There are many stories to be told about the collapse of the proposed AT&T/T-Mobile merger. One of them underscores, once again, the vitality of an advocacy press and bloggers who ask questions and hammer away at the truth in a way that much of the media simply does not. And while there were many involved in that effort, LGBT bloggers and gay media in particular were critical.
The merger blew up for a variety of reasons: AT&T's timing was horrible, with Occupy Wall Street focusing on corporate injustice as President Obama heads into a tough reelection; the promise of massive job creation just didn't add up; and the Justice Department was on a winning streak with antitrust cases.
But another reason attributed is the backfiring of AT&T's aggressive lobbying, getting nonprofit organizations and civil rights groups to support the merger -- in what looked like an exchange for cold, hard cash.
It was in early June when gay bloggers first got wind of the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation's endorsement of the merger. As Towleroad put it, "GLAAD Touts AT&T-- T-Mobile Merger as 'Social Justice' in Bizarre Endorsement Letter to FCC." The letter from GLAAD to the FCC indeed connected "faster wireless" to "social justice": "The LGBT community has a longstanding commitment to all forms of social justice. That is why we look at the deployment of faster wireless Internet options not only from financial and technological viewpoints but also in terms of how this improves society."
Americablog asked, "What is a gay rights organization doing weighing in on a phone company merger?" Queerty and The Bilerico Project bore in as well. Many noted the $50,000 donation that GLAAD had received from AT&T, one of several groups, like the NAACP, that backed the merger and got cash from the telecommunications giant. It also came to light, as Dan Savage at Slog noted, that GLAAD had apparently written another letter to the FCC opposing net neutrality -- AT&T's position -- only to send a second letter on the topic asking that the first be withdrawn, implying it was forged and noting that the signature was not that of the GLAAD president. Something very strange was going on.
A few days later, Laurie Perper, the former GLAAD co-chair, appeared on my radio program on SiriusXM, making serious allegations: GLAAD's president, Jarrett Barrios, had supported the merger and, initially, opposed net neutrality, because he was trading favors with a GLAAD board member who'd backed him in various battles at the group -- a former AT&T lobbyist named Troup Coronado, who was still working with the company.
The following day, after refusing to come on my show and respond, Barrios gave an interview to The Bilerico Project in which he basically admitted to a cover-up: the initial FCC letter opposing net neutrality was not a forgery but was sent by his office, though mistakenly, supposedly by his assistant. (What would be revealed in the days to follow was that another board member, after seeing the anti-net-neutrality letter filed with the FCC -- a form letter AT&T had apparently written itself -- went ballistic and forced Barrios to withdraw the letter. ) More details surfaced in the Washington Blade, on FiredogLake and in other gay media about the past involvements of Coronado, the former AT&T lobbyist on the GLAAD board, as an uproar ensued among LGBT activists nationwide. Pam Spaulding at PamsHouseBlend and others -- including me -- called for Barrios to resign. Within days he was out, as were six GLAAD board members, including AT&T's Troup Coronado.
Media organizations that hadn't covered any of the controversy (at least, not until the end), like The Boston Globe and The New York Times, wrote editorials commending gay bloggers for pressuring Barrios to resign and certainly noted that the events were highly troubling. (GLAAD later reversed its position, withdrawing support of the AT&T/T-Mobile merger.) The embarrassment for AT&T, already seeing its merger beginning to teeter for various other reasons, only helped to escalate the problems, bringing attention to how the company was buying off civil rights groups. And none of that would have happened without a vibrant gay press and LGBT blogs and websites shining a light on it.
Follow Michelangelo Signorile on Twitter: www.twitter.com/msignorile
Josh Levy: The Top 10 Ways Mobile Carriers Tried to Screw Us in 2011
Lets' add;
After Gay Rights Group(s) Took 'Bribes' And Acted In Bad Faith To Help Pass It
As a gay person, I was advocating FOR the merger so my gay friends stuck in T-Mobile contracts could join us in the 21st Century ;)
=======================================================================
I'm sure some here are old enough to remember when Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill (under Reagan) said, "All politics is local." Looks like it can even be said that some politics "is" personal.
====================================
aliberalkidd:This is why I encourage OWS not to allow any groups like GLAAD, NAACP, Democrats, or others to tie their personal agendas to the OWS movement, because these cash seeking pigs in the NAACP, GLAAD, politic and others are as just as complicit in the corruption of America as corporate greed.
There is no way in hell the NAACP should have agreed to this merger that would have further limited telecommunication choices for poor Americans.
And I see no evidence that "Gay Media Helped Sink the AT&T/T-Mobile Merger" after they tried to help it pass!
This is why I am offended when gays try to wear and/or own the civil rights and liberal brand. True Liberals are beyond reproach.
There is a difference between media and advocacy groups. The article notes the outcry from various gay bloggers who were questioning GLAAD's motives and interest in this deal. Bloggers count as "media."
"This is why I am offended when gays try to wear and/or own the civil rights and liberal brand. True Liberals are beyond reproach."
Your statement suggests gays are not "true liberals" and that they falsely claim to be fighting for civil rights. The vast majority of liberals would disagree. They affirm that there is no difference between gay rights and civil rights.
Please attempt to distinguish an advocacy group and the people they claim to represent. GLAAD is not all gay people in the slightest.
Thanks for nothing. As a consumer of ATT cell service, I am now denied all the benefits that T-Mobile was going to provide.
Don't forget to mention Reddit, and other forums and email newsgroups that actually made you and the other blogs you mention aware of the messed up relationship between GLAAD and AT&T. Without them you probably would not have been aware of the issues in the first place.
Bloggers are always being criticized for stealing and not giving credit where credit is due, so why not shine a light on those who made you aware of the situation in the first place? Do you always read the same six blogs every day?
I think we had a bit of a role too at Feast of Fun. Don't forget podcasts! We broke the story on our blog days before many of the blogs you mentioned (including yours) got around to it. Bilerico even paraphrased our article to write their own! What gives?
We actually interviewed people directly involved in the matter: Jarrett Barios, the President of the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation and Timothy Karr the Campaign Director for Save The Internet.
Don't be too eager to throw yourself a parade.
This AT&T merger is just the tip of the iceberg. Right now Congress is trying to kill the internet altogether with SOPA- the Stop Online Piracy Act, a bill intended to stop online piracy but gives Corporate Hollywood and the U.S. Government unlimited power to censor the internet and will threaten whistle-blowing and other online forms of free speech.
The old guard is obsolete and in the way. Thanks for all you've done and good bye.
They would rather spend money on getting around local & legal restrictions, than to upgrade their own equipment.
Just another business looking for a quick cheap fix than supporting it's own infrastructure.