GLAAD President Resigns

[crossfire]

GLAAD President Resigns After Endorsing AT&T/T-Mobile Acquisition
The aggressive sales pitch that AT&T (NYSE: T) has attached to its landmark acquisition of T-Mobile claimed its first victim over the weekend. Jarrett Barrios, head of the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), submitted a letter of resignation to the group over the

Comments

[hllangel]

I just finished a filing against this merger for work, and after digging through all of AT&T's documents about it? The 97% is pure bullshit.

As is everything else they're claiming. If anything, GLAAD should be against the merger -- AT&T has a history of censoring viewpoints they don't agree with. (As does Verizon, I might add)

[roseofjuly]

They use a shady definition of 97%. I remember reading the fine print on one of the ads. What they actually mean, I think, is that they reach 97% of land-based U.S. within the contiguous 48 states or something akin to that - it's not anywhere near 97% of the U.S. American population.

[hllangel]

The calculation of broadband maps in general is extremely sketcy, even when it's being done by the FCC. I read one report a few weeks ago that said that in some instances if even one person in a zip code is covered then they count the entire zip code.

[roseofjuly]

Oh that is just awesome, lmao. No, Verizon, I do not think that you actually have service in rural northern Montana.

[anolinde]

Have you ever noticed how Verizon will show a map of America covered in red and go, "We cover 97% of America, way more than AT&T," and then the next commercial will be Luke Wilson showing that same exact map of America (only covered in blue) and going, "AT&T covers 97% of America, way more than Verizon"? Or is that just me thinking the two commercials are nearly identical?

[brewsternorth]

Heh, it's not just you.

I forget where I saw it, but there was a very useful article that pointed out that consumers are encouraged to compare brands on attributes that are not actually as useful as they're being told they are. Case in point; cellphone coverage doesn't vary widely between carriers unless you're having to choose between a GSM phone and a CDMA one and there's a difference between the distribution of the different kinds of cell-towers in your usual stamping-grounds. Better to compare networks on customer service (but, alas, most major cell carriers fall down badly on this one).

[roseofjuly]

I usually just choose based on price and devices available. I'm in New York so I don't really have to worry about coverage (although I will say AT&T has a LOT of dropped calls and fuzzy call quality going on, especially with the iPhone). Both Verizon and AT&T have horrible CS (I have AT&T for my wireless and Verizon for my Internet). T-Mobile's CS is actually pretty good, but they haven't been known for having the best devices AND they are about to get bought by AT&T anyway, which is how I ended up AT&T in the first place. I actually was deliberately avoiding them in 2004 and got Cingular, and as we all know, AT&T ate Cingular. I escaped for a year on T-Mobile but came back for the iPhone...which...wasn't worth it, honestly, but I had no idea smartphones were going to blow up like they have recently with all the great Android devices out now

[brewsternorth]

And as I understand it, Virgin Mobile just piggybacks on Sprint's infrastructure anyway.

...I wish I knew what was letting ATT emborgenate itself in the wireless market. I mean, there was an antitrust case which meant that it had to split up into the so-called 'baby Bells' for landline service purposes, so you'd think there would be as clear a case for saying that gobbling T-Mobile would be a merger too far in the cellphone universe. I've had a minimum of problems with T-Mobile, like you (I'm also in NYC), but if ATT takes them over I am seriously contemplating switching. I have a phone of *very little brain*, and I'm not currently looking to upgrade to a smartphone of any kind.

[roseofjuly]

You're right, they do use Sprint's network - and now that I'm looking at it, Virgin Mobile is just a brand of Sprint. So is Boost.

Cricket also uses Sprint's network but is it's own company. There's also MetroPCS (which is of course city-bound, although that might have changed). U.S. Cellular is supposed to be good, but I think it's bigger in the Midwest.