Cable lobby group NCTA-The Internet & Television Association claimed that the commission's "micromanagement of advertising in today's hyper-competitive marketplace will force operators to either clutter their ads with confusing disclosures or leave pricing information out entirely."
Comcast calls me all the time trying to sell me on their Trojan horse streaming box or their cell service. I’m polite to the caller cause I know it’s just a gig for them but I always calmly tell them I only have Comcast as I have no other choice and I’d rather peel off my finger nails than give them any other business. It speaks to how bad things are that I’m dying for Verizon of all companies to come “save” me. Hyper-competitive, fucking lol.
I would hope this would also apply to the live TV streaming services like Hulu+live tv, Fubo, YouTube TV, etc. I looked into some of them, and the added fees took the monthly bill from like $83 a month to over $100 a month, but you don’t know that unless you read the disclaimers since they advertised it at $83 a month.
And the thing about regulation like this is that it just resets the bar height for everyone. It's not like this doesn't apply to all competitors.
Unless we mean non-cable competition, i.e. streaming. Maybe that's not under the jurisdiction of FCC? If not, though, then I have to wonder why this has to be an FCC thing in the first place. This is about truth in advertising, in general.
Isnt there like..only two cities in the whole country where cable companies actually have to compete with each other? (and consequently the customers see the lowest prices in the country.. weird how that works?)
The proliferation of home cell internet and Starlink's internet has had a nice downward pressure in many markets. Both are often surprisingly good, even for heavy internet users. They are something worth checking out in your area.
Edit: Note, if you look into satellite internet, Starlink is pretty much the only one that doesn't suck. This is due to the satellites being in low earth orbit (fairly close) rather than way, way off in geostationary orbit.
Nothing better than Verizon advertising $65 a month, which is already too much, then when you actually try to sign up it's not just more; they straight up refuse to tell you what it will be (yes, I tried asking).
I know that's not cable but they both play the same games. No, it's not impossible for you to just tell a customer what you're going to charge them.
Whatever it is It will only come down to costing companies with deep lobby pockets money and how the conservative new agencies are spinning it.
I'd like to see everything priced on the rim and out the door. Taxes, registration, fees, shipping all on the line. I'd like the price on the shelf/invoice/website/advertisement/cash register and bank statement to all match.
The lobbying group for cable companies said that it would hurt their highly competitive market(I'm sure they weren't able to type that without laughing) and it makes it harder for them to advertise one price since the cost of the sports and local bundles are regional (though they have no problems getting those prices correct on the bills.)
Umm uhhhh they'll have to increase the total price to make up the difference in processing more numbers which will cause the employee budget to decrease hurting the local economy which means less taxes to fund fire department and your babies will burn in a fire caused by the unqualified cable tech they had to hire to offset the loss in profits.
Usually here it's not a good thing because nothing is allowed to be good. Was the same on a lot of Reddit, too. Like, the upliftingnews subreddit comments were the worst for it.
"Child spends weekends collecting cans from the trash to save enough money to turn off the Orphan Crushing Machine for a day" is not uplifting news, and is most of what got posted there.
In case you were wondering the Republicans on the FCC both dissent claiming that the FCC has no jurisdiction to ban lying because people being marketed too aren't cable subscribers yet and therefore outside of the FCC's purview. What a load of horse-hockey. Their next argument will be that the FCC has no right to regulate cable at all because the consumer hasn't been screwed until they give the cable company their money at which point it's too late.
As much of a free-market-enjoyer that I am, this is what you get when you vote Republican (or stay home).
Haven't had cable nor streaming services my entire life, and I'm 35. Though I do pay for YouTube Premium. Then again, I watch media reviewers and longform film and game essayists. And speedruns. I buy or pirate all my shows. I "own" a number of shows on Google Play, but the last several years has made me stop buying there too. Physical or piracy, baby.
This. For people wanting to clean up their interface, if you select "block user" on any of those spammer posts, it removes them entirely leaving only real posters.
Media Contact:
Office of Media Relations
[email protected]
For Immediate Release
FCC VOTES TO REQUIRE CABLE AND SATELLITE TV PRICING
TRANSPARENCY
New ‘All-In’ Pricing Rules Will Address Consumers’ Confusion on Hidden Fees in
Cable and Satellite TV Billing
WASHINGTON, March 14, 2024—The Federal Communications Commission today adopted
new rules requiring cable and satellite TV providers to specify the “all-in” price clearly and
prominently for video programming service in their promotional materials and on subscribers’
bills. The FCC aims to eliminate the misleading practice of describing video programming costs
as a tax, fee, or surcharge.
This updated “all-in” pricing format allows consumers to make informed choices, including the
ability to comparison shop among competitors and to compare programming costs against
alternative programming providers, including streaming services. TV providers often use
deceptive junk fees to hide the real price of their services. The FCC is putting an end to this form
of price masking, increasing competition, and reducing confusion among consumers.
These new rules require cable operators and direct broadcast satellite (DBS) providers to state the
total cost of video programming service clearly and prominently, including broadcast
retransmission consent, regional sports programming, and other programming-related fees, as a
prominent single line item on subscribers’ bills and in promotional materials. The record
demonstrates that charges and fees for video programming provided by cable and DBS providers
are often obscured in misleading promotional materials and bills, which causes significant and
costly confusion for consumers.
These new rules continue a series of consumer-focused proposals to combat junk fees and support
transparency for consumers. In addition to this “all-in” pricing, the Commission is preparing to
upcoming launch of the mandatory Broadband Consumer Labels and has proposed to eliminate
early termination fees from cable and satellite TV providers.
Action by the Commission March 14, 2024 by Report and Order (FCC 24-29). Chairwoman
Rosenworcel, Commissioners Starks and Gomez approving. Commissioners Carr and Simington
dissenting. Chairwoman Rosenworcel, Commissioners Carr, Starks, and Simington issuing
separate statements.
MB Docket No. 23-203