh... (Score:2)
First of all, no you don't. Second of all, what percentage of low-income families without home broadband have at least one smartphone with a data plan? Voila; they're online.
Customer service (Score:2)
You know another way we could get a low cost plan? (Score:1)
Bust their monopolized asses up into multiple overlapping entities and make them compete. We'd get a few more perks, too if they are suddenly given a real incentive to improve their product.
This is your Government (Score:1)
This seems obvious. (Score:1)
has signed up only 12 percent of the 2.6 million families eligible for the service since it was launched
Perhaps only 12% of those 2.6 million want internet service? I know it's unthinkable to be without broadband but there are people that don't want it. Why the crusade to get to 100%? ... Oh yeah, more sheeple for advertisers.
Alternative corporate structure (Score:2)
I've been thinking about an alternative structure that might allow a viable alternative to the hegemonic networks we have today. Every time I try to write this out I struggle to explain it, and never submit. I'm going to do my best to write this and hope that some of the folks on slashdot could help flesh this out. I'm trying to do something along the lines of writing a GPL license. Using a contract to turn the business of networking upside down, making people owners of the network they use.
As I see it, th
Missed the boat (Score:1)
The way America's poor 20-somethings get on the Internet now is through their smartphones. (In my experience the older poor don't get online at all). The plethora of $30-$40/mo. "unlimited" 3G services and used 1+ year old smartphones means you can do it and have phone service for about $100 upfront and $40/mo thereafter, and not tied to a landline either. However this is a recent development. US prepaid data plans before 2012 were woefully inadequate.
I won't pretend that we don't live in an age of tech