571
submitted 5 months ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

Cable firms to FTC: We shouldn’t have to let users cancel service with a click — Customers may “misunderstand the consequences of canceling,” say lobbyists::Customers may "misunderstand the consequences of canceling," cable lobby says.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] ZeroCool@slrpnk.net 167 points 5 months ago

"The proposed simple click-to-cancel mechanism may not be so simple when such practices are involved. A consumer may easily misunderstand the consequences of canceling and it may be imperative that they learn about better options," NCTA CEO Michael Powell said at the hearing. For example, a customer "may face difficulty and unintended consequences if they want to cancel only one service in the package," as "canceling part of a discounted bundle may increase the price for remaining services."

This sounds like a "you" problem. If your service were any good this wouldn't be a concern because nobody would have a reason to reach that page. Take those discounted bundles and fuck right off.

[-] 018118055@sopuli.xyz 12 points 5 months ago

"imperative"

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Bocky@lemmy.world 103 points 5 months ago

That’s exactly the point. There should not be any consequences for cancelling a monthly subscription.

[-] GoodEye8@lemm.ee 60 points 5 months ago

There should be some consequences, like stopping monthly payment requests.

[-] menthol@lemm.ee 94 points 5 months ago

If you cancel your subscription you're a subclass idiot, you might not even be competent... so sad... We need to fight these attempts to unsubscribe.

If you're subscribed you're among the genius class. Just keep paying and don't think about it, even if you haven't watched in months and forgot you are paying. You're not misunderstanding anything.

[-] toiletobserver@lemmy.world 94 points 5 months ago

They can oligobble my balls

[-] Sammy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 5 months ago

Succinct. I concur.

[-] Makeitstop@lemmy.world 93 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Sending a notification that a renewal is coming up? Impossible, will cost a fortune.

Sending mountains of junk mail offering bundles and limited time offers? Clearly much cheaper and easier.

Also, think of the labor costs, retraining the call center staff to not spend hours trying to talk people out of canceling and instead just having them hit a button. Why, that's got to force a price hike.

[-] Th3D3k0y@lemmy.world 16 points 5 months ago

Our profit margins are hurting due to young people not wanting to work and not fully understanding the gift, the boon, the euphoria of owning a TV and paying for services you don't use. This has nothing to do with our prices, lack of customer service, or our programming being flooded with repetitive drivel.

[-] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago

Hey now, I own a TV and pay for services I don't use. Just not cable. I can't justify spending that much on something I don't use. $15 isn't bad, but a decent cable package is like $100 last I checked and it's still chock full of ads.

Gamepass has no ads, plus the added benefit of every now and then opening it up to see it has some of the games I just bought on Steam, which is a sign that they have good taste.

[-] Copernican@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

The real hurdle for me is the cost of leasing a cable box and other service fees. Cable bundles sound good on paper until I factor that cost in.

[-] Tylerdurdon@lemmy.world 91 points 5 months ago

Thank goodness those lobbyists are looking out for us and our easily confused little brains. Perhaps if we're so easily confused, they should lobby to get rid of the fine print and simplify those contracts while they're at it. Oh... Wait... Not that.

[-] squid_slime@lemmy.world 27 points 5 months ago

The writing is tiny to not confuse us with the big words.

[-] unreasonabro@lemmy.world 51 points 5 months ago

so, just a thought, make it illegal for there to be consequences of cancelling

[-] db2@lemmy.world 44 points 5 months ago

This crap is why I haven't had cable in over a decade.

[-] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 25 points 5 months ago

And the FTC is about 30 years late on considering these regulations.

[-] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 23 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

The Biden admin appointed a serious badass to head it, Lina Khan. While at Yale she made waves by vivisecting Amazons buisness practices, basically redefining how America should handle antitrust laws with digital platforms.

Shes basically a rabble rousing anti-monopolist who has blocked a record number of mergers. It's why the FTC is hitting hard at all of these industries at once.

[-] wikibot@lemmy.world 11 points 5 months ago

Here's the summary for the wikipedia article you mentioned in your comment:

Lina M. Khan (born March 3, 1989) is a British-born American legal scholar serving as chairwoman of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) since 2021. She is also an associate professor of law at Columbia Law School. While a student at Yale Law School, she became known for her work in antitrust and competition law in the United States after publishing the influential essay "Amazon's Antitrust Paradox". She was nominated by President Joe Biden to the Commission in March 2021, and has served since June 2021 following her confirmation.

^to^ ^opt^ ^out^^,^ ^pm^ ^me^ ^'optout'.^ ^article^ ^|^ ^about^

[-] DacoTaco@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

About 20. Belgium has had these laws for around 18 years now because switching mobile provider was shit and it was found to not support competition within the mobile market ( no shit ! ).
At the same time they forced mobile providers to allow other providers to use their network infrastructure so new providers could be made without needing to make their own network infrastructure

[-] squid_slime@lemmy.world 39 points 5 months ago

Easy solution.. Make it clear, write a prompt "are you sure you want to cancel your cable service? Please don't? 🫣"

[-] ABCDE@lemmy.world 26 points 5 months ago

'We shouldn't have to let users sign up with a click'.

[-] MapleEngineer@lemmy.world 21 points 5 months ago

They are going to offer your a discount to keep their service. Maybe if they had offered you a better price in the first place you wouldn't be trying to cancel. Making it hard to cancel so that they can offer you discounts to stay is a way to keep prices high for everyone else. It's a way to maximize profits. Why not simply put a one click, "cut my bill in half" button on the website?

[-] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 5 months ago

Because then they would have to cut it in half for everyone.
By making this a calling requirement the bar to access is higher in comparison.

AND: They are likely increasing customer satiafaction because they saved 50% of the bill with a simple negotiation call and maybe get new features on top.
The satisfaction wouldnt be high by clicking a button that may be just buried.

[-] MiDaBa@lemmy.ml 19 points 5 months ago

Where they see consequence I see benefit.

[-] PunnyName@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

And where they see benefit, we see consequences.

[-] Frozzie@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

That's like the dairy lobbyists not wanting the vegetable milk products to feature the word "milk" because people might buy them by accident.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 3 points 5 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Lobbyists for cable companies and advertisers yesterday expressed their displeasure with a proposed "click-to-cancel" regulation that aims to make it easier for consumers to cancel services.

Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan has said that changes are needed because "some businesses too often trick consumers into paying for subscriptions they no longer want or didn't sign up for in the first place."

NCTA-The Internet & Television Association, the primary trade group for cable companies like Comcast and Charter, said the rule would make it harder to offer deals to customers who are trying to cancel.

The FTC also proposes that sellers be required to "provide an annual reminder to consumers enrolled in negative option programs involving anything other than physical goods, before they are automatically renewed."

"The proposed rule would disrupt the current regime by adding specific requirements dictating what auto-renewal disclosures must say and how they must be presented," said Lartease Tiffith, the IAB's executive VP for public policy.

Tiffith defended auto-renewals generally, saying the practice of automatically renewing services brings "significant benefits to both businesses and consumers in the form of cost savings, convenience, and heightened value."


The original article contains 613 words, the summary contains 189 words. Saved 69%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[-] EdibleFriend@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

And then they will pay the FTC and they will say this is acceptable.

The End.

[-] BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Pay?

The lobbyists and politicians are all part of it.

Regulatory Capture

[-] ripcord@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Part of what, the FTC?

this post was submitted on 18 Jan 2024
571 points (99.5% liked)

Technology

55643 readers
3688 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS