Stupid Spin
September 4th, 2009 at 10:58 am by David FarrarTom Pullar-Strecker writes in the Dom Post:
People might be forgiven for taking a joint media statement issued by Parents Inc and Youthline on Wednesday at face value. The charities said they were concerned the Commerce Commission’s proposal to regulate mobile termination charges might have a ”negative impact”.
Why would they be getting involved in this issue?
Vodafone’s charitable arm, the Vodafone Foundation, awarded Youthline $200,000 to build a centre in Papatoetoe in March and has also paid the salary of a Youthline counsellor. Parents Inc announced a three year partnership with Vodafone in June.
And their arguments:
Both Parents Inc. and Youthline are concerned about the other unintended consequences of regulation, such as the potential for an increase in text spam and text bullying. When a service is very cheap or free, it increases the risk of abuse.
They’re arguing that a reduction in the cost to phone or text someone is a bad thing as it may lead to text spamming and worst of all child abuse by text bullying.
That is like arguing we should introduce a charge to send e-mails, to reduce e-mail spam and e-mail flame wars. Absolute throwing the baby out with the bath water.
Yes it is possible more companies may try to send text spam, if sending texts is cheaper. However commercial text spamming is against the law, and further the telcos have a code of practice that bans it from their networks.
Pilbrow says, “One of the issues with young people and parents is that the technology is growing so fast we have not had time to put boundaries around it. Parents struggle with it, and when spam and other areas of abuse are factored in, the issues for parents increase immensely.”
So lowering the mobile termination rate will add to family stress for parents. I can not believe anyone in their right mind allowed this press release to go out with such vapid and stupid arguments – obviously motivated by a desire to please their funder.
Youthline CEO Stephen Bell is particularly concerned about text bullying. “The mobile is such a personal communications device, and teenagers in particular rush to read and respond to a text message as soon as they hear the phone beep. Texts can easily be anonymous, which emboldens bullies and intimidates victims. Anything that makes it easier for bullies is of grave concern and we should take it very seriously.”
Again this is just an outrageous argument. It is like arguing that lowering the price of petrol makes it easier for drunk drivers, or that lowering the price of newspapers make it easier for arsonists!
Incidentially Curia, which I own did some market research for Exceltium for their Lower the Rate, Mate campaign. This was well publicised at the time. My views on mobile termination rates pre-date that arrangement, and my response to these press release is entirely my own initiative fueled by outrage at the arguments used. No-one at all pointed the article out to me, suggested I should blog on it, or even knows I was going to blog on it.
There are valid arguments for and against mobile termination rate regulation. However scaremongering about text bullying and spam are not amongst them, and shame on whomever put these groups up to making such ludicrous assertions.
Related posts:
- The spam red herring
- Drop the Rate, Mate
- Mobile termination rates coming down
- Mobile termination rates
September 4th, 2009 at 11:19 am
Having been summoned to Russell Stanners’ office for the low down on how he saw the mobile termination issue, back when I was a hack, I can imagine the sort of pressure these two groups were put under to tell his carefully manufactured side of the story.
It’s a shame they felt it necessary to put out this non-sensical blather, but it’s the game Vodafone plays.
Let’s hope their funding is secure now that they’ve done Russell’s bidding (despite losing some self respect in the process).
Vote:September 4th, 2009 at 11:24 am
How do you make a text message anonymous? In Australia I know they permit sim-less phones, which is a massive problem with emergency services. I didn’t think NZ permitted them. If we cared about text bullying we’d simply ban those phones. They have no useful purpose anyway.
Vote:September 4th, 2009 at 11:38 am
Unbelievable! This is along the track of banning anything that could potentially cause harm.
Lets cut down all the trees, a child might injure themselves falling out of one.
Vote:September 4th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
“Lets cut down all the trees, a child might injure themselves falling out of one.”
Can’t do that, with less cellular signal blockages kids will be able to text bully more.
Vote:September 4th, 2009 at 12:04 pm
Interestingly some years ago Bill Gates suggested a 1 cent fee on each email to apply ‘friction’ to spammers. Only trouble was the $$ would gp to Microsoft.
Vote:September 4th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
How do you make a text message anonymous? In Australia I know they permit sim-less phones, which is a massive problem with emergency services. I didn’t think NZ permitted them.
Maybe I don’t follow you, but aren’t pre-pay phones essentially anonymous? I have one so could easily text someone and they wouldn’t have any way of knowing who did it.
Vote:September 4th, 2009 at 12:25 pm
I initially thought those arguements were from the Onion, but given they are real, one has to wonder if these people are fit to run a charity.
Vote:The good news is if Vodafone are so scared they’ll stoop this low to get support, you know that the change should be made.
P.S. Just read the article, it was not quite as bad as DPF’s own spin, nonetheless my second Sentence stands.
September 4th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
The phone is still identifiable, and can be blocked if it is being misused. The sim-less ones always come through as “private number” so you cannot easily block them.
Vote:September 4th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
In Australia I know they permit sim-less phones, which is a massive problem with emergency services.
Not true, I doubt you can buy an off the shelf pre pay in Australia without photo identification and proof of address – the amount of paper work I had to fill out to get a pre pay was more than the paper work I had to fill out to get a vodafone contract. And Im sure there are no sim-less phones here that can call all numbers – you can hide your caller ID, but then that is done on the phone itself. Typically a phone without a sim can only dial 000 as far as I know.
Vote:September 4th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
cheapest cost of all is my vote.
Vote:a friend in Washington has 5 phones his, wife’s and three kids. pays $20= $10×4, they don’t txt just voice calls as it’s so cheap.
September 4th, 2009 at 1:19 pm
MikeNZ – I’m not so confident on your maths. He has 5 phones, and pays $20 which equals $10 times 4.
Vote:1. $10 x 4 is $40
2. You said 5 phones. What is the 4? Shouldn’t it be $10 x 5 = $50?
September 4th, 2009 at 8:51 pm
sorry paul
Vote:his = 20 and his wife’s and 3 kids equal 10 each = 60 all told.
Thanks.
They are on their phones to each other like we txt our kids, its expensive to txt there!
September 7th, 2009 at 10:28 am
Mr Pilbrow insists its concerns about regulation are valid. Vodafone had “educated” the charity on the issue.
“They asked us, if we felt compelled to be involved, then they would appreciate our part of the argument.
“They said we raised valid concerns and they needed to be heard and it is a lot easier for us to say those things than Vodafone, because if Vodafone say things like that, [people] would say it was just Vodafone saying that.” Indeed they might.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Well B. . . . me.
Vodafone had educated the charity. (As they were handing them the cheque?)
Better that they raise the concerns as if Vodafone said it, people would think that Vodafone had an alterior motive. (as if holding your hand out for a large amount of money doesn’t equate to an alterior motive)
I will give it to Mr Pilbrow. At least he is honest.
– He admits to being educated by Vodafone.
– He admits to Vodafone asking him to publicise an issue.
– He acknowledges that Vodafone gave them a lot of money.
What more do you need for a smoking gun?
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 11:27 am
I doubt you can buy an off the shelf pre pay in Australia without photo identification and proof of address
Same rigmarole in Kuwait – had to let them take photocopies of my civil ID card before I could buy a prepay SIM. Here, just handed over the money and took the card.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 11:36 am
“Same rigmarole in Kuwait”
Oh wow, you BEEN there??? How wonderful.
“Here, just handed over the money and took the card.”
Heck, a vestige of life in NZ where bureaucracy has not yet interfered to any great degree. Let’s make sure we repair this gross oversight as soon as we can. Bring on the government… yay cheers clapping..!!!
If this kind of simple approach catches on, you never know what it might lead to. You and a lot of your bludging desk pilot mates Milt might have to get a real fucken job. Stamp it out quick…!!!
Vote: