Quantcast
Community Discussion: Blog by Revuhlooshun | Integration: Legitimizing monopoliesDestructoid
LIGHTS:  ON | OFF
surf dtoid with arrow keys



REMOVE ALL ADS?
Guaranteed contest entry?
A new video show?
Something else?

Vote in our membership poll

About
I like the news and Gundam.
Player Profile
Follow me:
Revuhlooshun's sites
Badges
Following  




The American Telephone and Telegraph Corporation was founded in 1885 from an offshoot of the American Bell Telephone Company, itself the result of a number of mergers originating back to Alexander Graham Bell, the inventor of the first telephone. From its outset, AT&T’s goal, using Bell’s master telephone patent #1774465, was to create a "One Policy, One System, Universal Service." Throughout the early 1900s, the business absorbed as many competitors as possible during an age of great trusts and monopolies, irking the ire and attention of anti-trust regulators.

Throughout most of the 20th century, AT&T dominated and obliterated its competitors, protected under what was considered “natural monopoly” status before finally being broken up as a result of a Justice Department anti-trust lawsuit initiated in 1974 and settled in 1982. From the corpse of AT&T rose the “Baby Bells”: Bell Atlantic, BellSouth, Southwestern Bell, U S WEST, Pacific Telesis, NYNEX, and Ameritech.

Almost 30 years later, Ameritech, BellSouth, Pacific Telesis, and Southwestern Bell have been reabsorbed into AT&T. In the meantime, Bell Atlantic consumed NYNEX and formed into what is now Verizon. Both entities have risen from their dead fragments to re-monopolize the modern telecommunications industry after cutting them apart to solve this very problem. They stifle and strangle consumer choice in nearly every area they operate, with most people having only one option when selecting a cable provider as a result of their predatory business practices.

And now they, along with Comcast, have teamed up with Microsoft, itself the target of a number of infamous anti-trust investigations in the U.S. and Europe, to allow them to spread their tentacles even further onto every home with an Xbox console inside of it, feeding off of each other to concentrate their control.



Yes. This is going to be one of those blogs.

Some people were enthused when Microsoft announced they’d be bringing cable services to Xbox Live. Some found the news rather pointless, the addition somewhat useless. I find it dangerous and counterproductive to a problem which affects every person reading this more than they think. These companies don’t just bring you your television – they most likely bring you the internet you’re reading this on, and they sometimes use it to fuck you, the paying customer, over.

This integration of services inevitably picks winners and losers when console manufacturers take sides in such a manner: when Netflix is integrated onto the PS3, its competitors lose out. When Microsoft broadcasts exclusively matches from the UFC (itself a monopoly) and leaves out all other options, that kills off other choices. One company’s gain is another’s loss.

This brings forth a dilemma: does this integration help create monopolies, and help them to win? Or have these companies already won? Is it helping monopolies which already exist, meaning the integration is inconsequential?



It’s akin to figuring out whether or not a burning house is capable of being extinguished. There’s a certain point where nothing can be done, that there is no salvaging it. In either case, I don’t think throwing in canisters of petroleum is beneficial. Comcast is already a monopoly in a lot of areas it operates. Whether or not their service is on Xbox Live is inconsequential to that fact. But let’s not kid ourselves: it certainly doesn’t help that fact, or that problem. At the same time: does it even matter after a certain point?

What this integration does is legitimize monopolies – it crowns winners. When Microsoft announced the integration of Facebook and Twitter onto Xbox Live, the news originally puzzled me: what if those two businesses ever go out of business? What if people stop using them? What if Google+ does get its act together, and everybody stops using Facebook in 5 years? What if they end up on the road Netflix is on, beleaguered with torrents of customer complaints and canceled subscriptions? It seemed like a bold move to openly embrace a business as being permanent and indispensible like that, since even monopolies do sometimes vanish.

But then again, sometimes, as we have seen with the American Telephone and Telegraph Corporation, they don’t. To me, the current shouldn’t be towards expanding Comcast’s reach: it should be to pushing it back. Comcast uses its monopoly power to throttle the internet connections of its customers and to restrict the amount of bandwidth they are able to consume. In fact, Comcast, along with AT&T and Verizon, have been waging a war against FCC regulations governing the internet since its inception to allow them to decide what traffic and information gets sent to you, if at all, and whether or not they can charge premium access to it. And they do this with all the money they collect from consumers who have no choice as to who provides them cable, and from deals like this which allow them to strengthen that power.



Does this integration provide conveniences to the consumer? Yes. But long term, it enables market domination and stifles competition and choice. These companies have a right to exist. They have a right to make money. They do not have a right to control the market and do whatever they may please. What this boils down to is whether or not those short term conveniences are worth the potential long term problems these conveniences fuel and support.

I am not sure on the matter myself. Despite all of this and everything I just wrote, these are nice conveniences. I do enjoy watching Netflix in bed, on my television, without having to turn on a computer. I like turning on ESPN on my Xbox, and being able to watch soccer matches I would probably never see without it. There are benefits. But my intention is to offer another perspective, to nuance this issue and bring to light some important questions no one is asking. Is this trend, in the long term, a positive thing? That our consoles are being used as trojan horses in plots to stamp out competition?

Yes, it is neat when we can all watch Hulu on our PS3s without a computer. But not when it’s because it is our only choice, because all of Hulu’s competitors went out of business. Watching Comcast on your Xbox suddenly doesn’t seem that great of an idea if AT&T and Verizon fall back into their graves, leaving Comcast the only cable provider available to begin with. None of this will happen as a result of this integration, of course. But there are more angles to this issue, some of which are not entirely obvious.



Is this blog awesome? Vote it up!




Those who have come:



Did you know? You can now get daily or weekly email notifications when humans reply to your comments.

Legacy Comments (will be imported soon)


Great article. It's something I haven't given much thought since I don't own a 360, but I'm glad you brought it up.

I have mixed feelings about it. My local cable/phone/internet provider, Cox Cable, was the monopoly here in VA for years. They were the only cable provider in the area, the first to offer high speed internet and the only company offering all 3 services. They dominated this area my entire life. In a few short years Verizon FIOS has managed to force its way to the top around the country, including here. Now, Cox is still big (hehe) around here but it can't compete on a national level the way Verizon or Comcast can. You even see these services offered at a group discount through employers. My family recently made the switch for just that reason. Saving money is great and all, but if the competition dries up we may be worse off in the long run.

Maybe your burning house analogy is right on the nose. What are our choices? This monopoly or that one? Should I really choose smaller business over the affordability, accessibility and superior quality big companies can afford to provide? I don't know. I try to support the little guy as much as possible, but they don't always have what I want or need.
Yeah. My intention, or purpose, isn't necessarily to be say "No! You can't have Comcast or Netflix on your PS3!"

This trend is just worrying. I see a bunch of monopolies getting together to help each other out. UFC, Netflix, Facebook, Comcast, Microsoft...they all dominate their own respective markets. And now they're teaming up to feed off each other.

But, like you said: the little guys don't always have everything. Partially because they're crowded out. And it is nice to have these services that we undoubtedly use at quick reach.

It simply troubles me to see this much collusion, especially in our own industry which is already highly monopolized.
Another great read!!

I was trying to stream the hockey game over my PS3 on the weekend since I had family over for Thanksgiving. I have a bunch of different streaming sites I use but none of them worked on the PS3. The only way I could have watched the Leafs game was if I spent over $100 on CenterIce since there's an app for it on the XMB, and I'd have to be out of the Leafs' broadcasting region so the game would have been blocked out for me anyways. I ended up just streaming it on my laptop for everyone (couldn't find an s-video cable to show it on the TV) which probably used up over a gig of my 10GB data cap (the most I can get out in the country) -___- Not sure if this was at all relevant but I'll take any chance I get to say "Fuck Rogers".
Beautiful piece. For an example of how bad a thing these monopolies can be you really have to look no further than the Canadian telecom industry... :(
@ScottyG - Oh really?

I'm not familiar with it. Is this a recent thing? I know Harper has been going on a deregulatory rampage since becoming the Prime Minister.
Yeah, it's bad. I don't really know all the details but :

They were still allowed to force contracts onto customers (They cancelled that policy only a year ago). Even if the service is shit, which Bell totally is, you were locked in. As if you're dependant on them. They decide what you should put up with or get nothing. There is next to no competition (2 or 3 providers). I'm speaking for Quebec.
.. what I found interesting about the new Microsoft TV offerings is that they include Crackle... which is owned by Sony and is primarily a free library of old Sony TV shows and movies.

Not sure how that works into the monopoly theme... but it's interesting that one of the 3 monopolies in terms of gaming seem to be cooperating when it comes to the video aspect - colluding with the enemy as it were. In fact, Crackle isn't even a separate thing on the PS3 yet (it's not included with Netflix and the other video offerings) but instead it's found through the PS3 browser as an linked source.

Very odd!

Oh, and I think that with the coming generation of internet connected TV's, Microsoft's offerings may not matter very shortly. Neither will Comcast or anyone else's. In my area I really only have a choice between Shaw and Telus for cable TV... but with my iPad I can access apps for Rogers and for tons of other TV content. If anything, the current IPTV (internet protocol TV) may break the large monopolies. Paying for a Rogers cell phone account could also net me the ability to watch Rogers TV channels for free. Many people may opt not to bother at all with a cable bill and get the freebies offered elsewhere.
@Elsa - But Rogers, from my understanding, is itself already a large conglomerate in what can be accurately described as an oligopoly. It leads the Canadian telecommunications industry by a wide margin. That merely extends its reach.

http://mobilesyrup.com/2011/02/23/report-rogers-to-have-35-7-market-share-by-the-end-of-2012/?utm_source=feedburner

As I've noted before, competition in a market is largely formulated by combining the market share of the four largest firms in an industry. In Canadian wireless telecommunications, the biggest three account for 90% of the entire industry. Which, is an astounding number. Not even the American wireless industry is that concentrated.

http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2010/5/comScore_Reports_March_2010_U.S._Mobile_Subscriber_Market_Share

If we use the same metric, the top 3 carriers muster only a combined rate of 68.3%, and using the proper 4-firm metric, 80.3% - Canadian wireless telecoms still outdo their American counterparts in terms of sheer domination.
Exactly... but the increased competition from consoles and IPTV in general may actually help to break up those monopolies... at least I hope so! We pay WAAAAY too much for cable TV up here.
Well, it depends.

If consoles are being used as trojan horses to strengthen Rogers, Bell, Comcast, and AT&T, then it's questionable. But if they were to bring over individual channels, build its on line up of programming, and actually competed against those companies, then it's possible.

But that'd require a lot of money in licensing fees, and an entire new business to manage. It'd mean Microsoft would be setting out to compete against them. Which it doesn't seem like -- it looks like they're being used as a trojan horse.
To some degree you are right... but TV viewing habits are changing now that people are gaining access to worldwide IPTV channels (from Europe and Britain, etc) and with the gradual popularity of things like YouTube, Netflix, Revision3 TV, Crackle, etc. None of these are tied to specific networks - which tend (in Canada) to be owned by the cable providers. I do think that any competition at this point is good competition... though in the end, those large cable companies may end up making more money by licensing their various shows to "sub-providers" like potential MicrosoftTV or AppleTV. Still, it means increased choice for the consumer, and increased options - more than what we had a few short years ago when the only cable provider in my area was Shaw. (Telus was a phone provider and only recently got into providing TV service which it does through an internet protocol).

Back to Top
DLC   |   BEST Games of 2012   |   Best PC Games   |   Best PS3 Games   |   Best Xbox 360 Games   |   Best Wii U Games   |   Best 3DS Games




All content is yours to recycle through our Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing requiring attribution. Our communities are obsessed with videoGames, movies, anime, and toys.

Living the dream since March 16, 2006

Advertising on destructoid is available: Please contact them to learn more