dan@uunet.uu.net (Dan Breslau) (11/14/90)
The following was sent to me by a friend of mine; I asked her if it would be OK to post it here. Her reply: > YES!!!! Put it on the USENET! And by all means, add US Sprint's 800 > number! It's 1/800-877-4646. Disclaimer: Neither the original writer nor I have any relationship with these companies, other than as customers. ----------- To all of you who are *still* using AT&T, I offer the following little story: Saturday, after working all day and late into the night, (3 AM, to be precise) I return home, trying not to wake the housemates, and collect my mail from the dining room table. Scanning through the usual junk mail and bills, I pause to read yet another solicitation from AT&T, telling me how they've changed, they're not the same since I've left them, and that I should come back. Now my parents still have AT&T (due only to the remoteness of their home -- the other companies don't reach that far north), and I have asked them if they've noticed any difference. All I get is stoney silence, before the usual "you-never-come-and-visit-anymore" sigh. Hmmm. I look over the letter. Right on the top, it says, in BOLDFACE TYPE, they've LOWERED THEIR RATES! "Wow!", I say, "can it really be true?" Then, a little memory creeps in and whispers: "Wait. Don't be duped." I walk over and pick up a copy of the {Wall Street Journal} from the previous week. (Wednesday's, I think.) Front page: AT&T INCREASES ITS LONG DISTANCE RATES. Now, I may not be a rocket scientist, but I can read. These two things do not add up. Truth in advertising? There is an "800" number on the letter. It's 3 AM. I go to the phone. I dial. It's really not like me to harrass a poor telephone operator who is only doing her job. Really. I'm a live-and-let-live kind of person. But it's 3 AM, and AT&T has just sent yet another sleazey piece of propaganda. The operator doesn't know anything about the rate hike or the mailer. She gives me to her manager, who is so programmed that I don't think he could tie his shoe without an instruction manual. ME: I have just received this letter from AT&T saying that they've LOWERED THEIR RATES. AT&T: That's right. We've LOWERED OUR RATES on long distance service. Would you like to change from your present carrier? ME: Well, perhaps. Do you read the Wall Street Journal? AT&T: No, ma'm, I don't. ME: Do you think that *your* supervisor reads it? AT&T: I have no idea. ME: I thought not. Why do you think that last Wednesday's Wall Street Journal would have an article on the front page saying that you've *raised* your rates? Is AT&T going to sue the Journal for libel? Would you like me to be a witness? AT&T: I don't know anything about a lawsuit, ma'm. ME: Well, now think for a minute. I read that AT&T was *raising* their rates just nine days ago. But you are telling me that AT&T has LOWERED THEIR RATES today. Am I supposed to believe this advertisement, or the Wall Street Journal? The manager then proceeded to tell me this long-winded story about how the mailer was printed weeks ago, and the advertising department might not have known that the *other department* that is in charge of rates would be raising them, but anyway, it's not much of a rate hike, only a few cents per minute, really, and it doesn't add up to very much when you get right down to it. And only a couple of other people had called to complain tonight, so what was the big deal? I thought of all the things I wanted to say, cleared my throat, and asked to be removed from any future mailings. I also asked if they would mail out an apology to everyone for lying to them about LOWERING THEIR RATES. Know what I got for an answer? *click* I suggest US Sprint. Great service, very, very inexpensive.
john@bovine.ati.com (John Higdon) (11/16/90)
Dan Breslau <codex!dan@uunet.uu.net> writes:
[a story about AT&T's silly and stupid advertising and how it
apparently conflicted with a {Wall Street Journal} article]
This past election, if serving no other purpose, should have convinced
the last hold-outs that a person cannot, repeat CANNOT, base a
purchasing, financial, or voting decision based on advertising.
Advertising is designed to sell products, not to be critically
analyzed or studied to collect information. The big-three IECs are no
different when it comes to misleading and ridiculous media hype.
I use Sprint and AT&T. Sprint has advantages in some areas, AT&T in
others. Sprint has generally lower INTERstate rates, while INTRAstate
is about on a par with AT&T. Audio quality is even-Steven. AT&T offers
its usual little-known services such as foreign language translation,
deaf forwarding, the ability to reach inward numbers at LECs (such as
repair), etc. Sprint's billing is far superior and much more detailed
(at least on my commercial account). Sprint allows 800 and 950 access
to it's network (to get around errant COCOTs), but AT&T's calling card
is easier to use in non-restrictive situations.
It is one's right to be offended by any image or face a company puts
forward and even a right to take whatever action is deemed
appropriate. But I would hate to think that someone was depriving
him/herself of the best or most appropriate product because of an
attitude generated from advertising. Especially if that attitude was
already present and the advertising merely provided a convenient
justification to perpetuate a possibly unwarranted opinion.
John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395
john@bovine.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !