Hmmm.

That might be true if you have the digital literacy skills needed, and have a Smartphone with a data plan, or Internet access at work, or broadband and a computer at home.  But what about everyone else?

Earlier this year the Louisiana Weekly published an article that said “subscribers to high-speed Internet services in New Orleans are generally white and in the higher income brackets.”  In fact, data compiled by the Investigative Reporting Workshop at American University shows that Louisiana is ranked 44th out of 50 states in terms of broadband subscription, with just 51 percent of residents subscribing.  You don’t need to be a math genius to understand that means nearly half of the state lacks reliable Internet access.

So what is this really about?  Could it be about *insert shocked face* a larger profit margin for AT&T?  Public Service Commissioner Foster Campbell thinks so, and I agree.  Foster opposes AT&T’s request, calling it  “a moneymaking deal.”   He rightly points to the fact that without a phone directory and/or Internet access, Louisiana residents will be forced to call 411—and pay $1.50 per call.  This, in a state that has a poverty rate of over 18%!

The Louisiana Public Service Commission could vote on this request as soon as May 23rd—including their counter recommendation that white pages (or a paperless CD ROM) only be sent to people who specifically request it.  Whatever happens—it’s worth following, because with the lobbying reach of AT&T, it’s fair to say your state could be next.

Center for Media Justice Celebrates a Community Victory over AT&T’s Failed Attempt at Media Consolidation

Statement from the Center for Media Justice:

December 19, 2011 (Oakland, CA) – The Center for Media Justice cheers for a big community win with the news that AT&T will be dropping its bid to swallow up T-Mobile to the tune of $39 billion.

The proposed merger was uniformly criticized by the United States Department of Justice, Federal Communications Commission and many prominent members of Congress. But, more importantly, community members raised the alarm all over the country that consolidating two of the four major cell phone carriers would result in less competition, fewer options and higher prices for the 99%. This would especially have had a negative impact on communities of color, who depend on affordable wireless coverage to get online more than any other population segment.

amalia deloney, Media Policy Field Director of Center for Media Justice stated, “Since AT&T first announced its intent to takeover T-Mobile, the Center for Media Justice has continuously raised concerns about what role a duopoly would mean for historically marginalized communities— particularly communities of color and America’s poor who disproportionately rely on access to mobile broadband to find employment, access healthcare, advance their education and organize for social and economic justice.”

This holiday season, millions of folks across the country will not be blind-sided by high phone bills, and T-Mobile employees – many of whom are people of color and all of whom are nonunion- will get to keep their jobs. Today marks an important victory for rural and poor communities, people of color, and the hard workers of America who simply can’t afford to pad the pockets of the corporate CEOs.

For more information about the Center for Media Justice and our work, please visit www.centerformediajustice.org or call Brandi Collins, Communications and Marketing Manager, at 510-698-3800 x409.

Founded in 2002, the Center for Media Justice is a dynamic progressive communications strategy and media policy tank for grassroots organizations serving communities of color and America’s poor.

The Beloit College Mindset List, an annual compilation designed to examine the perspective of incoming college freshmen, leads off this year with a simple fact that has startling implications: the incoming class of 2016—largely born in 1993—has never lived in a world without the Internet.

This is a generation that has integrated constant access to the Internet into every aspect of their lives. And according to a recent study by The Newspaper Association of America Foundation, they are increasingly connecting to the Internet through their smartphones. The survey found that smartphones are replacing televisions, desktop and laptop computers and other devices as the primary provider of information among 16-20 year olds.

In a world where access to the Internet increasingly means access to opportunity, nothing could be more important than ensuring that young people can get online cheaply and stay connected. The need for wireless access is especially clear for young people of color and people from low-income communities, who are more likely to rely on their cell phones as their only means of accessing the Internet.

Given that, the proposed merger between AT&T and T-Mobile should raise significant concerns for young people and those who are interested in protecting access to information for all. Currently T-Mobile plans cost $15 to $50 less per month than comparable plans from AT&T. If this merger is approved, new subscribers will no longer have access to this lower cost option and 80 percent of the wireless market will be controlled by just two corporations: AT&T and Verizon. The reduced competition is likely to result in higher prices for consumers. This is particularly bad news for students who are struggling to get by in an economy with high unemployment, tight family budgets and rising tuition costs.

Less competition is also likely to mean a decline in service and fewer innovations for subscribers as providers have less need to find strategies to hold onto existing customers.

We need to ensure that mobile devices and the access they provide remain affordable. Doing this will require more competition, not less in the wireless market. As the Federal Communications Commission and the Department of Justice consider whether to approve this merger, they should think carefully about the impact it will have on the ability of this generation to access information. For the benefit of these young adults, and for all consumers, they should strike down this unnecessary and harmful merger.

By amalia deloney

If you are one of the millions of Minnesotans who believes your phone bill is too high, be prepared: It could get a lot worse very quickly.

As you’ve no doubt heard, AT&T is trying to swallow T-Mobile to the tune of $39 billion dollars and the results would be nothing short of disastrous—especially for Minnesotans of color and low-income communities throughout the state. In order to make sure this deal doesn’t happen, my organization and hundreds of others have worked tirelessly to fight this takeover as it goes through the lengthy legal review process in Washington.

If the merger is approved and T-Mobile, a vital low cost wireless carrier, is eliminated, AT&T and Verizon would control nearly 80 percent of the wireless market. Minnesotans could see mobile service plans increasing by as much as $50 a month with only the two providers competing against one another. At a time when our country can least afford it, when Minnesota’s poverty rate is currently hovering around 10 percent, this takeover would likely cause the greatest harm to unserved and underserved Minnesotans (rural and urban alike) who rely on affordable wireless broadband services. With 31 T-Mobile locations throughout the state, over 430 Minnesotans stand to lose their jobs if this deal is approved.

We applaud Senator Franken for his call to block this merger outright and earlier this week, we too called on Attorney General Eric Holder and FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski to protect our communities and deny this takeover.

Now after months of lobbying and debate, we stand at a crossroads in the fight. After over two years running the antitrust division, today is Christine Varney’s last day in her post at the Department of Justice.

Christine Varney was a strong defender of American antitrust law, protecting consumers and businesses from anticompetitive behavior. With her departure comes a great deal of uncertainty; who will carry the torch at Department of Justice and what does her absence mean for

American consumers?

President Obama will soon nominate an Assistant Attorney General to fill her role and AT&T will no doubt aggressively lobby against any candidate that possesses Ms. Varney’s commitment to competition, but we must ensure internal staffing changes do not result in our voices being lost in the shuffle. AT&T’s takeover of T-Mobile would cause irreparable damage to the competitiveness of the wireless industry, and more importantly, the wallets of every mobile phone user.

As Senator Franken stated in his letter to the Department of Justice and the Federal Communications Commission, “This transaction is not in the public interest. If approved, it would result in greatly reduced competition, the potential loss of thousands of jobs, higher consumer prices, and less innovation in technology.”

We couldn’t agree more.

[[Editor’s Note: Amalia Deloney is the Grassroots Policy Director at the Center for Media Justice, a fellow with New America Foundation’s Open Technology Institute and a long time board member of the MN based—Main Street Project.]]

“If the proposed merger goes through, just two companies– AT&T and Verizon–would control nearly 80 percent of the mobile market in this country. In addition, the loss of a low cost wireless carrier would force 20,000 T-Mobile workers to lose their jobs,” said amalia deloney, Grassroots Policy Director for the Center for Media Justice.

The Center for Media Justice (CMJ) is leading this effort alongside the Media Action Grassroots Network (MAG-Net), a national coalition of community organizations working in local communities across the country to ensure low-income and working Americans are represented in the heated debate over the proposed takeover.

The petition and letter ask the FCC and DOJ to stop the merger on behalf of the millions of people in the United States who are already struggling to obtain essential modern communications services. “If the merger goes through,” said Betty Yu, MAG-Net Coordinator, “customers can expect an increase in their mobile service plans by as much as $50 a month.”

The filing of the petition launches MAG-Net’s ‘Month of Action’ against the merger. Throughout August, member organizations will conduct in-district visits with Congressional representatives, hold community education sessions and participate in online actions.

“When people understand what’s at stake, they are upset,” said Steven Renderos of the Minneapolis-based, Main Street Project. “Half the battle is cutting through the technical language. People need something they can understand–that’s why we created Mo’ Mergers, Mo’ Problems. We took a hip hop classic and remixed it to talk about the merger.” The Center for Media Justice believes the merger does not meet public interest obligations, and therefore should be blocked.

07.25.2011– The Center for Media Justice has been invited by the Federal Communications Commission’s Chairman Julius Genachowski to join the newly formed Consumer Advisory Committee. 

The committee was developed to gather and make recommendations to the FCC regarding consumer issues within the jurisdiction of the FCC, and to facilitate the participation of all consumers in proceedings before the FCC. 

“The Center for Media Justice is extremely honored to have been appointed to this committee,” said amalia deloney, Policy Director for the Center for Media Justice, “we are pleased that the FCC has shown an interest in ensuring consumers are a part of the policy-making process, including and especially in these tough economic times, and we at CMJ will continue to fight for jobs and strong consumer protections for America’s poor, rural and communities of color.”

The first meeting will be held August 17th at the FCC headquarters in Washington D.C. All meetings are open to the public and will be broadcast live with open captioning over the internet from the FCC Live web page. 

Currently, CMJ is asking it’s supporters and allies to oppose a proposed AT&T – T-Mobile merger which they say will be a jobs and democracy killer and a “disaster for all mobile phone users — especially people of color and low-income communities in rural and urban areas.”

*************************

Founded in 2002, the Center for Media Justice is a dynamic communications strategy and media policy tank for grassroots organizations serving communities of color and America’s poor.

With headquarters in Oakland, California, and staff in Chicago and New York, CMJ is the only group in the nation that both develops communications strategies and leaders for a 21st-century progressive movement, and organizes nationally for media policy solutions to end racism and poverty.

CMJ is a proud coordinator of The Media Action Grassroots Network (MAG-Net), a local-to-local advocacy network of grassroots community organizations working together for media change to end poverty, eliminate racism, and ensure human rights. With over 100 member groups nationwide, regional chapters, an online action network, a media justice learning community, and collaborative campaigns- MAG-Net is advancing an exciting new vision for media justice and a 21st century economy.

Latino organizations represent the fastest growing consumer base for wireless technologies- and they have a difficult choice to make. Can they afford to examine the merger on its merits, and oppose it if they find it harmful?

Despite clear evidence that the AT&T merger is the worst way to expand access, would eliminate jobs, raise prices, and harm workers who aren’t lucky enough to be unionized- some civil rights groups have still given it a thumbs up. But some Latino organizations I know and respect are doing a damn good job making sure their communities are represented as the DOJ and the FCC decide if this merger is best for America.

Recently, the National Latino Congreso, a member of Latinos for Internet Freedom (LIF), sent a letter to AT&T asking tough, but good, questions about claims that the merger will bring access and employment to Latino communities. Rather than simply pointing fingers or turning a blind eye to the facts, NLC is doing what all Latino civil rights groups should- making AT&T answer to them instead of the other way around.

In a recent blog, another LIF member, the National Hispanic Media Coalition, said they were disappointed to hear of the merger- and pointed out that despite that 25% of Latinos are in poverty, they pay more for cell phones than any other demographic group. On average, they pay $104 per month.

These two leading Latino organizations oppose the merger of AT&T and T-mobile. What about you, what do you think? Will the replacement of a low-cost competitor (T-mobile) with a carrier that boasts expensive phones, a bad network, and control of more than 70% of the wireless market (AT&T) hurt or help Latino communities?

As a black lesbian director of a national media strategy and organizing center, I consider it my fight to ensure that the civil rights groups of the DC beltway represent the needs and dreams of local under-represented communities when it comes to telecom issues. When the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) took it upon themselves to advocate for the AT&T takeover of tmobile, they advocated for the company, not the people they are sworn to represent. I had to ask myself why.

Big Media = Big Money. According to an article published in Politico last week, AT&T gave money to all the civil rights groups that currently back the merger. While AT&T claims their donations and grants to be the result of socially responsible partnership with non-profits, it seems pretty obvious that the ONLY groups that support the merger are ones that have received money from AT&T.

GLAAD isn’t the only group to suffer under the thumb of the expectations that come with receiving corporate money. Just last month, Comcast pulled a grant from Reel Grrls -a small video production organization serving young women- after they tweeted a critique of Comcast’s hire of FCC Commissioner Meredith Baker. These young women raised concerns about reports that FCC Commissioner Meredith Baker had gone from overseeing the approved merger of Comcast and NBC to working as a top official at Comcast. Instead of begging for their grant back, Reel Grrls raised a ruckus and alerted both their allies and the media. Under national scrutiny, Comcast apologized and offered to restore the grant, but Reel Grrls had raised enough money through donations. They set a precedent by saying no to the corporate money and the strings that come with it.

Accepting significant financial contributions from big industry links the fate and survival of these non-profit organizations with the profit-bearing motives of corporate donors and the deregulation of corporate America.

GLAAD only received $50,000 from AT&T, which is a drop in the bucket compared to what has been given to some larger groups. Even this small amount was enough to coerce GLAAD into taking a bizarre position on a merger that will have clear negative impacts on the communities they serve. But it’s not good enough for public interest media reform groups to tell non-profits like GLAAD or Reel Grrls not to accept corporate money, regardless of the clear and compelling evidence that political coercion is imminent. Together, civic organizations must fight to ensure there are alternate sources of funding that support –not distort- the mission of these groups.

Lack of Appropriate Information and Representation. Beyond the money, there is a serious lack of good research and policy information available to these groups. Like GLAAD, most beltway civil rights groups do not have in- house telecom counsel or staff. So where do they get their information?

From the Minority Media and Telecommunications Council (MMTC)- a group run by David Honig which has repeatedly advocated for mergers and the deregulation of the telecom industry. David, who is white, has taken a few progressive positions on telecommunications issues, but his analysis of what it takes to close the digital divide and advance democratic participation is more corporate investment. He suggests that making big business follow the same rules the rest of us do would decrease investment and harm people of color. He insists that if left alone to make their money, companies like AT&T and Comcast would “do the right thing”. Have you ever heard of a big company doing the right thing without incentive- particularly when potential profits are at stake? This is the misinformation flooding local, state, and national civil rights organizations. Without the legal or technical in-house expertise to interrogate these assertions, they rely on MMTC.

But MMTC isn’t the biggest culprit here- in my opinion they’re just trying to make it within a culture of backroom corporate deals. Despite great labor practices and a socially responsible face, AT&T is the real bad guy. Like other big media companies, they often write letters to the FCC, and civil rights organizations like GLAAD just sign them. This practice is largely denied, and GLAAD was first in line to claim their pro-corporate policy position as authentic- but in a recent admission by GLAAD President Jarrett Barrios acknowledged that at least once, AT&T officials had written a letter for GLAAD. If AT&T is doing the advocacy, and MMTC is providing the information- who is speaking for the gay/lesbian/bi/and transgendered community? It sure isn’t GLAAD.

Worldview. Why does AT&T have such power in civic organizations from the DC beltway to your hometown? Well it isn’t because these organizations are dumb, or simply because they are struggling for resources or ill-informed. No. These organizations are often run by brilliant leaders of integrity. Instead, I think it’s because many groups have internalized a worldview that prioritizes getting our piece of the American pie, rather than one that seeks to remake the pie into something we can not only eat, but create and control. In the context of decimated public and municipal infrastructure, and an economic environment where jobs are scarce- the promise of contracts, work, and money, coupled with the belief that wealth equals freedom, promises mean a lot. Even if history proves that when it comes to big industry, promises not guaranteed by regulation are made to be broken. As a movement for justice, part of our mandate is to shift beliefs and values about the role of corporations in our lives.

Not only did GLAAD lie about their relationship with AT&T, but they failed to protect their members from the price gouging and content blocking this merger would legalize. This is why GLAAD may represent AT&T, but they don’t represent me. Sign the petition to stop the merger now.