FCC finally bans cable industry's "hidden fee" scam

Cal Jeffrey

Posts: 4,181   +1,427
Staff member
The big picture: Cable and satellite television providers must soon disclose "all-in" pricing in their marketing. All-in pricing refers to the cost of the service plus all required fees. The industry has a long tradition of hiding the extra costs of TV and internet access, then springing the charges on the customer with the first bill.

The Federal Communications Commission approved the new rules on March 14 but didn't release the final draft until Tuesday. The regulations primarily aim to disclose broadcast and regional sports fees. These surcharges allow providers to rebroadcast content through their service even though customers can view it for free over the airwaves.

It also calls out arguably unnecessary charges like "HD Technology fees."

"The record indicates that approximately 24 to 33 percent of a consumer's bill is attributable to company-imposed fees such as 'Broadcast TV Fees,' 'Regional Sports Surcharges,' 'HD Technology Fees,' and others, and that the 'dollar amount of company-imposed fees has skyrocketed,'" the final regulation draft reads.

Many of the extra charges are "pass-on" fees. These are expenditures that most companies absorb as the cost of doing business while raising their final price to the customer to compensate. Many cable companies, particularly Comcast, do not absorb these fees but rather tack them onto customers' bills solely to advertise a lower service price.

"Providers that communicate a price for video programming in promotional materials shall state the aggregate price for the video programming in a clear, easy-to-understand, and accurate manner," the FCC order reads. "If part of the aggregate price for video programming fluctuates based upon service location, then the provider must state where and how consumers may obtain their subscriber-specific 'all-in' price [I.e., via email or other means]."

Big Cable is unsurprisingly furious with the rules, saying the Commission is guilty of "micromanagement" and that the regulations will make advertising more burdensome and "confusing."

"[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," the cable lobbying group NCTA (formerly known as the National Cable & Telecommunications Association) threatened.

Of course, blaming the FCC for the cable industry's inability to produce honest, transparent, and simple-to-read ad copy is nothing more than weak posturing to excuse bad behavior. Despite that, there is a good chance the NCTA will sue to block the FCC regulations since it has already formally condemned the proposal and challenged the FCC's authority to enforce them.

The regulations still face an "information-collecting" process and a review by the US Office of Management and Budget. These legal hurdles must be completed within nine months. The rules will take effect once it clears the red tape, which could be as early as April 10.

"Beginning April 10, 2024, consumers should look for broadband labels at any point of sale, including online and in stores," the FCC says. "The labels must disclose important information about broadband prices, introductory rates, data allowances, and broadband speeds. They also include links to information about network management practices and privacy policies."

Permalink to story.

 
About time, but, I wouldn't count on the "cable industry" lawyers & lobbyist spending a lot of money in DC
to find a way around it.
 
I remember when my home country forced telecom providers to write the actual price over the full loan period when selling mobile phones rather than writing ‘0,-‘ in massive letters on the ad, and you having to comb the fine print to figure out what the actual cost of ownership would be…

Like 15 years ago, three or four years after the tactic had become popular…

Why is the US so slow to pass no-brain legislation?
 
I remember when my home country forced telecom providers to write the actual price over the full loan period when selling mobile phones rather than writing ‘0,-‘ in massive letters on the ad, and you having to comb the fine print to figure out what the actual cost of ownership would be…

Like 15 years ago, three or four years after the tactic had become popular…

Why is the US so slow to pass no-brain legislation?

"Capitalism"
 
"Capitalism"
Sorry your college classes failed you, but most of the world uses a capitalist economic system, so that doesnt work as an answer.
I remember when my home country forced telecom providers to write the actual price over the full loan period when selling mobile phones rather than writing ‘0,-‘ in massive letters on the ad, and you having to comb the fine print to figure out what the actual cost of ownership would be…

Like 15 years ago, three or four years after the tactic had become popular…

Why is the US so slow to pass no-brain legislation?
The easiest answer? You have a very polarized political system that traditionally flip flops. In such a system, getting work done is difficult, because anytime one party starts something, the other party will come in, remove that work, and start something else.

Secondly, thanks to Citizens United, corporations are considered "people" and money is considered "speech". So any bill that blatantly prevents a corporation from saying something is considered unconstitutional. As a result, groups must spend years to gather evidence that something bad is, indeed, bad, so any hypothetical court case fought over said rules would be so expensive and long nobody will bother challenging it.

Same reason US cops will argue with a Soverign Citizen for 30+ minutes while UK/Aussie cops pull them out of a car in 2 minutes. Because if they dont, there are tons of advocacy groups that will challenge the arrest to stick it to "the pigs". So they have to prove, without shadow of doubt, these people are in the wrong before moving.
 
Another answer is regulatory capture. A lot of "other countries" have the issue but sometimes to a lesser extent due to a better sense of citizenship (from both the regulators and the companies they regulate). There may also be less cultural inclinations toward non-regulation and "freedom" as there is in the US.

Here in the US its a jungle, and often times the very same agencies that are meant to regulate an industry are staffed by people from the industry and often have jobs waiting for them in the industry once their "public" career is up.

The US also has SO MUCH MONEY at stake in basically any regulatory decision that the cost of fighting the regulation is often dwarfed by the potential payoff of blunting or eliminating the regs.
 
If Big Cable is furious with the new rules, then it's probably a step in the right direction.
I found that comment in the article a bit humorous. I have 2 homes, one with Cox and one with Comcast, in both cases for at least 3-4 years (longer for Comcast), my bill is my bill, no hidden fees. All fees are identified and when they said it was $99/mo, it was $99 every month.

While they may not like it, 2 of the largest cable companies in the US have been pretty transparent for a while now.
 
Why is the US so slow to pass no-brain legislation?
We both agree the legislation is brainless. When I last activated Xfinity service, the agent on the call told me -- down to the penny -- exactly what the monthly fee would be. It's been more than a decade since I had AT&T, but I recall them doing the same as well.

The problem with advertising is this: due to prior government interference in the marketplace, there is a Frankenstein-like web of regulatory fees, charges, and regulations in the US, that varies not only by state, but often by city and county as well. These change not only the fees to be charged, but often mandate that certain channels must be carried, or cannot be (I.e. Sports channels. So until these firms know your specific zip code, it's literally impossible for them to know what your final bill will be.
 
We both agree the legislation is brainless. When I last activated Xfinity service, the agent on the call told me -- down to the penny -- exactly what the monthly fee would be. It's been more than a decade since I had AT&T, but I recall them doing the same as well.

The problem with advertising is this: due to prior government interference in the marketplace, there is a Frankenstein-like web of regulatory fees, charges, and regulations in the US, that varies not only by state, but often by city and county as well. These change not only the fees to be charged, but often mandate that certain channels must be carried, or cannot be (I.e. Sports channels. So until these firms know your specific zip code, it's literally impossible for them to know what your final bill will be.
Never underestimate the government's ability to create a problem, let it go unchallenged for several decades and then create a solution that has already been implemented by most of the companies they are targeting.
 
I remember when my home country forced telecom providers to write the actual price over the full loan period when selling mobile phones rather than writing ‘0,-‘ in massive letters on the ad, and you having to comb the fine print to figure out what the actual cost of ownership would be…

Like 15 years ago, three or four years after the tactic had become popular…

Why is the US so slow to pass no-brain legislation?

The easy answer is money in politics, lobbying to keep things as hidden as possible is their MO
 
But meaningful answers are censored and how likely are you to try to get in touch with the people who even bother to hint at what needs to be done?
Meaningful answers are ignored due to large scale ignorance. Too many expect others, usually government, to have all the answers, instead of working together.
 
I never thought I would ever witness people carrying water for cable companies, but here we are.
What you describe as 'carrying water' is actually a level of mild disgust at the 70 IQ voters who hire 80 IQ bureaucrats who only make things worse for consumers, not better.

We're in this situation today because, decades ago, these same bureaucrats tried to "protect consumers" by banning all competition in the cable industry, replacing the free market with one single, tightly-regulated state-sponsored monopoly. The problem was that every state -- and even many counties and cities -- set their own rules on what fees and charges were required and banned, what channels must be played, vs. ones which weren't allowed, etc, etc, ad nauseum.

When the government finally woke up and realized what a mistake they'd made, they allowed in competition -- but left most of this Frankensteinian patchwork intact. So today, no cable company can tell you what you'll pay unless they know your zip code. But guess what? They'll do JUST THAT. Call any of them, give them your address, and 30 seconds later you'll know down to the penny exactly what service will cost you. No "hidden fees" whatsoever. The headline is a lie.
 
Back