in context: Transparency has been a running theme lately for many tech-related companies. Apple moved the ball forward by requiring developers to include a “nutrition label” in their app descriptions. With regulators around the world calling for more consumer transparency, different companies are fighting for or against open practices.
Recently, the FCC adopted a transparency rule requiring Internet service providers to create information labels so customers can make informed purchasing decisions. The tag should list a detailed description of the subscription price, including data cap, performance, and all associated fees.
Of course, it came as no surprise when Comcast filed a complaint against the rule, arguing that implementing the proposed label would “impose a significant administrative burden” on the company and add “unnecessary complexity” to its operations. It claimed that in order to comply with the FCC’s rule, it would have to create 251 labels to provide all required information.
Comcast wasn’t the only provider to complain about the new Rage. Five lobbying bodies, including the Communications Association of America, CTIA, The Internet and Television Association, The Rural Broadband Association and The Broadband Association, jointly petitioned the FCC to reject the rule in favor of the older, simpler label it proposed in 2016 .
On Tuesday, the FCC told them all, “No.” it will go on implementation Rules whether the ISP likes it or not. The commissioners argued that consumers should know the final price and all other contingencies before deciding which plan and provider is best for them.
“Every consumer needs transparent information when deciding which Internet service offering will be most useful to their family or home,” said FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel. “No one wants to be hit with charges they didn’t ask for or expect. That’s why the broadband consumer labels are so important.”
The complaints from ISPs and their lobbying groups are clearly hearsay, but even if they weren’t, they show how frustratingly complicated it can be for a consumer to read a bill and find out that it’s so much more than the quoted price. Why more Isn’t it ironic that your ISP is arguing that the 251 bits of information are too difficult to list in advance, but have no problem listing them on your bill? It’s like going to a restaurant and ordering a $10 cheeseburger, but being billed for water, napkins, silverware, seating, greetings, order processing, bathroom access, climate control, entertainment tax, and many other unknown charges. I get a $20 bill. ,
Very good on the FCC for sticking to its word. However, temper your expectations. Too many times, we have seen the commission making rules without any power. Let’s see how it pans out before praising the FCC too much. Also, let’s not forget that a lot of these fees come from government bureaucracy.