Brendan Carr Crafting ‘Patriotic’ Call Center Onshoring Plan To Provide Cover For Mass Looming Telecom Layoffs
When he’s not busy trampling free speech, crushing the First Amendment, and destroying media consolidation and consumer protection standards, Brendan Carr has other hobbies. Like helping the telecom industry patriotically sell a brutal coming wave of new layoffs caused by the kind of industry consolidation he regularly rubber stamps.
Carr recently began circulating plans for something he claims will restrict U.S. telecom companies’ use of foreign call centers and require foreign-based customer service workers to be proficient in American Standard English. The plan is vague, but Reuters unskeptically frames it as a good faith effort to protect U.S. consumer privacy, improve customer service, and protect Americans from the scourge of foreign accents:
“Carr noted that nearly 70% of U.S. businesses outsource at least one department, including customer service and call center operations, to overseas locations.
“As a result, too many Americans have struggled to resolve an issue with a representative due to cultural and language barriers,” Carr said, adding foreign customer service centers “also raise concerns about protecting consumers’ personal information.”
What is Carr really up to here? I suspect he’s working closely with U.S. telecoms to craft pseudo-patriotic/nationalistic cover for another brutal round of layoffs. Some of which will be caused by AI, but a huge amount of which will have been caused by Carr’s love of rubber stamping harmful telecom industry consolidation.
For one, there’s no real evidence that overseas customer service centers create serious cybersecurity issues. As he did with his recent effort to remove phone unlocking rules, Carr likes to use cybersecurity as a bogeyman when convenient to something unpopular he’s trying to help industry sell.
Then, with his other hand, Carr is busy making U.S. consumers less safe and secure by gutting functional oversight of giant telecoms (despite the recent massive Salt Typhoon hack by China).
It’s also not really clear the FCC even has this authority. Especially in the Trump era, which has involved the Trump courts taking an absolutely brutal hatchet to regulatory independence. This sudden micromanagement of telcom support runs contrary to Carr’s “light regulatory touch” rhetoric. It’s also worth noting that a lot of telecoms, like Charter, already have mostly U.S. support agents.
But here’s the more important thing. I’ve covered Brendan Carr probably longer and more extensively than pretty much anybody alive. And I can tell you, with 100% certainty, that Carr doesn’t do anything that’s just inherently in the public interest. That’s simply not who he is.
He’s always working an angle for industry or large companies, usually media and telecom giants. There’s just no evidence that he’s a good faith operator in any of the arenas Reuters gives him unearned credibility for, and his ethics and principles, as we’ve seen repeatedly, are not consistent.
So I really doubt this has anything to actually do with improving customer service, or holding telecoms accountable for shoddy overseas support. I suspect he’s cooking up a stage play.
We’ve long noted how these consolidated regional telecom monopolies have some of the worst customer service ratings of any industry in America (which is truly saying something). Maybe AI will improve some aspects of that, but as we’ve seen in other arenas where AI is layered on top of very broken sectors (journalism, health insurance) by unethical executives, the end result isn’t particularly great.
If you don’t fix the underlying monopolization, you can’t fix the symptoms of monopolization, which generally are high prices, spotty service, slow speeds, and abysmal customer service. Layer AI on top of a broken industry, and you usually get a badly automated broken industry.
It will be worth keeping an eye on Carr’s final proposed plan. But I suspect it mostly involves him working closely with telecom giants to put a nationalistic, racist veneer on looming plans to dramatically accelerate layoffs in a telecom sector that’s already seen massive workforce reductions, largely due to the mindless consolidation Carr regularly rubber stamps.




I mean it certainly starts that way. And your point makes sense if you completely ignore the later stage trajectory of most large privately-traded companies over a long enough timeline. Like Boeing. Or the entirety of telecom. And you mention Google, but their search quality is an absolute dumpster fire now because, in part, they're financially incentivized at every level to pursue impossible ever-upward scaling growth over quality.
here's a study from just this week showcasing how U.S. mobile data price competition effectively halted in the wake of the deal https://research.rewheel.fi/downloads/The_state_of_mobile_and_broadband_pricing_1H2024_PUBLIC_REDACTED_VERSION.pdf I'll trim out the relevant bit for you: "Five years on, the Sprint / T-Mobile 4-to-3 mobile merger made the US one of the most expensive mobile markets in the world."
This is gibberish. The FCC literally didn't read the merger review impact studies from its own agency before approving the deal: https://www.techdirt.com/2019/10/22/fcc-approved-t-mobile-sprint-merger-without-even-seeing-full-details/ And the Trump DOJ "antitrust enforcer" Makan Delrahim worked with both companies, in his personal time using his personal phone and email accounts, to make sure the deal got approved: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/19/technology/sprint-t-mobile-merger-antitrust-official.html That is not how "antitrust enforcement" works. Also here's a study from just this week showcasing how the consolidation in competition immediately put a halt to all wireless data price competition https://research.rewheel.fi/downloads/The_state_of_mobile_and_broadband_pricing_1H2024_PUBLIC_REDACTED_VERSION.pdf mindless consolidation apologists are embarrassing
freedom technology
I mean he just last week called X a "freedom technology," which suggests to me either rampant ignorance or allegiance to the broader mission of being a safe space for bigots. I simply can't take him seriously.
I forgot to mention in this post that Comcast waited two weeks to implement the necessary patch to protect its systems, despite widespread discussion of the severe impact of this particular vulnerability. Good times!
yup. "flood the zone with shit." Undermine consensus and expertise. Erode public trust in institutions. Make it challenging if not impossible to determine what's true. Helps if you simultaneously attack journalism and academia on multiple, concurrent fronts.
thanks
Whoops, thank you. I had conflated the union background with People's Choice (which is engaged in a similar mission) in my head. Corrected, thank you (and please keep up the good work).
the data is super clear on this, yep. Cooperatives, utilities (many city owned), and municipalities provide better, cheaper, faster broadband. AND it's locally owned by people who have a direct responsibility to the markets they serve. It's not some magical panacea, and there's certainly a huge role for private ISPs, but the path forward here is pretty clear. Tons of community-owned open access fiber networks, leased to multiple competitors.
yes, most analysis also doesn't include the hidden fees buried below the line. That just technically doesn't exist, and that's where cable and telecom giants make huge chunks of their profits.
"Push it onto the large ISPs: make them give details of speed availability throughout the territory they’re operating in (or looking to expand into), have an intern overlay it onto a map, and hold the companies to it." One, giant telecom monopolies lie about coverage, constantly. Two, they have spent twenty years lobbying government to ensure telecom regulators are too feckless, feeble, understaffed, and underfunded to hold them accountable for anything. Your proposal basically involves throwing untold billions at a big ambiguous mountain of predatory monopolies and just hoping it all works out Without reform and taking aim at state and federal corruption, none of this works out particularly efficiently, which is kind of explained in the post you responded to.
RTFA
So the FCC's first effort on this front made adhering to it voluntary, which was pointless. The Infrastructure bill required that they implement it permanently with mandatory requirements. But it still needs review and getting it implemented and enforced would require an FCC voting majority, which they don't have because the telecom lobby is currently ratfucking the appointment of a third Democratic commissioner to the FCC. And even with its full voting majority I'm not really sure the FCC would have the backbone to consistently enforce this much.
whoops, yes. brain fart. apologies.
it's so funny because even the Democratic Commissioners heralded as being pro-consumer can't candidly acknowledge in public comments that telecom monopolies exist and cause harm. there's just zero political courage to challenge them in any meaningful way, even if it's just rhetorically.
there used to be these kinds of requirements embedded in many local franchise agreements, but those were largely killed off in a big vilification push when phone companies lobbied to ready the field for their entry into the TV sector.
they're still basing a lot of this on "advertised" speeds. Hopefully this gets corrected courtesy of challenges, but I'm hearing a lot of skepticism on the challenge process actually working.
...
They don't serve my neck of the woods in South Seattle, unfortunately. There's conduit everywhere yet Comcast remains the only competitor here in much of "Silicon Valley North"
right on. "don't do the thing they incentivize you to do and punish you for not doing" is not a solution. And as I note to others, I also don't like laggy GUIs, tying the GUI to basic HDMI port switching, which still happens if you're offline.
I settled on the LG C1 this last purchase round and love the quality, but I still think the OS and GUI is shitty. And it STILL has the same problem where they tether the GUI (which gets slower as the TV hardware ages in relation to software bloat) to HDMI switching, so doing the basic act of switching ports is way more cumbersome and annoying than it should be (even if you operate the TV without connecting it to the internet).
Sceptre is arguably the dodgiest TV brand you can find and he linked to a dated LED TV. He literally didn't read the post, did a 30 second google search, and concluded the issue solved.