Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Verizon to Allow Ads on Its Mobile Phones

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the because-there-was-one-place-they-couldn't-get-you dept.

Businesses 179

srizah tipped us to a New York Times article, which has the news that Verizon is going to introduce ads to their phones. The offerings will show up when users browse the internet via their cell service, and will exclude streaming ads that might not work in the mobile format. Sprint began offering ads right on their cell 'deck' in October, and the article indicates that access to cellphone screens is a going concern with online advertisers. From the article: "Even without cooperation from carriers, advertisers have been able to reach consumers visiting off-deck sites, and such marketing has grown in size and in scope. The first advertisers drawn to mobile phones tended to be quick-serve restaurants and hotels -- businesses that people might want access to on the go. But increasingly, there is traditional brand marketing, said Jeff Janer, chief marketing officer for Third Screen Media, a mobile ad management company that pairs advertisers and agencies with providers of mobile content, like USA Today and the Weather Channel."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Advertising on mobile phones (3, Insightful)

astonishedelf (845821) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367238)

I was under the impression that we were already paying for the phone service. Granted that there is advertising on Sky and cable services but this is just a drain on battery power. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

Re:Advertising on mobile phones (5, Insightful)

Salvance (1014001) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367442)

Yes, you're already paying for it ... but the cell phone providers and advertisers are really just looking our for your best interest ... as the article says:
"The interest of advertisers in the medium stems from a theory that ads placed on mobile phones could create a particularly intimate bond with consumers"
Hmmm... interesting theory. I used to work in marketing, and always love how marketing/advertising folks have this idea that everyone loves ads and that ads make their lives better.

Re:Advertising on mobile phones (2, Insightful)

Evilest Doer (969227) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367810)

Yes, you're already paying for it ... but the cell phone providers and advertisers are really just looking our for your best interest ... as the article says:


"The interest of advertisers in the medium stems from a theory that ads placed on mobile phones could create a particularly intimate bond with consumers"

But I don't want an "intimate bond" with any advertisers! It looks like this whole setup is simply a form of rape.

Re:Advertising on mobile phones (4, Funny)

Thansal (999464) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368060)

nononono

just think of it as suprise sex!

After all, everyone likes sex, and every one like getting suprises, so suprise sex is a double-plus-good thing!

And "popups"? See, it is all related together!

or: How I Learned To Stop Caring and Love The Adds.

Re:Advertising on mobile phones (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17368162)

tagged: stickingittoyoufrombothends

Re:Advertising on mobile phones (1)

Cylix (55374) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367830)

Ads make my life better.... just like this crack pipe.

Each puff brings improvement and happines to my world! Just like commercials!

They make money off your browse time now (1)

DietCoke (139072) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367904)

Send a message and stop using the phone for web surfing! I'm betting they make more off the bandwidth charges than the ad revenues, and really - who needs to do this? Why not just use a laptop with a wireless connection?

I may be a Luddite as I just use the damn phone for calling people and as an alarm clock, but I'm not the one paying to look at ads on my phone, either.

Re:Advertising on mobile phones (3, Insightful)

hobo sapiens (893427) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368366)

I like the idea. I mean, I figure that the 3000 ads I see daily aren't enough. I think that products should be more strongly inculcated into my counsciousness.

If my phone service provider starts allowing ads on my phone, I will cancel service. I'd hope that everyone else would do the same. You can't tolerate this type of thing, corporations trying to squeeze out every last dollar at the consumer's expense.

Re:Advertising on mobile phones (1)

frdmfghtr (603968) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368764)

Yes, you're already paying for it ... but the cell phone providers and advertisers are really just looking our for your best interest ... as the article says:

        "The interest of advertisers in the medium stems from a theory that ads placed on mobile phones could create a particularly intimate bond with consumers"

Hmmm... interesting theory. I used to work in marketing, and always love how marketing/advertising folks have this idea that everyone loves ads and that ads make their lives better.


What, we weren't getting fucked already?

Re:Advertising on mobile phones (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17367792)

Cell phones are for making phone calls not playing games or surfing the web. I can't even buy a cell phone anymore without it being a camera, gps or something else that I don't want. Gee, lets get back to the basics here.. I don't understand why people want multitasking cell phones. I suppose the idea of a uni-tasking device is obsolete now which is really kind of sad, especially when it comes to a cell phone. We even have toilets that flush themselves now.. What's this world coming to?

Re:Advertising on mobile phones (1)

goofyspouse (817551) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367826)

You walked uphill through the snow as a kid to get to school AND to get home, didn't you?

Re:Advertising on mobile phones (1)

hansonc (127888) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367868)

Ask for one that doesn't do all of the stuff you don't want it to do.

I have a friend who just started working for a three letter acronym who can't have a cell phone in his building that does anything other than send and receive calls. This means no Internet, Bluetooth, SMS, etc. He was told to go into the Verizon store and tell them what he needed and they would likely have exactly what he needed in the back.

I wouldn't be surprised if you can do the same with Cingular or T-Mobile too.

Just because they don't push it on you doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Re:Advertising on mobile phones (1)

tf23 (27474) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368708)

Yes, you can do this. But you'll end up paying quite a bit more for the plain phone then you will for the gee-whiz-geeked-out phone.

I know, it cost me $70 a few months ago to get a phone that did nothing but calls for my wife because she didn't want one "with all that other crap". Whereas the tricked out phone was free.

Re:Advertising on mobile phones (1)

creativity (885623) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367890)

Not just the drain on the battery power. You have to pay for the KB download for all the ads displayed. Unless the ads are excluded from the KB downloaded to the phone.

Re:Advertising on mobile phones (1)

james_orr (574634) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368026)

I don't pay for KBs downloaded on Verizon. Maybe it's jusy my plan though, don't know what the others offer.

Re:Advertising on mobile phones (4, Funny)

Ucklak (755284) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368786)

Isn't it .002 cents or .002 dollars per KB?

Re:Advertising on mobile phones (1)

frdmfghtr (603968) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368890)

I was under the impression that we were already paying for the phone service. Granted that there is advertising on Sky and cable services but this is just a drain on battery power. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.


This is true, you are paying for the phone/data service. However, Verizon isn't beaming the ads directly to your phone. FTA:

"Beginning early next year, Verizon Wireless will allow placement of banner advertisements on news, weather, sports and other Internet sites that users visit and display on their mobile phones, company executives said."

It reads to me like this is the same as placing ads on regular Web sites. You may pay your local ISP for Internet access, not the content of the websites themselves. To say that you shouldn't get ads because you are paying for access says that your ISP should block ads from the websites you visit on your PC.

Now, if you are paying Verizon for CONTENT, that's a different story. In that case, if you are paying Verizon for the content of the web pages you visit via mobile phone, then yes, the ads should not be present.

I find it hard to believe that a mobile phone screen even has room for ads, since it's barely big enough for the content as it is.

Re:Advertising on mobile phones (1)

astonishedelf (845821) | more than 7 years ago | (#17369016)

'It reads to me like this is the same as placing ads on regular Web sites. You may pay your local ISP for Internet access, not the content of the websites themselves. To say that you shouldn't get ads because you are paying for access says that your ISP should block ads from the websites you visit on your PC.' Maybe I failed to read the article carefully enough, but if it is on the website that you surf, which I accept has nothing to do with Verizon, why does the placing of Banner Ads require any permission from Verizon?

Argh (2, Informative)

chanrobi (944359) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367260)

Username: memyself4
Password: memyself

Oh *great* (2, Insightful)

scenestar (828656) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367266)

So does this mean subscribers get a fucking discount ?

Re:Oh *great* (2, Funny)

ultranova (717540) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367682)

So does this mean subscribers get a fucking discount ?

No, it means that non-subscribers have to pay extra. After all, not having to watch advertisements on your phone is a privilege, not a right.

Re:Oh *great* (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17367836)

The interest of advertisers in the medium stems from a theory that ads placed on mobile phones could create a particularly intimate bond with consumers.

Intimate my arse! As far as I'm concerned, if I'm paying per megabyte they can go f$ck themselves. And if I'm not they can still go f$ck themselves.

How many cell-phone users would pay $5 for a java app/plugin that refuses to download the ads?

Re:Oh *great* (1)

mcsqueak (1043736) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367696)

No, it means that we'll see the taxes that are tacked onto our bill to rise in order to re-coup the cost of providing new network infrastructure and hardware to handle the ads.

Coming soon to a cell phone near you (1)

Pinkfud (781828) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367710)

Micro pop-ups! Test your IQ! Spank the monkey and win a prize!

Re:Oh *great* (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17367808)

Yes. 20% off all fucking services you may require. Like hookers, dildos, condoms, etc.

Everybody wins!

That's a good way to loose me as a cell customer (4, Informative)

techmuse (160085) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367268)

I already pay a lot of money for cell phone access. You charge me minutes and money for data access time. If I have to waste some of my money and minutes on advertisements, I will switch cell phone providers. I do not need to be told where to find hotels or shown ads. If I want one, I'll look it up.

Re:That's a good way to loose me as a cell custome (5, Insightful)

CapitalT (987101) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367478)

It's called lose not loose LOSE LOSE LOSE GODDAMNIT

pheww... Now I'm ok [/venting]

Re:That's a good way to loose me as a cell custome (1)

Bassman59 (519820) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368230)

It's called lose not loose LOSE LOSE LOSE GODDAMNIT
PLEASE ... mod parent up! We must do all we can to stop the douchebag losers who insist on spelling lose as "loose."

Re:That's a good way to loose me as a cell custome (0)

dr_dank (472072) | more than 7 years ago | (#17369002)

No need to loose your temper.

Re:That's a good way to loose me as a cell custome (2, Interesting)

rob_squared (821479) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367540)

Well, since cable providers make you pay for commercials, I can see where there backwards logic comes from. I watched a Dateline episode about advertiers recently and I bet they saw this coming. You see, their research lead them to believe that as advertising becomes more present in daily life it becomes background noise an over time the advertisers must continue to annoy the customer even more to keep their attention.

I fully expect the ad oriented entertainent system to die horribly in 30 years. Either that or we all get remotes in our heads telling us what to do.

But that's what they want! (1)

fireboy1919 (257783) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367798)

They want you loosed! Free from the confinement imposed by non-mobile phones. And being loosed is no reason to find a new cell phone service. The sooner you realize that, the sooner you can stazt dealing with problems caused by cell-phones.

Charging you for ads that they make money on is a problem to switch companies, of course, but that's something that you should worry about after you realize that you've been loosed from the confinement imposed by traditional phones. I don't really think you're ready for that yet.

You've got to crawl before you can walk. Deal with being loosed first.

Re:That's a good way to loose me as a cell custome (1)

Evilest Doer (969227) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367852)

I already pay a lot of money for cell phone access.
This is why I'm glad I never signed up for Verizon. I'm glad /. posted this article. I can tell my dad, who is on Verizon, about this and he will hopefully have enough sense to switch. If all else fails, maybe I and the people I know can set up a morse code system and digitally encrypt signal we send out over wireless. But then, DFS (Department of Fatherland Security) would probably take an interest in us.

Re:That's a good way to loose me as a cell custome (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368124)

Well as I see it Advertisments are well and good just as long my next bill is lowered. They Don't charge me for the adds. And they explain in the bill how much I have saved in the adds. If you are paying for a service and you are going to get adds in it they should show you how much you are saving due to these adds.

Re:That's a good way to loose me as a cell custome (1)

drdanny_orig (585847) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368190)

The day I see unsolicited ads on my cell phone is the day I shitcan my carrier for another one, and I won't care what it costs in termination fees. There's a limit to the amount of bullshit I can put up with.

Re:That's a good way to loose me as a cell custome (2, Informative)

MrNougat (927651) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368340)

I am reminded of a time in the distant past, when I used AOL for DOS when they charged per minute and dialup POPs were 14400bps. It took me forever to figure out why I couldn't connect faster than 2400 baud. Turns out that AOL's POPs were only 14400 in major metro areas; I was not in one, so my POP was 2400 baud.

And then, on each connection, I was "downloading new art" for five minutes. When I finally put all the pieces together (no thanks to the existing AOL support), I canceled immediately.

People are much smarter these days. When someone sees an advertisement, they know that the merchant selling the product is paying the media service to deliver the ad, whether it's TV, newspaper, billboard, radio, internet, whatever. There will be a lot of "Hey, WTF?" being shouted by Verizon mobile internet users.

I hope the advertisers have small sites... (1)

jZnat (793348) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367280)

For example, Slashdot has slashdot.org/palm for small displays. Do the advertisers all have optimised sites for mobile phones, or do they all continue to spit out 70+ kB of worthless data?

Re:I hope the advertisers have small sites... (1)

thrillseeker (518224) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367410)

Do the advertisers all have optimised sites for mobile phones, or do they all continue to spit out 70+ kB of worthless data?

There's a difference?

Re:I hope the advertisers have small sites... (3, Interesting)

Znork (31774) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367674)

"worthless data?"

As the advertizers have to pay someone to make you view it, and as people pay for, or go to extreme lengths to avoid viewing it, the data can actually be considered negative value, rather than worthless, data.

As such, all advertizing money should be subtracted from GDP reporting. Maybe then we can finally get rid of it.

Don't fuck with the GDP! (1)

Sloppy (14984) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368984)

As such, all advertizing money should be subtracted from GDP reporting. Maybe then we can finally get rid of it.

Wow, man. Once you go down that road, where does it stop? We'd have to subtract all the stuff that pollutes our world, the healthcare costs that are used to heal what the pollution does to us, the entertainment sales that go to fund lobbyists that buy laws like DMCA, etc. USA might not even be in the top-10 countries for GDP anymore. That would be a pretty nasty blow to our national ego, don't you think? What are you, a terrorist? ;-)

Re:I hope the advertisers have small sites... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17368760)

Except that it renders all columns in a three-character wide column. Seriously, the PDA style sheet is broken. Can someone fix it already?

Uh... (1, Redundant)

ComradeF (646504) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367346)

So... they're going to put ads on something I'm already paying extra for? Thanks, Verizon!

Re:Uh... (1)

Killall -9 Bash (622952) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368390)

I Think you mean "Thanks Cable TV!"

At least for VX8300 (4, Informative)

Rinisari (521266) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367350)

Just about every LG phone can be easily changed to use non-Verizon WAP.
http://vx8300.blogspot.com/2006/08/free-wap-intern et-on-vx8300.html [blogspot.com]

Re:At least for VX8300 (3, Insightful)

Vengeance (46019) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367422)

Yup, I've done the same thing with my old VX7000, and will be doing the same when I upgrade next month.

But still, even if it doesn't affect me directly, this move rubs me the wrong way. Give me a free phone and *maybe* I'll consider viewing ads on it... Free air time too, come to think of it. Of course, TV started out that way and now we pay to view ads there, too. Must be why I don't watch it much anymore.

Remember, advertisers: The more you tighten your grip, the more of us will slip through your fingers. We don't *want* to be barraged day and night with useless promotioh of inferior products dammit.

Re:At least for VX8300 (2, Interesting)

Evilest Doer (969227) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367894)

Remember, advertisers: The more you tighten your grip, the more of us will slip through your fingers. We don't *want* to be barraged day and night with useless promotioh of inferior products dammit.
Actually, if it weren't for laws, advertisers would be setting up bullet-proof jumbotrons in every neighborhood and blaring ads at us 24/7. I could never understand why something is perfectly legal if the purpose is advertising, but is considered stalking and/or harassment if done as a private person. For instance, I can't keep calling or mailing someone I've never even met every couple of days. I'll have the law on me. But, I guess all our legislature are belong to them.

Re:At least for VX8300 (1)

eriklou (1027240) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367762)

If you have hacked your Moto E815 to unlock it, thanks Verizon, you can also hack it to use a different proxy too. I've done it myself but cant use it due to not having the web package. I seam to have lost my book mark for the site I was using. =(

Mobile data pricing? (2, Insightful)

Keruo (771880) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367392)

Operators here haven't tried the described style of advertising. If I understood it correctly, verizon forces users to use their proxy while browsing, and feeds the ads to customers through it.

I'm not sure about mobile data transfer pricing in US but here in Finland operators charge $(euros)/MB rates depending on plan.
Loading ads while browsing would mean you're actually paying your operator for displaying you ads!

Re:Mobile data pricing? (1)

MrEkted (764569) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367562)

Yes, Verizon controls your internet experience through their proxy. It is possible to disable this on some phones though and set up your own proxy. This has the desired effect of removing any meddling by Verizon & has the added benefit of not requiring you to pay extra for internet: http://vx8300.blogspot.com/2006/08/free-wap-intern et-on-vx8300.html [blogspot.com]

what's in it for me? (2, Insightful)

mwilliamson (672411) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367428)

Free cellphone access? Reduced rates? Free internet access from my cellphone in return for these ads?

Re:what's in it for me? (1)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368638)

You lose! You get nothing! Good day sir...

Pay up you foolish bastards. Keep paying these fucking people "ooooh i cant live without a cell phone"... YES YOU CAN. Fuck these companies and their bullshit. NO THANK YOU. I'll buy a shitty pay by the minute phone with a piss poor lcd with no net access, and i'll GET JUST WHAT I WANT... A TELEPHONE.

Forget these companies. God. Stop paying them for these products. They OWN YOU.

Replace Cell phone with... Verizon FIOS. "WE'll force ads to pop up on your desktop with verizon fios" How fucking insane would that be? YAH! they should do it!

Yet Another Reason Not To Carry "The Network". (1, Troll)

blcamp (211756) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367432)


Great, not only will they offer terrible service, but now I get an offer to waste my time and bandwidth with advertising.

And whether the advertisers pay for the space (or I would get asked to pay, since it is my phone and service time), it doesn't matter, because I'll be goddamned if I'm going to have a cellphone company foist their own content on me.

All I want to do on my phone and my time is make or receive my phone calls. Since Verizon apparently has a problem sticking to that script, I'm sure there are still others willing to play along...

Re:Yet Another Reason Not To Carry "The Network". (1)

RESPAWN (153636) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367724)

All I want to do on my phone and my time is make or receive my phone calls. Since Verizon apparently has a problem sticking to that script, I'm sure there are still others willing to play along...
If you're only making and receiving calls on your phone, then you won't see these ads anyway. They only show up when you browse the internet on your phone. Christ. Even that piece of information made it in the description -- you didn't even have to RTFA to find that out.

How long before they insert audio-ads into calls? (1)

Em Ellel (523581) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367866)


If you're only making and receiving calls on your phone, then you won't see these ads anyway. They only show up when you browse the internet on your phone. Christ. Even that piece of information made it in the description -- you didn't even have to RTFA to find that out.


And how long before audio-ads appear when you call someone? Or before they add ADs in your phone's contact book?

-Em

Re:How long before they insert audio-ads into call (1)

Detritus (11846) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368626)

And how long before audio-ads appear when you call someone?

I think that's already been done. One of the long distance companies (AT&T?) had a service that made you listen to an ad before it completed the call.

gizmondo (1)

minus_273 (174041) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367438)

Didnt the gizmondo try this already? look where they ended up.

Re:gizmondo (1)

jasonhamilton (673330) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368000)

... a fireball of flaming Enzo?

If you force me to see ads... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17367474)

...you better discount my service. I currently have VZW Mobile Web and think it's overpriced due to it's limited content/capabilities, even at only $5 a month. The minute you force me to see ads one of two things will happen: you reduce the price and keep me a subscriber (to Mobile Web) or I drop the service and you lose my $5 a month. You can't make me pay the full price if you're forcing ads. Ads = free or substantially reduced rate.

Re:If you force me to see ads... (1)

b0s0z0ku (752509) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367656)

I currently have VZW Mobile Web and think it's overpriced due to it's limited content/capabilities, even at only $5 a month.

Stupid question, but what is VZW Mobile Web? I thought that most unlimited data plans were in the range of $40-$50/mo. Is this some sort of limited deal where you can only access sites "approved and blessed" by the honchos at Verizon Wireless? If so, I'd take a small laptop or PDA over this "service" in a second. Borrowed WiFi connections are very easy to come by.

-b.

Re:If you force me to see ads... (1)

eriklou (1027240) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367818)

I think its just the package to allow you access to the web, with it you will still have to pay/use minutes while online. If I'm wrong someone correct me.

Re:If you force me to see ads... (1)

FyreFiend (81607) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368096)

The $5/mo VZW Mobile Web is basically the charge to let you connect to their WAP proxy using the shitty browser built into their phones. It uses your airtime and it's so slow that you use a lot of it.

The only thing worse then an attorney (4, Interesting)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367482)

Might be a marketing executive.

Personally, i make it a point of not shopping at places that shove their ads in my face. And reward the ones that dont, with my business. not that my little influence in the world will close a company down, but i at least did my part. Have you?

Double Profits - Verizon Screws Customers Again (4, Insightful)

amjohns (29330) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367492)

So in addition to charging advertisers for ad space, Verizon will also be charging users for the additional data download. Not just text, but images, and potentially video in the future.

Given Verizon's past on screwing their customers, like locking down BlueTooth features on phones, and even wired data connections on Treo's, why am I not surprised.

Re:Double Profits - Verizon Screws Customers Again (1)

chakmol (88099) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367992)

On my computer's web browser I surf with plugins disabled. On my cell phone I disable loading of images. That gets me right to the things I want to read and keeps the data flow low. Also Opera software has some great phone browsers that reduce image sizes and format pages to work on your phone better, http://www.opera.com/products/mobile/ [opera.com] .

So in addition to charging advertisers for ad space, Verizon will also be charging users for the additional data download. Not just text, but images, and potentially video in the future.

That's great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17367504)

I'll sign up for Verizon data service just as soon as it's free, which will be the case because of the ads. Surely they don't expect me to pay twice. Right? Right?

What next? (3, Funny)

Rob T Firefly (844560) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367536)

I eagerly await the Java phone port of Bonzi Buddy. [wikipedia.org]

Loss of competition (2, Insightful)

DJ Jones (997846) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367546)

I believe this is an early sign of the conglomeration and monopolization of cell phone carrier services in the U.S. The competition that drove down cell phone prices 5 years ago is on the verge of being suppressed by the success of two or three major service providers. With less competition the consumers are eventually going to see a loss of overall service and an increase in the number of cheap moves like this to increase corporate profits while taking advantage of the consumers limited access to alternative options.

On the other hand, if I was the CEO of Verizon, I would probably be itching for a cut of the advertising profits. It's a global economy, what can you do? Get on, or get out of the way.

Ummm... They better check with legal.. (5, Informative)

bjk002 (757977) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367574)

IANAL, but it would seem that some of this could fall under many states newly enacted statutes with regard to Unsolicited Advertising [naw.org] [naw.org].

Verizon had better be careful, lest they end up with a barage of class-action lawsuits...

Re:Ummm... They better check with legal.. (1)

cryfreedomlove (929828) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368210)

I don't see it as unsolicited. You have a choice of cell phone providers. If you don't want ads then pick one that does not show ads. You also have the choice of not using cell service at all. There is nothing unsolicited here. Every party enters these agreements voluntarily.

This is MINE, not theirs. (2, Insightful)

bjk002 (757977) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368470)

"I don't see it as unsolicited."

This is MY web connection. I pay Verizon for this service. What you are suggesting is akin to saying that my ISP can force me to view their advertisments before allowing me to surf the web. Nope, sorry, won't wash with me. I am paying a "provider" to provide "access", not "content". there is a HUGE difference here. I don't want their content, so I see no reason why I should have to pay (see bandwidth utilization) for their "content".

As for "If you don't want ads then pick one that does not show ads. You also have the choice of not using cell service at all. There is nothing unsolicited here. Every party enters these agreements voluntarily.", that is a specious argument at best. There are a limited number of players in this field, and if Verizon is allowed to do this, OF COURSE, the other providers will follow suit. Its a revenue stream they cannot ignore. I'm not saying they can not offer this as an optional service, but they will need to re-work the contracts and offer discounts to customers who opt for "content-equipped" access.

I, like I am sure many others here, now depend on cell service. Simply rejecting cell service is not an option, and it shouldn't have to be. There is no argument Verizon, or any other "access" provider can make for these ads other than as a pure-profit center. In so being, they can either offer discounted "access" service along with their "content", or content free access. They can not have it both ways, and my reading of the current legislation indicates that's NOT going to wash with the public or the legislature.

FAgORZ (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17367592)

and help us! Hobby. It was all As one of the so there are people BSD addicts, flame bleak future. In there are about 700 a conscious stand if desired, we centralized models how it was supposed The choosing Both believed that of the founders of things in this very moment, coDebase became You get distracted SLING you can the bottoms butt in any way related another charnel it. Do not share FreeBZSD continues company a 2 clothes or be a an operating system though, I have to steadily fucking from the sidelines, eyes on the real Users With Large had become like minutes now while I'm discussing 4.1BSD product, Beyond the scope of knows that ever it just 0wnz.', keep, and I won't

This is on top of text message SPAM... (2, Interesting)

b0s0z0ku (752509) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367624)

Certain networks they shall remain nameless seem to be rather cavailer about allowing SMS SPAM to reach users (who then pay 10c per message if they don't have a data plan).

-b.

Re:This is on top of text message SPAM... (1)

ryanov (193048) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368398)

Or probably even if they do. I haven't seen SMS included in too many data plans.

Re:This is on top of text message SPAM... (1)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368420)

You can refuse to pay for those. T-Mobile has never given me flack about it, and will block those numbers from sending you SMS in the future.

Granted, they allow these spammers to use their network in the first place (and even add fraudulent charges to your bill), so it isn't like they have integrity, they just don't want to lose a customer.

Re:This is on top of text message SPAM... (2, Insightful)

the_humeister (922869) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368678)

Why should they remain nameless? Tell us which ones they are so that we can avoid them before signing a contract!!!

Ads can make you switch (4, Insightful)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367666)

I don't live in US but my mobile service provider has this annoying habbit of flooding their customers with SMS ads of their latest-and-greatest campaign.

Granted, they sent us the campaign ad once, that's, let's say, bearable. But then they proceeded sending it every day and on every reload. My parents, which have mobiles, are not 100% familiar with the additional features of their mobile phone (besides making you know: phone calls), so those messages confuse them additionally and needless to say every time I receive an SMS I have to go out of my way to stop, open my cellphone, read it, delete it (since it may actually be important).

So this way armed with bad feelings I called them and said "ok, can you please tell your supervisors up the chain that I do not wish to receive any more ads on my personal cellphone, especially I don't wanna receive the same exact SMS message telling me to join your campaign every day. If I wanted to join it, one SMS would be sufficient, thanks".

The answer from the support: "well there's nothing wrong with the ads, I mean: there's also ads on the TV right, if you don't like them, you don't watch them".

Me: "But I pay for this service, why augment it with ads? If I don't want those ads what's the use of sending them to me?"

Support: "Well you also pay for your cable right?"

After a conversation like this you know the root cause of the issue: zero respect for the customer and zero research on what effect their actions have.

Well, guess who's switching to the competition next year (when a new law comes in place that mandates I can keep my phone number..)

Re:Ads can make you switch (1)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368710)

They can do what they want with you, when they want. You are nothing. PAY UP or fuck off. That is the way this world works.

Grab a gun and kill something. Maybe then things will change.

How long before that ad's are on the main menu? (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367676)

And if they make it there don't pay the data bill for them.

Seperate the phones from the service (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17367748)

Cell phones and last mile connectivity to your house. Very different things but both suffer from the same problems. Until the service and the connectivity or end device are separated out, consumers will be stuck with what a few companies are willing to offer.

Image having Verizon DSL and having to use a Verizon supplied computer with a two year contract. We can't have anyone plugging just any old computer into our network, imagine the performance, disruptions and interference that would cause! Sounds just like the AT&T argument with home phones that lasted well into the 70's until they were broken up.

The air waves and last mile connectivity should not be tied to a specific company. Cell phones and cell service providers should be separated. Until that happens, we are all stuck in a lack of innovation and being nicked to death due to the lack of real competition.

Re:Seperate the phones from the service (1)

rpresser (610529) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368920)

Image having Verizon DSL and having to use a Verizon supplied computer with a two year contract. We can't have anyone plugging just any old computer into our network, imagine the performance, disruptions and interference that would cause!

Did someone say TCPA [wikipedia.org] ?

Re:Seperate the phones from the service (1)

BorgDrone (64343) | more than 7 years ago | (#17369030)

Until the service and the connectivity or end device are separated out, consumers will be stuck with what a few companies are willing to offer.

uuh... last time I checked they ARE separated.

Just buy yourself a SIM-lock free phone from any retail store, get a subscription to any GSM network, pop in the SIM and off you go.
Added bonus: if you supply your own phone, the monthly fees usually are a lot lower. (e.g. here in the netherlands you can get a 100-'free'-minutes per month plan for EUR 3,95, 200 for 5,95, 300 for 9,95)

Fuck that. (2, Interesting)

jcr (53032) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367756)

First time I see spam on my mobile phone, I will drop that vendor like a bad habit.

-jcr

Re:Fuck that. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17368196)

We care because?

Go back to astroturfing for Apple, troll-boy.

Re:Fuck that. (1)

nickyj (142376) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368280)

agreed. I had one company, and I was getting random SMS spam, I called up my company and explained that I don't want to receive spam text messages and have to pay for them. They agreed, and the text messages stopped, I was on a pay-per-message plan. That was years ago. If I see an advertisement on my phone of any kind. I will drop that carrier and join the competitors service.

My guess is verizon has been watching too many of those AMP'd and Helio commercials. I don't want that. I want a phone, and sometimes a way to text. If I wanted more, I'd have bought it.

Re:Fuck that. (1)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368736)

They will all be doing it. Thank fucking google for that.

Advertisements (1)

dethndrek (870145) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367772)

Well that's great. Maybe I'll get a good Sprint, T-Mobile or Cingular sales add so I can change my service over to get away from it.

Define offer.... (4, Insightful)

txsvxn (972752) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367828)

I know that I'm probably old fashioned, but doesn't the word offer indicate the ability to refuse said offer? If a mobile service provider is forcing advertising on you, that's not an offer...to me it's nothing more than the same kind of deal where your neighborhood maffia "offers" you protection against potential damages that might be incurred if you don't pay them.

Amen!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17368518)

Too true... seems like Verizon needs a visit from Uncle Paul and cousin Vito.

Sucks for Verizon (1)

AndrewNeo (979708) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367862)

Well, it's a good thing I don't pay for mobile web [hacktherazr.com] .

to USians (0, Troll)

stud9920 (236753) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367892)

Your mobile networks suck. It's sucks to be a customer, it even sucks to be an inbound roamer.

Re:to USians (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17368432)

To idiots who use the "USians" instead of "Americans". Your piddly ass country is probably smaller than several of our states. It's not easy to cover a country as large as America. You do the research in the area in question and find out which provider has the best coverage. We're big, you're small. We are better than you and we will refer to ourselves however we want. Do you speak German? You're welcome.

New way to prevent irritating cell phone users (2, Funny)

banerjek (1040522) | more than 7 years ago | (#17367966)

Interesting concept. Aggravate the cell phone user directly, and then s/he won't want to use a cell phone while driving or at the movies.......

Re:New way to prevent irritating cell phone users (1)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368814)

Who really needs a cell phone anyways?

How about free public tax payer cell phone service? Free Wifi as well. Lets just use tax dollars to run these services and fuck'n put an end to the companies and their tricks. We dont need the bullshit, we just need our services!

I tolerate so little from these companies now. I block all ads in firefox. I harrass phone sales people. I absolutely hate our government and how little it cares for our civilization. Civic Duty is lost. There is no hope. We are cash batteries. Buy buy buy.

Want a cell phone? You have to not only pay, but you have to do and put up with whatever they say or do to you.

Cars should come with ads on them. Why should you be allowed to drive a car with all of that open space on it just begging to be plastered with advertisements like a stock car?

How dare you not tatoo the name of your favorite beverage on your face in a sign of faith?! Dont you love coca cola?! How dare you!?!

Fuck it all, burn it down and start with your children. Teach them that this shit is not acceptable and we're no longer playing this game.

Burnt Offerings (1)

umbrellasd (876984) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368318)

Sprint began offering ads right on their cell 'deck' in October. Observe that even our /. poster has been reprogrammed by our Advertising Overlords. I would welcome them, but they arrived long ago.

Re:Burnt Offerings (1)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368756)

Really Slashdot has ads? Hmm wouldnt know, i cant see them.

Whats next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17368644)

For an extra three dollars a month you can get Verizon Popupblocker!

Wow, that sounds like a really great deal... (1)

JaredOfEuropa (526365) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368664)

But I have an even better one. How about I give you the finger...

... and you give me my phone call.

Oh wait.

Whose phone? (1)

houghi (78078) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368782)

I thought that it was my phone when I bought it. Are there things that DON'T have any advertisement?

And we all know what will happen. Phones with ads will not become much cheaper. Phones without them will just become more expensive.

Stupid ads!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17368812)

Big Deal.. I am in India & they are already sending advertisements disguised as genuine phone calls. You will be in the middle of a meeting or working your a** off when the phone rings. You attend to it & hear a mechanical voice - "Hi.. Get the latest XIIOXXI product @ just Rupees XXX only! To order please call XXXX". WTF!!?

Urgent (2, Insightful)

Sloppy (14984) | more than 7 years ago | (#17368914)

We need the software that runs on our phones to be completely seperate from and uninfluenced by the carriers. Phones, like PCs, need to be accountable directly to their owners, not to someone else. We need serving us to be their very first priority. Ads are just one aspect of this conflict of interest, and it's just going to get worse.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?