Comcast Gets A Wrist Slap For Using Dumb And Misleading ’10G’ Marketing To Confuse Customers
from the this-one-goes-to-11 dept
Back in 2019, when fifth generation (5G) wireless was getting a lot of dumb (and as it turned out, unwarranted) marketing hype, the cable industry came up with an amazing idea: they’d simply call their existing cable broadband service a “10G technology” in a bid to (1) piggyback on the hype 5G was getting, and (2) falsely represent coaxial-based broadband as something more futuristic than it actually is.
At the time, former FCC boss turned top cable lobbyist Mike Powell insisted that this was a revolutionary step for the cable industry:
“With groundbreaking, scalable capacity and speeds, the 10G platform is the wired network of the future that will power the digital experiences and imaginations of consumers for years to come. As an industry, we are dedicated to delivering an exceptional national infrastructure that will power digital advancement and propel our innovation economy into the future.”
Of course here on planet Earth, cable broadband has a notorious reputation for being much slower and less reliable than fiber, consistently overpriced, and featuring painfully slow upload speeds. Cable companies like Comcast also have a well-established track record of being grotesquely full of shit.
Quite rightfully, AT&T and T-Mobile complained to both the National Advertising Review Board (NARB) and the National Advertising Division, noting that the 10G terminology would confuse customers. Both organizations have subsequently recommended that Comcast stop using the term:
“The NARB panel concluded that 10G expressly communicates at a minimum that users of the Xfinity network will experience significantly faster speeds than are available on 5G networks. This express claim is not supported because the record does not contain any data comparing speeds experienced by Xfinity network users with speeds experienced by subscribers to 5G networks.”
Keep in mind both NARD and NAB are part of a self-regulatory system run by BBB National Programs (read: corporations). It’s basically an attempt for industry to claim that you don’t need government regulators with any backbone policing misleading ads, because industry will regulate itself.
The problem is it’s all a bit performative. “Punishments” for misleading ads occur long after the ads have run (notice how this ruling came four years after cable began using the 10G term). There’s no serious penalty for telling the organization to piss off (outside of an empty threat to forward concerns to actual regulators, which usually doesn’t happen and might not result in penalties anyway).
Comcast has defended the 10G term because some very limited parts of its network (namely a very limited number of markets where it has deployed fiber) are capable of 10 Gbps speeds. And while it the company says it will make some changes to the way it uses the 10G term, it says it won’t phase the usage out entirely, showcasing the performative nature of the entire numerical charade.
Filed Under: 10 gbps, 10g, 5g, broadband, cable, false advertising, high speed internet, marketing, nab, narb
Companies: comcast
Comments on “Comcast Gets A Wrist Slap For Using Dumb And Misleading ’10G’ Marketing To Confuse Customers”
No interested. I’m waiting for the 999G, that at the current pace, we should have by the end of the year.
“I’m waiting for the 999G, that at the current pace, we should have by the end of the year.”
Dude, I don’t think that’s how you spell ‘millenium’.
Re:
so if we start at the beginning of the universe and fit the data points to an exponential curve, we will definitely reach 999G by the end of the year
Re: hmmm
Don’t you mean ♾G? ha
Fifth generation wireless?
“Back in 2019, when fifth generation (5G) wireless …”
Oh please stop this lazy crap.
Wireless networking has been around for over 30 years, and standardized by international bodies for at least 27 years. There are more than five generations, and nobody but salespeople (and you) call anything 5G.
https://www.commscope.com/blog/2016/the-theory-of-wi-fi-evolution-and-ieee-802.11-selection/
If you want to pretend that the death of GSM and the rise of something else (LTE? lol) is 3G or 4G or 5G then no.
LET – Long Term Evolution. Stupidest title ever next to “NextGen” anything. Those who don’t learn to numerate revisions will always lose. “NextGen” and “Long Term Evolution” and “NextStep” and whatever just means “status quo back when we designed it years ago.”
There’s no 5G. Never was. There’s no 10G. Never was. Pretending that the former means the latter is invalid is bending the knee to the standard that was never there.
E
Re:
You complain about improper use of naming generations of cellular connectivity by providing a link to… WiFi generations. You can, of course, also through in the CB Radio in that list, but you’ve already sufficiently established that you know nothing about the topic.
Re: Re: CB radio
Sure, I’ll take on this huckleberry. Wireless communication has been around for a Loooooooooooooong Looooooooong time. It has nothing to do with CB (but thanks for the old timey reference) and has no generational gain. So 1G — when was that?
Oh, you don’t know. Sure… How about 2G? When was that?
Oh, GSM, not popular in the US, but early 1990s or 30 years ago? Sure.
3G?
But hey, since CB seems important to you…
11 meter AM 40-channelized frequencies. That’s US citizens’ band radio. (CB Radio)… it predates FRS, GMRS, and many other service allowing audio-only communication using mostly unlicensed radio gear on 2M and 70cm bands.
I say “mostly” because if you go into Mexico or Canada, the frequencies withour licenses are not the same.
But hey, move your mouth some more. Perhaps something will come out of it that has a factual component.
None of that has to do with bullshit 5G or other claims.
Re: Re: Re:
Have you considered doing less methamphetamine when you post? You might be seen as a bit more rational and coherent.
Not a lot more, mind you. But a bit.
Re: Re: Re:2 Meth
Is this to me? Brother, I don’t use uppers or downers. I even gave up caffeine before you were twelve. Thank you for the question though, and this gem:
Assuming yet again you’re referring to me, are you suggesting that you might see me as a bit more rational and coherent if I stopped using the drugs I don’t use? Do, please, elucidate.
If it wasn’t about me or if it was, it’s going to be one hell of a 13G superbowl event (that’s three Gs after 10G). ISPs and Telcos are different words. Have a great weekend.
E
P.S. Chiefs by 12
Re: Re: Re:3
Maybe you should consider the downers, then.
Re: Re: Re:4 Prescribng drugs for people on the Internet is failure.
Maybe if you were licensed to prescribe drugs and had examined me this would be worthy of even one complete
Re: Re: Re:5
I’m as qualified to opine on your drug use, as you are on the existence of 5G as a term of art.
Re: Re: Re:
As the quote goes…
At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this [virtual] room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Seriously, again, how does a link to Wi-Fi generations have anything to do with cellular technology? Why didn’t you then list Bluetooth generations?
You have no idea what you are talking about in either marketing or technical sense.
Re:
“There’s no 5G. Never was. There’s no 10G. Never was.”
Which is exactly what the article says. Nothing like summarizing an article to criticize it, eh?
Re:
So what do you call the adopted implementations of a network standard that means something to people in general without sounding like an Intel sales-drone hawking CPU’s by their model numbers? Do you say IMT-2020? ITU-R.M.2150? 3GPP 5G-SRIT? 3GPP 5G-RIT? 5Gi? DECT 5G-SRIT?
5G is just a handy name for a transmission standard that has several technological innovations not available or specified in a previous standard.
Do you use a 25-30 year old cell-phone and it can still connect to a cellular network?
You better tell the organizations working with these standards that, because their documents are all using the name 5G.
What you fail to realize here, is that the G-naming scheme is loosely based on the generations of common standards, not actual technological generations or older proprietary standards. It doesn’t actually matter that the name doesn’t reflect a specific objective generation, what matters is that the name implies a specific common standard.
Re: Re:
Well, the one point where he’s somewhat correct is that 5G mostly just says “You know those optional extensions in the LTE standard? Well, now they’re required if you want to stamp 5G on your equipment.” Beyond that, 5G equipment is authorized to work on some bands unavailable to LTE (partly because those extensions are now mandatory).
And, of course, the reason that the standard is called 5G is that those pushing it thought that the name would increase sales.
“Oh please stop this lazy crap”
I thought the story, in part, was about the industry using bullshit terminology in their advertising. Given this, it would seem logical to include said bullshit terminology in your article about the industry that is being criticized for using bullshit terminology – no?
Re: Feed the trolls
Hey, stop using logic and factual reasoning. It no longer applies in our current society.
Still cant wait for that PlayStation 9. We’re past the halfway point!
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Literally all these terms, 3, 4, 5G are made up
….and no, there is no way that fucking government agency would be able to keep them from being “misleading”. They can’t even get basic measurable things like MPG right.
I always lol that you think the solution is some form of government intervention, when that almost always makes it worse.
Marketing is inherently nonsense. Even dumb people are pretty aware of that.
genius marketing
Verizon: Oh yeah? Well we have…100G!
AT&T: So what! We have…InfintyG! Nyah Nyah!
I should go trademark InfinityG right now, shouldn’t I?
Re:
Probably not; Comcast already owns the trademark on Xfinity, and they’d sue you claiming that InfinityG is too close. And then they’d go and coin XfinityG as their next version.
Re:
Actually, the genius marketing term is “speeds up to”, as in: “We provide speeds up to 10G… even though it was only recorded one time by the one customer who lives q0 feet from the backbone server.”
But this is the trick of using “up to”: companies get away with it as long as there’s no push back from consumers.
It’s like how HealthCare.gov can advertise they have plans “as low as $10 month”: one customer got that rate because he’s not even making minimum wage, so they advertise that anyone might be able to get that rate.
To Confuse Customers. Those who are confused are likely also certain the 2020 election was stolen, Covid was a hoax, Q runs things in the background, Trump cares about what they want, etc.
Trademarks
If you read TD you know how trademarks work.
Comcast registered the trademark “XFINITY” on September 21, 2010. The trademark covers the provision of non-downloadable films, movies, and television.
Feel free to use “XFINITY” as you like outside of the above limitations. I have an XFINITY of uses for limp-dick-lawyers and I can’t wait for one of them to send me an XFINITY of letters threatening to sue me for saying so.
E
10G? But these go to 11.
Crap
If an average person do any of this dirty tricks and theft Comcast is doing she/he will get years behind bars but because the Evil corp is doing this kind of theft and cheating everything will be fine and they will get only a wrist slap.Customers must boycott this crap and cheating.
I was going to root for the 49ers to win the Super Bowl yesterday, and that was until I saw Christian McCaffrey’s Comcast advertisement. After that, I rooted for the Chiefs to win and I’m glad that McCaffrey lost! The ad made many falsehoods insisting that Comcast had better internet quality/speed and Comcast also insisted that their service is “the real deal”; with every other provider being impostors.
Ok, sliding backwards.
Ok. First giving Comcast/Xfinity some minimalist due credit.
10g as 10 gigabit, does exist in some areas so, technically it is accurate.
10G as being double the speed of 5G, which currently caps in the 600mbps range, is accurate on the majority of the xFi infrastructure, with top speeds of 1.5gbps.
That out of the way… again it’s stupid consumers who are the problem. People really need to be more proactive in figuring out what they are buying and what their choices are. Free services are available that will show you every company that offers internet at your address (99% of the country has multiple options): the advertised speed, know speeds, cost of services, etc.
Same idea on video options. Cable, satellite, broadcast…
Channels advertised, available, cost stated, cost billed, blackout restrictions, etc.
Read the damn contract.
The loud majority here wants to ignore human stupidity. There are plenty of options to easily research exactly what you are getting. And if you agree to 6 months, a year, 5 years, you agreed to that. The contracts all say subject to change on what’s included. It’s up to you to decide.