Maybe Sprint CEO Gary Forsee didn’t really “resign” over strategic disagreements with his board of directors. Maybe he just couldn’t stomach any longer the idea of heading up a company that screws people this way. (OK, probably not.)
What we know for certain is that Sprint has no better grasp of the meaning of the word “unlimited” than does Verizon.
MSNBC blogger Bob Sullivan today has a story that proves beyond any doubt that parents who insist on giving their children cell phones do not have a Popsicle’s chance in hell against the merciless marketers who drive the nation’s carriers and their affiliates.
Ask Sean Clark, father of an 18-year-old developmentally disabled daughter who found himself staring at a $10,000 text-messaging bill from Sprint after intentionally choosing the carrier’s unlimited text-messaging service expressly to protect himself from such an occurrence. Turns out that the “unlimited” part does not apply to third-party text-message providers who use Sprint’s network to flimflam irresponsible and unaccountable young people alike. It’s enough to make your blood boil … and make me thankful that my children are only six.
(Clark) called Sprint immediately looking for an explanation. Clark knew ringtones and Web-based downloads could get expensive, so he had turned off Web access from Amanda’s phone. He also knew that Amanda, a developmentally disabled 18-year-old, liked to send text messages so he “protected himself” by signing up for unlimited messaging. The bill for his family plan was normally a couple of hundred dollars per month.
Initially, a Sprint customer service agent agreed with Clark’s guess that he was a victim of fraud. But a bit of research revealed that he was instead the victim of third-party providers who offer services on Sprint’s network. And he quickly learned that not all text messages are equal.
Amanda had signed up for a series of so-called “premium” text message services. Premium texts cost typically $1-$2 each and are not covered by monthly bundling plans.
The details are nauseating, especially as they relate to the tactics of the third-party text provider. So, too, are some of the blog post’s “blame the victim” comments, although a number of contributors have constructive advice to offer.
If Sprint wants to market an unlimited text-message plan that isn’t unlimited, it should be obligated to gather an affirmative acknowledgment from the customer that the customer understands that the service does not apply to third-party texting; it should be obligated to provide warnings about unusually high monthly charges before they become astronomical; and it should refrain from doing business with come-on artists who titillate teen-agers into abandoning whatever limited level of self-control they may possess.
In short, stop screwing people.
In the case of Verizon’s unlimited plan with the hidden limits, New York’s attorney general recently came down on the carrier to the tune of $1 million. Here’s hoping that prosecutors are gearing up to give Sprint the same kind of scrutiny.
But that’s not enough — nowhere near enough. It’s long past time for federal authorities — both the FCC and lawmakers — to step up and do the right thing. Criticize parents all you want for being too lax in policing the cell-phone habits of their children, but no measure of irresponsibility on the customer’s part can excuse the predatory practices that by definition are necessary to create a $10,000 text-messaging bill.
