Scripted opposition to wireless merger raises credibility questions

While attorneys at the Department of Justice spent countless hours investigating the legality of a proposed merger between wireless carriers AT&T and T-Mobile, publicly filed comments opposing the transaction were piling up at the Federal Communications Commission. 

But word-for-word, an overwhelming number of those comments are either completely or partially identical.

The thousands of comments, filed through the FCC’s website, have not gone unnoticed. Sprint Nextel Inc., which ardently opposes the merger, points to the comments as proof average Americans do not want to see AT&T and T-Mobile become one entity.

Many of the most recent comments contain the language, “Don’t let AT&T put our mobile future at risk. Please stand with me and reject such reckless consolidation of the mobile industry.”

Coincidentally, Free Press — a media reform advocacy group — is promoting a feature on its “Take Action” Web page that allows visitors to submit a scripted comment to the FCC.

“AT&T’s takeover of T-Mobile would stifle choice and innovation in the market, harm consumers, and lead to higher prices and fewer jobs nationwide,” reads the comment. “Don’t let AT&T put our mobile future at risk. Please stand with me and reject such reckless consolidation of the mobile industry.”

Last month the Atlanta Journal-Constitution pointed out that more than half of the filed comments opposing the merger from Atlanta residents “were identical, taken from a statement posted on a website by the Free Press.” (As Justice Dept. reviews legality of merger, it’s AT&T versus Spring)

And a search of the FCC website finds that the phrase “Please stand with me and reject” turns up more than 19,000 times.

The Take Action site was launched less than a week before the FCC’s May 31 deadline for filing comments. At the time, it was reported that Free Press sent a mass email to 275,000 subscribers, including a link to the site. From there, visitors could weigh in just by clicking “send.”

The jump from comments filed before the site launched, to comments filed after the site’s inception is staggering, going  in just a few days from less than 100 to 10,000.

Some now point to these “robo-comments” as proof of a campaign that makes a lot of noise but is organized by only two or three groups. And for some, the robo-copy raises questions about the credibility of the opposition to what would be a gigantic corporate merger.

Another organization, called CREDO Action — an advocacy arm of telecom company CREDO Mobile — circulated a petition in May asking its members to oppose the merger. CREDO then filed the petitions with the FCC, in increments of between 3,963 to 4,574 names each time. In all, CREDO submitted roughly 35,000 signatures.

CREDO resells Sprint wireless phone service. And in recent years, it has been a significant donor to Free Press.

  • Pingback: FCC Robo-Comments and an Apparent Funky Two-fer

  • mindshift

    If I sign a petition, does that mean my commitment to that cause is less than if I send an individual letter or email? Just because I send an email that was written by an organization does not mean I’m indifferent to that cause, or that I do not read the contents before I click on Send. I have always been concerned over the creeping monopoly of big business mergers. I have had personal experience with AT&T, and any statement that they will make no changes must have the word YET added to it. Using a form letter that is already well written and thought out only makes it easier for me to express my wishes and concerns.

  • Pingback: Tech at Night: AT&T, T-Mobile, NAB, Spectrum | We The Conservatives

  • Pingback: Tech at Night: AT&T, T-Mobile, NAB, Spectrum | RedState

  • Pingback: Scripted Opposition Part of the Tainted Script for Public Interest Groups @FCC

  • Dmoon

    The credibility issue is not with protests against the merger — it is with ATT’s claim that by taking out one more independent company (T-Mobile), ATT and Verizon will offer a better and more competitive marketplace.

    This is untrue on it’s face! Two companies dominating a market is an oligopoly, and as they collude, which they will, they will be an effective monopoly.

    Does anyone still think Microsoft’s monopoly is a good thing, that Windows is the greatest? Then, you will have to find the OPEC oligopoly also a good thing, as you pay through the nose for gas and the U.S. spends trillions defending OPEC oil.

  • chuckh

    The US, although a leader in smart phone technology, lags behind other areas of the world in cell phone use. I am all for competition in any industry. Competition lowers prices and builds a better mouse trap, so to speak. However, there is a hugh cost of infrastucture and economy of scale can also help bring cost down.

    If the FCC wants to help the consumer they would have all cell phones work with all carriers.I want to purchase the iPhone 5 when it is released in a couple of months, but I can only chose between Verizon or AT&T. It seems those companies with the best lobbist win.

  • Supernatural Witness

    All this proves is that as soon as people were informed of the merger they clicked the link by the thousands. The real reason people are opposed is because ATT sucks, and anyone who has T-Mobile is screaming bloody murder: no no no please not that!!!

  • Drahcir

    So the wording is the same.
    Does that mean that the signature, eletronic or otherwise, is the same also?
    People may have been just too lazy to write a responce to the merger.

  • Pingback: Scripted opposition to wireless merger raises credibility questions | iBlogAuto