NAB uses pop-ups to generate "comments" to the FCC
Friday, November 23, 2007 at 3:14 PM
Tags: 2, XM
Yesterday, the Thanksgiving Day post lightly touched upon what the Washington Post uncovered recently: that many of the "comments" submitted to the fcc against the Sirius-XM merger were simply generated through a dubious pop-up ad campaign.
This issue goes far beyond the use of form letters. I'm no lawyer, but this appears to border on all out fraud.
Form letters can be a "useful" tool for large groups to assemble their thoughts en masse. I don't necessarily like them (I would much prefer the public submit in their own words), but at least the submitter is voicing their opinion and is aware of it.
But what the NAB has done here is not at all a case of "form letters."
The Washington Post discovered that out of the 60 people they contacted - many of the phones were actually disconnected, or went unanswered. Out of the 10 people they were actually able to talk to (which - in itself - is a ridiculous rate of failure), only 1 person - ONE PERSON - even remembered filling out something remotely related to satellite radio (and not even being merger related).
So how did those comments get submitted to the FCC?
According to the Washington Post article, the NAB bought pop-up ads on websites like CarMax.com, Staples.com and PriceGrabber.com in August and September. The ad ran the headline, "The XM Radio/Sirius Merger will create higher prices. Stop the Monopoly!" - and users could click either, "Yes, I'd like to help stop the monopoly" or "No, thank you."
Those who clicked "yes" were asked to type in their contact information and later received a confirmation e-mail "detailing their action and providing a copy of the letter to be sent to the FCC," according an NAB spokesperson. Respondents were given the "opportunity to opt out of the process" and cancel submission of their letter.
If I'm reading that correctly... it means that any inaction to the email was considered confirmation. So if these emails were sent to the Spam folder, or were inadvertently deleted, the submission was still considered confirmed.
And there's another question...
So far only a little over 5,000 computer generated emails have hit the FCC and, as the article points out, many with the names and addresses of people who said they never filed any comments regarding the merger. But the NAB states in the article that 8,500 comments were "inspired" by this campaign.
That means some 3,500 more "comments" with dubious provenance are waiting to appear. Where are they? When will they show up? Why have they been withheld?
I don't care if you're pro- or anti-merger. If you have an opinion on the merger - whatever it may be - you should have submitted your comments to the FCC. That is your right as a citizen, and it's the whole purpose as to why the FCC has a public comment submission process.
These phony letters corrupt this entire process and are in sharp contrast to the thousands of Americans who took time to write genuine, thoughtful letters to the FCC.
The fact that the NAB - which advocates on behalf of over 8,300 radio and television stations and networks, and has an annual NAB Radio Show which reportedly is attended by over 110,000 industry professionals - simply cannot garner enough genuine public support for their agenda is telling. Very very telling.
But just because the public isn't agreeing with a lobbyist's position doesn't mean they should resort to these tactics. It is the public who should decide how to voice their opinion, not a special interest group.
A Call To Action:
The more I think about this, the more angry I get. Again, we're not talking about form letters (which, sadly, is a standard lobbying practice) - I'm talking about people participating as part of a legal process without knowing they are. In the Washington Post article, it was pointed out that a poll of 350 congressional staffers conducted by the Congressional Management Institute in 2005 indicated that half of them did not believe that form-letter messages were sent with the knowledge or approval of constituents.
How long has this been going on? How many other comments from "the public" aren't genuine? How exactly are all these comments being extracted, especially considering WaPo's astonishing rate of failure in contacting submitters? Are these in fact even real people?
We need to ask Congress and the FCC for an inquiry. There needs to be some accountability here.
Regardless of whether you support or oppose the merger, we need to know the extent of these practices. How exactly were these comments were "inspired" by the NAB? If you feel the same way as I do, then please voice your opinion and contact Congress/FCC to demand an inquiry.
There's several ways to do this (like, contacting the FCC directly or check out the EFF's guidelines for contacting Congress). XM and Sirius also have handy-dandy pages that submit your comment to the FCC and copy your state's representatives (here's XM's version, or Sirius' version - they both do the same thing).
However you do it, just remember this issue is not about the merger itself, rather an inquiry into these deceitful and dubious tactics. Those of us who's actually spent the time to submit a unique and thoughtful comment shouldn't be undermined by a pop-up ad.
Digg It!
Featured Entries
From the Forums...
Search Orbitcast:
Latest Poll
Satellite Radio Websites
Sponsored Links
Comments
yes, i agree--its smells, looks and feels fradulent
Posted by: gary | November 23, 2007 3:41 PM
You said an inaction is a confirmation? No, entering your contact info is the confirmation. Happens all of the time, as long as there is an opt out or an UNSUBSCRIBE, no law is broken.
People took action by entering their info. I know it is not ideal, and obviously you hate it (Although, would you be this mad if XM and Sirius had done the same)...
You know I respect the hell out of you but you and I disagree on this. I think you are letting your deep deep passion FOR the merger fuel your anger.
You also are mad on a premiss that XM/Sirius have done NOTHING shady or misleading in the proccess, and I think their fantasy promises of cheaper prices and more options are shady, because as WAPO said and I agree, no one, and I mean NO ONE has been able to show where the merger of the only servoce providers of any service has led to LOWER prices, MORE choices and better service. Has never happened. One has to believe that this wil be the first one in History led by a guy (Mel) who is not known for that. I guess he will change his ways, this once? C'Mon.
Posted by: The Squeaky Wheel | November 23, 2007 4:05 PM
you missed the entire point sqeaky---The Washington Post followed up on this and found disconnected numbers, no such persons existing and the ones that they did actually get hold of had no clue about it---See a pattern here?? Thats the issue---You wouldnt remember voicing an opinion on the merger if you had?? come on....It then calls into question the actual way of sending out to the fcc and was it fradulent
The proposed merger has filed a price plan, ala-carte which offers more choice, lower prices depending on the type of program you take--not sure about the better service(remains to be seen) but overall, the "proposed plan" would be a benefit to the consumer-
What the merged entity does a few years down the road remains to be seen but considering they compete against free radio, internet, ipods etc---Its not in their best interests to raise prices---wouldnt you think??--
Posted by: gary | November 23, 2007 4:44 PM
Below is what sent in to Chairman Martin and the rest of the FCC; something needs to be to NAB.
-----Original Message-----
From: xxx
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2007 5:40 PM
To: KJMWEB@fcc.gov
Cc: Michael.Copps@fcc.gov; Jonathan.Adelstein@fcc.gov; dtaylortateweb@fcc.gov; robert.mcdowell@fcc.gov
Subject: Sirius/XM merger - NAB uses pop-ups to generate "comments" to the FCC (Washington Post)
The illegal tactics used by the NAB gives me great apprehension in the objectiveness of the entire process that is being used to determine the merger approval between XM and Sirius. Chairman Martin what is going to be done to the NAB or their surrogates that have instigated this clearly dubious tactic to sway your commission. This not just wrong but blatantly wrong and illegal, please tell me it is, if not illegal it should be. I know one of your assistants is going to read the letter but I hope my letter finds its way to you and I receive an answer, thank you.
The link to the article and a short excerpt is included below.
Constituents' E-Mail on XM Deal Not Well Received
By Jeffrey H. Birnbaum and Kim Hart Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, November 22, 2007; Page D01
Juanita Daigle of Baton Rouge is listed as one of the thousands of people who sent e-mails to the Federal Communications Commission opposing the proposed merger between the satellite radio networks XM and Sirius.
But Daigle said she never sent an e-mail and is distressed that anyone would think she did. "How did they get my name?" she asked. "I don't want someone using my name for something I don't even know about."
Name
Posted by: Alonzo | November 23, 2007 5:43 PM
the post article says the nab has records for "the name, date, postal address and numerical Internet address of the e-mailers, including those contacted by The Post, to show that the electronic letters were sent by actual people." assuming this is true since the post can easily verify this by looking at the records then what do you think? maybe the people just forgot what they clicked on, or maybe, just maybe xm and sirius got wind ofwhat nab was doing and to discredit it got people to file lettters using fake names, etc. wouldn't it be interesting if the post keeps investigating and this turns out to be the real truth? call me crazy but stranger things have happened.
Posted by: george | November 23, 2007 6:56 PM
George, I told you not to be stupid you moron..........
Shut-up!!!........sit down!!!
Posted by: Joe Workman | November 23, 2007 7:02 PM
I do not know which is worse, the NAB or this commenter that knowingly provided false information to FCC. I think and hope the premeditated actions taken by both the NAB and the commenter will be pursued and punished to the fullest extent of the law.
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6519814913
Posted by: Rich | November 23, 2007 7:04 PM
Gary,
I hear where you are coming from but whern you say "The proposed merger has filed a price plan..." understand that it is not binding. It is what they say the PLAN to do but I am willing to bet everything that "Things chance."
Fact is when the FCC granted the freqs to both XM and Sirius they both had a "Plan" to never merge. Things change.
I am not defending the NAB, lord knows they are clowns, but I also do not think anyoen should lose sight that mergers NEVER benifit the consumer, only the stockholder will benifit(And that is the ONLY reason they want to 'merge')... that's all.
Posted by: The Squeaky Wheel | November 23, 2007 8:40 PM
For the record, I would be just as ripping pissed if XM and Sirius did this.
Posted by: Ryan Saghir | November 23, 2007 8:41 PM
George, you are exactly right. The NAB should subpeana those records the NAB claims to have and review each and every one of them.
If they are legitimate, they stay on the record. For each and every one that is not legitimate, fine the NAB. These tactics are underhanded, dirty, and I will agree with Ryan border on outright fraud. Anyone interested in a class action? ;)
On the Sirius and XM merger page, it clearly states "Contact the FCC". When you click that link, in the instructions under number 3, it states "Click "send" and your message will automatically be delivered to the FCC and your members of Congress." That is the way it SHOULD be.
If Sirius/XM did the same form letter scam, I would be just as pissed. I will tell you exactly what this form letter campaign shows: DESPERATION. If the company I was invested in showed this type of desperation, I would jump ship pretty damn fast.
Posted by: Brian R. | November 23, 2007 10:13 PM
@Squeaky: This has nothing to do with the merger. This has to do with the misrepresentation of "public" support. Just because someone entered in their contact information doesn't mean that they chose to voice their position to a federal agency.
We don't know exactly how this was positioned to the user. If 9 out of 10 don't remember ANYTHING about the issue, then it's obvious the process was flawed in some way.
What if it said "Win a free iPhone, submit your info to enter into a contest!" - would that be an acceptable use of someone's identity? Where do we draw the line? This is why we need an inquiry into how this was done.
Subscribing to an email newsletter and submitting your information to the FCC are two completely different things. This isn't an issue of CAN-SPAM compliance like in email marketing - remember users can always unsubscribe from emails at a later date - these people cannot retract their FCC statements with the same ease. (For the record, using a "double opt-in" method is considered a best practice in the email marketing industry.)
I know you're against the merger. And I totally respect that - I hope you understand that by now. Hell, I HOPE you submitted comments to the FCC expressing this position - because that's YOUR RIGHT - but this method of mass submission corrupts that entire process. INCLUDING YOUR OPPOSITION TO THE MERGER.
If the majority expressed opposition to the merger, then great - that's that. But would that give XM/Sirius the right to computer-generate comments in their favor? No. And the NAB shouldn't be absolved of this either.
...and that's why I'm so pissed.
Posted by: Ryan Saghir | November 24, 2007 8:25 AM
More importantly, the NYT made cumsies today all over K Martin concerning his support for a la carte cable services. So how could he oppose the merger.
And by cumsies, I mean shitskis
Posted by: teeheejimmy | November 24, 2007 9:24 AM
"And by cumsies, I mean shitskis"
Speak English Ass
Posted by: Joe Workman | November 24, 2007 12:04 PM