Internet Service Providers in 38 U.S. cities, including AT&T in Los Angeles, were offering high-speed broadband connections for the same price as sluggish ones to different households in the same city. In almost every case, lower-income, less White, and historically redlined neighborhoods tended to disproportionately get offered the worst deals.
AT&T, our investigation found, was 21 percentage points more likely to offer slow service to households in L.A.’s poorest neighborhoods than the company was in the city’s richest areas. An AT&T spokesperson called our analysis “fundamentally flawed.”
A report released around the same time by the California Community Foundation found Charter Communications, L.A.’s dominant cable provider, engaging in similar conduct. “People who live in higher poverty neighborhoods are not only routinely offered slower service at higher prices, but are offered contracts with worse terms and conditions,” the report read. “For example, Charter’s…promotional offers – guaranteeing a period of time before prices will increase – are for two years in wealthy communities, but for just one year in high-poverty communities.”
@ISIDEWITH3mos3MO
@ISIDEWITH3mos3MO
@EnergeticRhinoGreen3mos3MO
I don't see anything indicating that LA has banned anything. What I do is the that an understaffed department can investigate allegations of "digital discrimination" but doesn't even mention the word penalty once. Looks like more window dressing to me
