I really don’t understand this at all. In October, when the viral story of how Comcast managed to get a customer fired from his job for insisting that the communications giant address his legitimate complaints, I wrote:
I have never heard of even one customer of any company losing his job as a consequence of that company’s refusal to address legitimate complaints. That is why Comcast gets its Corporate Asshole of the Year award early. Nobody’s going to top this.
Yet amazingly, Comcast has managed to have yet another tale of atrocious service and customer abuse get widespread publicity. This video, by YouTube exhibitor Sweetlethargy, tells the whole jaw-dropping story:
In any normal consumer setting, a customer able to prove that he was induced by a company representative to purchase a service under false pretenses would immediately receive an apology, and the service promised for the price offered. In this case, however, as you can see in the excruciating video, Comcast’s reaction is, “Sorry, we won’t honor what you were told.” Translation: Screw you. Sue us. Good luck with that.
The is reminiscent of the running gag that was once famous on “Rowan and Martin’s Laugh-In,” the chaotic Sixties comedy show, in which comic Lily Tomlin would play a cruel, smug, nasal-voiced and snorting Bell telephone operator named Ernestine (above). Her specialty was telling infuriated customers who were receiving rotten telephone service that their complaints were futile. “We don’t care. We don’t have to care. We’re the telephone company!” she’d say.
Apparently this is Comcast’s attitude. Horror stories about Comcast service are all over the internet and social media, and heads aren’t rolling, the Board isn’t screaming, press releases aren’t issuing, and documented customer abuse keeps turning up. The company has nurtured a culture of carelessness, callousness and arrogance, and apparently believes that its services are too essential to suffer significant consequences.
What have you heard about Bell lately?
__________________
Pointer: Fark
Ethics Alarms 
Why would anyone think that Comcast will stop doing this? They have a near-monopoly on their services. In a country where citizens have legal rights, this would be breach of contract or fraud, but Comcast has no realistic legal liability in a case like this. Since the Supreme Court in its wisdom has made binding arbitration mandatory, this guy would most likely have to file a complaint, wait a couple of years, fly to NYC on his own dime for a few days, then argue the case before an arbiter that Comcast hired and whose continued employment depends on how happy Comcast is with the decisions. Since the FCC in the wisdom of its ex-Telecom head, has refused to declare such companies common carriers or monopolies, there is no government regulation to stop them. Comcast really can just take your money and there isn’t anything you can do about it. I am assuming it will take some people snapping and shooting up some Comcast centers or employees before the government decides that there is something wrong with this situation. It is sad, but I am afraid that is what it will take.
Has anyone tweeted the CEO’s address?
Barbara Kimmel of Trust Across America offers this excellent insight:
http://www.trustacrossamerica.com/blog/?p=2465
Just yesterday I had a dissatisfying Comcast experience! Next available opportunity and I’m going back to DirecTV. SMH.
I highly recommend DirecTV for its reliability and its customer service—plus the MLB package is a deal. Now: can you give my name as a referral? I think they still give discounts for that, and the way the ethics business is going, I could use it.
“I think they still give discounts for that, and the way the ethics business is going, I could use it.”
If you’d just relax your attitude towards the “Everyone Does It” rationalization, I think your business would boom. I hear that endorsing this rationalization is in high demand in the market…
What have you heard about Bell lately?
The Bell System in Connecticut has been hauled before the state legislature for mishandling hundreds of complaints in the last few months. Granted, they have some extenuating circumstances; their ownership changed this year (the local phone company, SNET, was sold by AT&T to Frontier). Comcast has no such excuse; they’ve been in the same markets for decades, steadily upgrading their infrastructure.
SNET changed its DBA name to reflect new ownership, and is at least nominally owning up to its service issues. Comcast has futilely tried to change its brandname to “Xfinity”, hoping people forget its horrible customer service, while not actually improving.
Regarding that, the person responsible is Lawrence Salva. Here is his profile.
http://people.equilar.com/bio/lawrence-salva-comcast-corporation/salary/620595