1. Welcome to Verizon Forums - the unofficial Verizon community! Have a question about Verizon? Click HERE to get started.
  2. Expecting Cell Phone Forums? We recently moved Verizon specific content to VerizonForums.com. If you previously had an account on CPF, it has been transferred!

FOX News Trashed ATT Wireless

Discussion in 'alt.cellular.verizon' started by Karen, Nov 29, 2003.

  1. CK

    CK Guest

    Melee-
    I think that a great deal of the consensus is that AT&T DID have good
    coverage, technology and customer service. You said you dropped them in
    2000. That was then, this is now. They are steadily getting worse and
    loosing long time customers. The guy in the Forbes on Fox segment was a
    customer for over 7 years before dropping. Obvioulsy it worked well for him
    in the past, but no longer. When I lived in Oak Harbor, WA the AT&T
    coverage was horrible.


    "Melee" <melee@optonline.net> wrote in message
    news:dmljsvo1eikt3mmjcf6j170viohvmn4ivn@4ax.com...
    > On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 20:35:52 GMT, "Karen" <kconan@bigfoot.com> wrote:


    > What a crock of shit. AT&T has been known to provide good cusomter
    > service for years. I had them from 1996-2000. Absolutely no problems.
    > Even JD Powers gives them good ratings. Yes, they may be biased to a
    > degree, but in my experiences, I'd say to say they're farily accurate
    > in their judgements.
    >
    > AT&T's TDMA service is just fine, it's the GSM service they offer that
    > stinks. They're taking way too implementing 850Mhz service and the
    > coverage has more holes than swiss cheese.



    › See More: FOX News Trashed ATT Wireless
  2. Ignoring his agents wishes,"CK" <no@email.com> flung open the hotel
    room door and announced to the gathering crowd:

    >Melee-
    >I think that a great deal of the consensus is that AT&T DID have good
    >coverage, technology and customer service. You said you dropped them in
    >2000. That was then, this is now. They are steadily getting worse and
    >loosing long time customers. The guy in the Forbes on Fox segment was a
    >customer for over 7 years before dropping. Obvioulsy it worked well for him
    >in the past, but no longer. When I lived in Oak Harbor, WA the AT&T
    >coverage was horrible.
    >



    I've had AT&T for at least 7 years as well. We were caught in the
    trap of everyone knowing our cell phone number. And of course, the
    longer we kept those numbers, the harder it was to drop AT&T. AT&T
    has always, in my experience, had good customer service. Their
    calling plans were not always competitive nor their coverage
    consistent. Once portability was available, we switched (actually in
    the process of), to Nextel. Their coverage in the metro DC area is
    better than AT&T by a wide margin and of course they have Direct
    Connect which we're quickly beginning to wonder how we got along
    without all these years.

    However, I'm not impressed with their calling plans and since their
    mindset seem(ed) to be aimed towards commercial accounts, they don't
    really have a good family plan. I suspect that will change though as
    competition becomes more fierce once everyone across the US can port
    their numbers.




    **********************************************************************

    People are more violently opposed to fur than leather because it's
    safer to harass rich women than motorcycle gangs.
    -Unknown


    Remove "die spammers" to email
  3. Been There

    Been There Guest

    > > > Yeah well, that's Faux News for ya. All opinion, no facts.
    > > >

    > >
    > > That's the problem with the media in the United States.

    >

    You want facts? Fact is Fox News continues to kick CNNs butt!
  4. Harry Krause

    Harry Krause Guest

    Been There wrote:

    >> > > Yeah well, that's Faux News for ya. All opinion, no facts.
    >> > >
    >> >
    >> > That's the problem with the media in the United States.

    >>

    > You want facts? Fact is Fox News continues to kick CNNs butt!
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >

    Well, of course: the righties who like Faux News have to be spoonfed
    their thoughts for the day.

    --
    Email sent to piedtypecase@yahoo.com is never read.
  5. Aboutdakota

    Aboutdakota Guest

    jdoe wrote:
    > The problem is I live in NW IL so I need good covg. there first.


    I had great coverage thier with my Cingular phone. If you don't mind a
    phone number that's not local to you, it might be a good option. I have
    not dealt with customer service for Illinois since I am in the southeast
    market (Florida, Georgia) where Cingular is rated higher than CDMA carriers.

    ==AD
  6. Aboutdakota

    Aboutdakota Guest

    Been There wrote:
    >>>>Yeah well, that's Faux News for ya. All opinion, no facts.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>That's the problem with the media in the United States.

    >>

    > You want facts? Fact is Fox News continues to kick CNNs butt!


    You are speaking of facts. Do you have an unbiased source that Fox News
    "continues to kick CNNs butt"? I know Fox News will claim that, but CNN
    will also claim that they are better than Fox News. And, isn't CNN
    available in a multitude of countries that Fox News is not?

    ==AD
  7. Donkey Agony

    Donkey Agony Guest

    Aboutdakota wrote:

    >> You want facts? Fact is Fox News continues to kick CNNs butt!


    > You are speaking of facts. Do you have an unbiased source that Fox
    > News "continues to kick CNNs butt"? I know Fox News will claim that,
    > but CNN will also claim that they are better than Fox News. And,
    > isn't CNN available in a multitude of countries that Fox News is not?


    You might want to Google before waxing indignant. The first link
    returned for the query

    ratings OR rated "fox news" cnn

    was http://www.jsonline.com/enter/tvradio/apr03/133295.asp :

    The average audience for Fox News is 3.4 million households,
    CNN's is 2.7 million and MSNBC's is 1.3.

    There were many similar links. According to some of the other links
    returned, Fox overtook CNN in January 2002 c.e.

    Yes, CNN has better overseas coverage.

    The only way to get a truly "fair and balanced" overview is to get your
    news from multiple sources (be it newspapers or TV). It's easy to get
    into a "Fox rocks, CNN sucks" or vice versa mindset, but the best
    approach is to diss them all -- and watch them all.

    --
    da
    ~~
    "OE Quotefix" http://flash.to/oe-quotefix
    to fix Outlook Express' broken quoting.
  8. Harry Krause

    Harry Krause Guest

    Donkey Agony wrote:

    > Aboutdakota wrote:
    >
    >>> You want facts? Fact is Fox News continues to kick CNNs butt!

    >
    >> You are speaking of facts. Do you have an unbiased source that Fox
    >> News "continues to kick CNNs butt"? I know Fox News will claim that,
    >> but CNN will also claim that they are better than Fox News. And,
    >> isn't CNN available in a multitude of countries that Fox News is not?

    >
    > You might want to Google before waxing indignant. The first link
    > returned for the query
    >
    > ratings OR rated "fox news" cnn
    >
    > was http://www.jsonline.com/enter/tvradio/apr03/133295.asp :
    >
    > The average audience for Fox News is 3.4 million households,
    > CNN's is 2.7 million and MSNBC's is 1.3.
    >
    > There were many similar links. According to some of the other links
    > returned, Fox overtook CNN in January 2002 c.e.



    All this proves is that there is an excess of right-wingers in the
    United States who tune in Faux News for their daily feeding of what they
    are supposed to think.


    --
    Email sent to piedtypecase@yahoo.com is never read.
  9. Giambi

    Giambi Guest

    "Harry Krause" <piedtypecase@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:bqdpmd$20qkas$3@ID-21096.news.uni-berlin.de...
    > Donkey Agony wrote:
    >
    > > Aboutdakota wrote:
    > >
    > >>> You want facts? Fact is Fox News continues to kick CNNs butt!

    > >
    > >> You are speaking of facts. Do you have an unbiased source that Fox
    > >> News "continues to kick CNNs butt"? I know Fox News will claim that,
    > >> but CNN will also claim that they are better than Fox News. And,
    > >> isn't CNN available in a multitude of countries that Fox News is not?

    > >
    > > You might want to Google before waxing indignant. The first link
    > > returned for the query
    > >
    > > ratings OR rated "fox news" cnn
    > >
    > > was http://www.jsonline.com/enter/tvradio/apr03/133295.asp :
    > >
    > > The average audience for Fox News is 3.4 million households,
    > > CNN's is 2.7 million and MSNBC's is 1.3.
    > >
    > > There were many similar links. According to some of the other links
    > > returned, Fox overtook CNN in January 2002 c.e.

    >
    >
    > All this proves is that there is an excess of right-wingers in the
    > United States who tune in Faux News for their daily feeding of what they
    > are supposed to think.
    > --
    > Email sent to piedtypecase@yahoo.com is never read.


    Well, if broad, generalizing, biased statements like that are supposed to
    represent the opposite viewpoint, you're not really much better off.. are
    you?

    --
    Jason G
    Marlins Win. The Gods of Baseball Smite Me Again.
    Remove 'WINNER' to reply.
  10. Donkey Agony

    Donkey Agony Guest

    Harry Krause wrote:

    >> was http://www.jsonline.com/enter/tvradio/apr03/133295.asp :
    >> The average audience for Fox News is 3.4 million households,
    >> CNN's is 2.7 million and MSNBC's is 1.3.
    >> There were many similar links. According to some of the other links
    >> returned, Fox overtook CNN in January 2002 c.e.


    > All this proves is that there is an excess of right-wingers in the
    > United States who tune in Faux News for their daily feeding of what
    > they are supposed to think.


    Or maybe it's because Fox offered some excitement contrasted with CNN's
    stale fare. (Though CNN seems to have improved lately in that regard.)

    So what is *your* news source that gives you such smug enlightenment
    which distinguishes you from the unwashed masses?


    Conservative, n. One who favors limited government and total war. ...
    One who is against exercise because Jane Fonda is for it. As Franklin
    Roosevelt said, "A Conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs
    who, however, has never learned to walk." Of course, Roosevelt forgot
    to add that a Liberal is a cripple who wants to force somebody else to
    pay for his wheelchair.


    --
    da
    ~~
    "OE Quotefix" http://flash.to/oe-quotefix
    to fix Outlook Express' broken quoting.
  11. Terry Knab

    Terry Knab Guest

    "CK" <no@email.com> wrote in message news:Jgoyb.17135$o9.1662@fed1read07...
    > Melee-
    > I think that a great deal of the consensus is that AT&T DID have good
    > coverage, technology and customer service. You said you dropped them in
    > 2000. That was then, this is now. They are steadily getting worse and
    > loosing long time customers. The guy in the Forbes on Fox segment was a
    > customer for over 7 years before dropping. Obvioulsy it worked well for

    him
    > in the past, but no longer. When I lived in Oak Harbor, WA the AT&T
    > coverage was horrible.
    >
    >

    I tried AT&T in California, southern to be exact, and they were miserable.
    (They seemingly only pushed GSM coverage, and getting them to activate a
    TDMA account is next to impossible here)

    I dumped them and ran back to Sprint, and wasted no time in doing it.

    Data on ATT is astronomically priced, as is everything else about them.

    Frankly, I'll stay with Sprint, thank you very much.

    Verizon? Don't get me started on their billing!
  12. Harry Krause

    Harry Krause Guest

    Donkey Agony wrote:

    > Harry Krause wrote:
    >
    >>> was http://www.jsonline.com/enter/tvradio/apr03/133295.asp :
    >>> The average audience for Fox News is 3.4 million households,
    >>> CNN's is 2.7 million and MSNBC's is 1.3.
    >>> There were many similar links. According to some of the other links
    >>> returned, Fox overtook CNN in January 2002 c.e.

    >
    >> All this proves is that there is an excess of right-wingers in the
    >> United States who tune in Faux News for their daily feeding of what
    >> they are supposed to think.

    >
    > Or maybe it's because Fox offered some excitement contrasted with CNN's
    > stale fare. (Though CNN seems to have improved lately in that regard.)
    >
    > So what is *your* news source that gives you such smug enlightenment
    > which distinguishes you from the unwashed masses?
    >

    Faux News is obviously right-wing in its slant and in its rah-rah
    approach to the Bush Administration. It is the most irresponsible
    presentation of news on cable. It is the Rush Limbaugh approach to news:
    rabble-rousing, snide, and rarely factual. But the righties who watch it
    love it; it's sort of like watching a football game while you're beered up.




    --
    Email sent to piedtypecase@yahoo.com is never read.
  13. Al Klein

    Al Klein Guest

    On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 20:35:52 GMT, "Karen" <kconan@bigfoot.com> posted
    in alt.cellular.verizon:

    >They said that Nextel was making money and although
    >Verizon had $30 billion in debt


    That number is meaningless without knowing how much cash and income
    they have to cover it. If they have $40 billion available they're a
    good investment. If, like Sprint, they have almost nothing to cover
    their debt, they're in trouble.
  14. Giambi

    Giambi Guest

    "Harry Krause" <piedtypecase@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:bqe3f7$219pja$5@ID-21096.news.uni-berlin.de...
    > Donkey Agony wrote:
    >
    > > Harry Krause wrote:
    > >
    > >>> was http://www.jsonline.com/enter/tvradio/apr03/133295.asp :
    > >>> The average audience for Fox News is 3.4 million households,
    > >>> CNN's is 2.7 million and MSNBC's is 1.3.
    > >>> There were many similar links. According to some of the other links
    > >>> returned, Fox overtook CNN in January 2002 c.e.

    > >
    > >> All this proves is that there is an excess of right-wingers in the
    > >> United States who tune in Faux News for their daily feeding of what
    > >> they are supposed to think.

    > >
    > > Or maybe it's because Fox offered some excitement contrasted with CNN's
    > > stale fare. (Though CNN seems to have improved lately in that regard.)
    > >
    > > So what is *your* news source that gives you such smug enlightenment
    > > which distinguishes you from the unwashed masses?
    > >

    > Faux News is obviously right-wing in its slant and in its rah-rah
    > approach to the Bush Administration. It is the most irresponsible
    > presentation of news on cable. It is the Rush Limbaugh approach to news:
    > rabble-rousing, snide, and rarely factual. But the righties who watch it
    > love it; it's sort of like watching a football game while you're beered

    up.
    > --
    > Email sent to piedtypecase@yahoo.com is never read.


    You didn't answer the question.
    --
    Jason G
    Marlins Win. The Gods of Baseball Smite Me Again.
    Remove 'WINNER' to reply.
  15. Harry Krause

    Harry Krause Guest

    Giambi wrote:

    > "Harry Krause" <piedtypecase@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    > news:bqe3f7$219pja$5@ID-21096.news.uni-berlin.de...
    >> Donkey Agony wrote:
    >>
    >> > Harry Krause wrote:
    >> >
    >> >>> was http://www.jsonline.com/enter/tvradio/apr03/133295.asp :
    >> >>> The average audience for Fox News is 3.4 million households,
    >> >>> CNN's is 2.7 million and MSNBC's is 1.3.
    >> >>> There were many similar links. According to some of the other links
    >> >>> returned, Fox overtook CNN in January 2002 c.e.
    >> >
    >> >> All this proves is that there is an excess of right-wingers in the
    >> >> United States who tune in Faux News for their daily feeding of what
    >> >> they are supposed to think.
    >> >
    >> > Or maybe it's because Fox offered some excitement contrasted with CNN's
    >> > stale fare. (Though CNN seems to have improved lately in that regard.)
    >> >
    >> > So what is *your* news source that gives you such smug enlightenment
    >> > which distinguishes you from the unwashed masses?
    >> >

    >> Faux News is obviously right-wing in its slant and in its rah-rah
    >> approach to the Bush Administration. It is the most irresponsible
    >> presentation of news on cable. It is the Rush Limbaugh approach to news:
    >> rabble-rousing, snide, and rarely factual. But the righties who watch it
    >> love it; it's sort of like watching a football game while you're beered

    > up.
    >> --
    >> Email sent to piedtypecase@yahoo.com is never read.

    >
    > You didn't answer the question.



    Oh, I have lots of news sources. I read the paper editions of the WSJ,
    NYTIMES, WASH POST every weekeday, plus a number of vertical news pubs,
    and I get the post and the times on the weekends, along with a plethora
    of news magazines. I watch some TV news programs.

    --
    Email sent to piedtypecase@yahoo.com is never read.
  16. Tony Clark

    Tony Clark Guest

    Wasn't the reported that admitted to making up news stories from the NY
    Times?

    TC


    "Harry Krause" <piedtypecase@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:bqe8vm$1uiqh1$1@ID-21096.news.uni-berlin.de...
    > Giambi wrote:
    >
    > > "Harry Krause" <piedtypecase@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    > > news:bqe3f7$219pja$5@ID-21096.news.uni-berlin.de...
    > >> Donkey Agony wrote:
    > >>
    > >> > Harry Krause wrote:
    > >> >
    > >> >>> was http://www.jsonline.com/enter/tvradio/apr03/133295.asp :
    > >> >>> The average audience for Fox News is 3.4 million households,
    > >> >>> CNN's is 2.7 million and MSNBC's is 1.3.
    > >> >>> There were many similar links. According to some of the other

    links
    > >> >>> returned, Fox overtook CNN in January 2002 c.e.
    > >> >
    > >> >> All this proves is that there is an excess of right-wingers in the
    > >> >> United States who tune in Faux News for their daily feeding of what
    > >> >> they are supposed to think.
    > >> >
    > >> > Or maybe it's because Fox offered some excitement contrasted with

    CNN's
    > >> > stale fare. (Though CNN seems to have improved lately in that

    regard.)
    > >> >
    > >> > So what is *your* news source that gives you such smug enlightenment
    > >> > which distinguishes you from the unwashed masses?
    > >> >
    > >> Faux News is obviously right-wing in its slant and in its rah-rah
    > >> approach to the Bush Administration. It is the most irresponsible
    > >> presentation of news on cable. It is the Rush Limbaugh approach to

    news:
    > >> rabble-rousing, snide, and rarely factual. But the righties who watch

    it
    > >> love it; it's sort of like watching a football game while you're beered

    > > up.
    > >> --
    > >> Email sent to piedtypecase@yahoo.com is never read.

    > >
    > > You didn't answer the question.

    >
    >
    > Oh, I have lots of news sources. I read the paper editions of the WSJ,
    > NYTIMES, WASH POST every weekeday, plus a number of vertical news pubs,
    > and I get the post and the times on the weekends, along with a plethora
    > of news magazines. I watch some TV news programs.
    >
    > --
    > Email sent to piedtypecase@yahoo.com is never read.
  17. Tron

    Tron Guest

    "Harry Krause" <piedtypecase@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:bqe3f7$219pja$5@ID-21096.news.uni-berlin.de...
    > Donkey Agony wrote:
    >
    > > Harry Krause wrote:
    > >
    > >>> was http://www.jsonline.com/enter/tvradio/apr03/133295.asp :
    > >>> The average audience for Fox News is 3.4 million households,
    > >>> CNN's is 2.7 million and MSNBC's is 1.3.
    > >>> There were many similar links. According to some of the other links
    > >>> returned, Fox overtook CNN in January 2002 c.e.

    > >
    > >> All this proves is that there is an excess of right-wingers in the
    > >> United States who tune in Faux News for their daily feeding of what
    > >> they are supposed to think.

    > >
    > > Or maybe it's because Fox offered some excitement contrasted with CNN's
    > > stale fare. (Though CNN seems to have improved lately in that regard.)
    > >
    > > So what is *your* news source that gives you such smug enlightenment
    > > which distinguishes you from the unwashed masses?
    > >

    > Faux News is obviously right-wing in its slant and in its rah-rah
    > approach to the Bush Administration. It is the most irresponsible
    > presentation of news on cable. It is the Rush Limbaugh approach to news:
    > rabble-rousing, snide, and rarely factual. But the righties who watch it
    > love it; it's sort of like watching a football game while you're beered

    up.
    >


    Oh no, is wittle baby lefty a wittle cranky because he knows there will be
    another 4 years of the current administration? Boo hoo. Now go back to
    your Doonsberry.

    I love it... Fox is unbalanced right wing bla bla... But CNN is totally
    unbalanced and fair--Right, it didn't get the term Clinton News Network for
    nothing! (As well as PMSNBC)
  18. Been There

    Been There Guest

    > Fox News is consistent in it's complete and utter right wing bias,
    So what! After years of constant leftist propaganda from the other boys,
    the majority now has a source for news. You may see it as "right wing
    bias", I see it as RIGHT!

    > whereas CNN moves where the wind blows. To get somewhat unbiased news

    Thought I would never see anyone admit this! I guess the wind blows because
    CNN sucks!
  19. Justin

    Justin Guest

    Been There wrote on [Wed, 03 Dec 2003 13:37:11 GMT]:
    >> Fox News is consistent in it's complete and utter right wing bias,

    > So what! After years of constant leftist propaganda from the other boys,
    > the majority now has a source for news. You may see it as "right wing
    > bias", I see it as RIGHT!


    Well then, you'd be wrong.


    >> whereas CNN moves where the wind blows. To get somewhat unbiased news

    > Thought I would never see anyone admit this! I guess the wind blows because
    > CNN sucks!


    Yes, CNN does suck. US news media isn't about NEWS, it's about SELLING
    ADS. So, Fox panders to the right wing fascists, and CNN panders to
    whoever will watch them.
  20. Jeremy wrote:

    > And that Sprint makes it so difficult to actually speak to a human being.


    Uhm ... *2 and say "representative". Tough one to figure out though.

    Tom Veldhouse

Welcome to VerizonForums!

Unfortunately you can't reply until you log in or sign up.


Forgot your password?