Comcast Can't Fill Seats With Comcast Supporters; Skips FCC Hearing Entirely

from the we'll-just-take-our-cable-and-go-home dept

Back in February, when the FCC held a hearing about Comcast’s secretive traffic shaping efforts, Comcast stacked the deck to some extent by hiring people off the street to fill seats and cheer for Comcast’s position. Partly in response to outrage over such practices, the FCC scheduled a new hearing, to be held today at Stanford. Perhaps Comcast realized that without paying people to fill the seats, the crowd might be a bit more hostile. So, with that in mind, it felt the best strategy was to not show up at all. Yes, despite it being a hearing about Comcast’s practices, Comcast has (at the last moment) sent notice to the FCC that it won’t be participating, claiming that it said everything that needed to be said back when it had a “friendly” audience at the last hearing.

Filed Under: ,
Companies: comcast, fcc

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Comcast Can't Fill Seats With Comcast Supporters; Skips FCC Hearing Entirely”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
RandOm says:

a great decision by a major cable/internet provider

how is it that comcast still has any consumer base? I mean I see stories floating around the media everyday about the retarded decisions they make and I can’t understand why anyone would rely on them for any product or service lol. I say we get the guys from to show up at their next PR event any see how they respond muwwhaa.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: a great decision by a major cable/internet provider

I have two choices where I live DSL provided from my town or wireless through canopy, I chose wireless because it had the best speed…6 Mbit up and down vs maybe 1.5 Mbit down and 256KB up. If Comcast were in my area I still would go with canopy cause of the speeds. That is ALL I care about I’m smart enough to manage how I utilize my internet torrents and all.

If comcast were in my area and had an offering similar to the speed I get now I would switch to them without a second thought but they don’t why? only they know.

Powerkor says:

Re: a great decision by a major cable/internet provider

I’m one of many without any other internet option and doesn’t want satellite tv.

Verizon is being very slow to implement anything in my area and I heard they suck just as much anyway. Either way, customers are losing.

I was debating on getting Dish Network, but I don’t know anyone who has it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: a great decision by a major cable/internet provider

“how is it that comcast still has any consumer base?”

Simple. Here in the area of southwest WA state that I live in you have two choices for internet: Comcast or Qwest.

Comcast does Cable. Qwest does DSL. Qwest service here is really really bad. Daily at every node they have a work truck out and during certain times of the day you have essentially dialup.

Comcast’s network is the better choice availble in the market.

Actually, I haven’t had any issues with Comcast here. Not even their ‘traffic shaping’ things that have been going on. And yes, at the time that started I had used torrents.

matt says:

Re: Re: a great decision by a major cable/internet provider

you will never see the issues with traffic shaping. Do you think they’re just going to give you a notice when they do it? Hell no.

Want to see how bad it is? Run network monitor in azureus while you download a torrent. Watch the normal reset rate while downloading. Now, run it after you finish and/or when you seed. Ain’t it grand that the reset rate goes from 3-5% to around 50-60%?

Sheesh, learn what that traffic shaping “thing”is, so that you can see when its done.

They don’t stop you from downloading. They stop you from sharing (even legal, legitimate things).

mark says:

Re: Re: Comcast in Portland, OR

No issues here either. I have a little building a few blocks from here with a Comcast sign on the fence. The speed checker websites tell me I’ve got just under 10Mb downstream and 400Kb upstream, and I don’t have to deal with Qworst. I’ve had the Triple Advantage for many months, phone, digital TV and internet, with only short sporadic hiccups and no major issues. The only issue I have with them is the remotes wear out too fast.

matt says:

Re: a great decision by a major cable/internet provider

I agree with the IE group idea, however
there is nobody else that comes close on speeds in my area, even as crappy as comcast’s policies and service are. Not even remotely.

It’s 6meg down/40KB/s up (aka turd on a log), or its like 2megs down/256kb (seriously advertised at) from anyone else whatsoever.

TheTraveler says:

"friendly" audience

The fact that they don’t show up because of a non “friendly” audience, just proves that there customer base is falling. There is no excuse for there ignorance! Now is the time if Verizon was smart, they would strike and do a sweep across America, offering FIOS to people in remote locations. They would crush the Comcast customer base hands down! Comcast would be caught like a 12 year old boy with his pants down rubbing one out to his sister in the shower!

Randy Moore says:

Ditto what the AC (#7) said

I have a choice for my internet service up here NW of Chicago. It’s either AT&T (or one of it’s resellers) or Comcast. I chose (and will continue to do so) Comcast. Why? Because even though they suck as a company, thier internet service is more reliable, and faster than AT&T’s (at least for the moment).

I haven’t noticed any slowdonwns in my service using Bitorrent, or anything else for that matter.

Powerkor says:

Re: Ditto what the AC (#7) said

Your ethical mojo is lacking friend.

Suck it up and watch Comcast burn in the fiery abyss of the cyber-space wastelands; caught in the endless fiber-optic spider webbing of customer support nightmares in which there will be no escape from the inevidible crumbling base of support and the promise of alternatives.

TheTraveler says:

Re: Re: Ditto what the AC (#7) said

As Comcast spirals downward into the bleak technological oblivion its so desperate trying to expel itself from, I will take pleasure in knowing that I was there to witness the start of there exponentially speed driven ignorance in trying to divert the intelligence of its customer base away from the fact that they wish to take control of every bite that is forged through the internet! Since they failed at this, they will pander about with there thumbs in places that is reserved for bodily waste removal and attempt to come up with a ply able excuse for there already demeaning existence. And again I scoff at there so called organization and CEO for the thought of even trying to restrict a “Free” internet base to its customers!

Powerkor says:

Re: spam

Because spam doesn’t use 10000000GB of up/down…. aka it doesnt cost them money…aka they don’t have to improve their network because of it…

you can be the first one to prove me wrong…. actually, lets all prove them wrong and start the first SPAM torrents.

label your torrents with the title SPAM_THIS_COMCAST
make the files 1-10GB and lets share junk with each other until with cripple Comcasts network


Billy says:

Re: Re: spam

You are so uninformed it’s not even funny. E-mail does use up serious amounts of bandwidth and is a huge issue for a company/ISP. This is why spam filters & blacklists are so important.

And sharing junk on the p2p networks is futile & a waste of resources. If you want to hurt them then just go to thepiratebay and seed they’re top100.

Powerkor says:

Re: Re: Re: spam

I beg to differ. In terms of bandwidth, i feel torrents use more bandwidth than spam, but thats just me…. dont tell me im misinformed for having an opinion. That fact is that it will take 500 emails to make up one mp3 (if not more)

But I see you have all your facts straight, you’ve collected all the reports and analyzed the data. I can tell, because you use phrases like ‘serious amounts’.

Do me a favor and shut your fucking mouth billy boy.

TheTraveler says:

Re: Re: Re: spam

Billy have you ever even looked at network traffic patterns? Or are you just pulling shit out your ass like a mentally retarded magician on crack? Email in itself does cause some congestion when attachments are added that are larger then 2MB, however the controversy here is over SPAM mail… which is any ware from 1K to 50K (If there is a lot of pictures for fools like you to click on). While the size of one normal Mp3 is about 3MB (That’s 3,000K since you don’t have a clue as to what your talking about). So let’s do some simple elementary school math shall we.

3,000/25 = 120

So what we have here is on average it takes 120 Spam mail letters to equal 1 small Mp3. So if you download 1 song a year, you have to receive 120 emails from Nigeria to compensate the bandwidth.
Furthermore, when looking at network traffic, a download of 3MB all at one time not throttled will fill your pipe up, causing slowness and congestion, unless you have QoS or some other form of traffic shaping… even if it where a large spam mail, a 50K file will pull fairly quickly and have it be in your inbox waiting for you.
So before you open your mouth and pollute the air like a coal company from 1960 with out any air filters, do some math and know what your talking about!

Alimas says:

In my Area

In NH its Verizon DSL or Comcast cable internet.
And I’m only blessed with those choices cause I live in the states only urban environment, the rest of the state gets Verizon or nothing.
And between the two Comcast’s cable is way better despite the shaping. The DSL is far slower and terribly unreliable. My poor girlfriend has to deal with it and its horrible service.
And they have no plans to even bring the FIOS up here.

Oh So Solly says:

Here in NJ, it’s either Comcrashed or Verizon DSL, and as sucky as Comcrashed is, it’s better than DSL. I’d use Dish for TV, except the Comcrashed extortionists charges you less for cable and internet than they do for internet alone. That, and they forgot to put a filter on my basic cable line, so I get all the analog channels.

Bill says:

Talk about an anti-Comcast article

Not sure which reason is right, the one that this site gives or the one at DSLreports, but this article seems to have a very anti-Comcast theme behind it.

“Comcast Chief Technical Officer Tony Werner was invited to testify at this hearing. He denied, citing a lack of preparation and family issues as the reason. Comcast also says that the issue isn’t just about them so they don’t need to be there. They assure people that they won’t be filling the room with seat-warmers this time around.”

steve (user link) says:


I’ve never been more disapointed with a service provider as I have been with Comcast. The very instant that something acceptable comes around I’ll switch.

They have us by the danglies with both TV and Internet in a sub-rural environ where there are no other choices.

Their monopoly allows them to behave in a manner that is beyond arrogant.

I’d boycott if I thought I could get others to join me !

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...