Tag Archives: Rogers

August 17, 2008 | Opinion, TV

CRTC roundup: Cancon porn, TSN2 and the Rural Channel

Lots more fun out of the CRTC this week:

Insert “beaver” joke here

The biggest news (or at least the most titillating) is the approval of a new Canadian-based pornography channel. Called Northern Peaks (cute), it would feature 50% Canadian content (i.e. Canadian-produced porn) from various categories, including pornographic sitcoms and game shows (that actually sounds like fun, but it’s really just the company covering all bases, so to speak).

The 50% mark is actually quite unusual, and is well above what would normally be required for such a network. But apparently it was the applicant’s request, according to the National Post:

Mr. Donnelly said he was required to offer as little as 15% Canadian content to appease regulators.

But because he wants “to legitimately be Canada’s adult channel,” he started at half Canadian. He said there is a huge unfulfilled market in Canada for local porn. Beginning last year, he began getting calls from cable companies looking to license his Canadian productions.

“I’ve always found there’s a real turn-on to watching and knowing it’s people you could run into in the grocery store,” he said.

But with more than 200 titles (and presumably they can be replayed over and over again, since most viewers wouldn’t mind repeats of classic programming), he thinks he can do it.

Quoth the CRTC: “The Commission did not receive any interventions in connection with this application.” Really? Not even from the pizza guy? Or that nosy peeping-tom neighbour you’re just waiting to have sex in front of so they can masturbate to it?

Needless to say the media had a field day with this one, the National Post turning it into a front-page story (complete with photo) and an opinion piece that’s pretty tongue-in-cheeks (sorry) asking readers to comment and either denounce the channel or come up with some programming ideas for it. (A funny side-effect of the latter is offhand mentions of Sheila Copps and Avi Lewis, which means searches for these two under “related stories” brings up a comment about a porn channel they have nothing to do with.)

One comment posted to the Post:

When do the adults at the Post return from summer holiday?

Of course, it wasn’t just the Post. The Globe and Mail also had a lengthy article on it (about 12 inches), and the news was picked up by Canadian Press and Reuters and Agence France-Presse and reached news outlets all around the world (well, those two anyway). It also got a mention on an anti-abortion (but still pro-women) conservative website.

The channel is being run by Real Productions (apparently not this Real Productions nor that Real Productions, which appear lower in the Google raking and I’m guessing confused or offended at least a few potential customers), which is run by a man named Shaun Donnelly (but not this Shaun Donnelly, Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Europe and the Middle East).

Due to the nature of the channel, it can’t be included in any channel packages and must be specifically requested by the subscriber. The network also promises to spend at least 25% of revenues on developing new programming.

Also of note is the 100% closed-captioning requirement, which may foreshadow a fight with Videotron concerning their demand that they not have to closed-caption on-demand video porn.

UPDATE (Aug. 18): The Globe has more on the channel, including an idea of what a broadcast day would look like. And then even more on the channel here. (They won’t let this story go, will they?)

UPDATE (Aug. 24): Farked. With suggestions on Canadian porn titles. Some of these people should write headlines for a living.

Continue reading →

April 24, 2008 | Canadiens, Montreal, Video

Recognize any of these faces?

Faces from the Habs riot of April 21, 2008

More faces from the … ahem … “alleged” rioters of Monday night.

Also posted on YouTube is the security video of a Rogers Wireless store downtown that was looted Monday night. They couldn’t take any cellphones because those were tied to the display tables, and those prepaid phone cards are useless because they have to be pre-activated by the cashier. But have fun with those charging adapters, I guess.

February 14, 2008 | Business, My articles

Getting biblical about spam

As promised, today’s article in Business Observer discusses brick-and-mortar companies who violate email netiquette and send unsolicited marketing emails to people. It’s based on three companies I talked about in my “not above outright spam” series:

Kanuk (which is still sending me such emails)
Rogers (my wireless provider, who seem to think being a customer is carte blanche for spamming)
CIBC

In all three cases, I can only theorize about why my email was added to these marketing lists, because not one of them responded to repeated requests for an explanation, the first as a regular spam victim, the second as a reporter researching a story. CIBC’s media relations guy asked for more information about the email, but I never heard from them or their email services provider Komunik again.

A fourth company, Chapters/Indigo, was left out because (a) the article was already way too long, (b) they responded to my request and investigated promptly, and (c) their investigation determined that my mother signed up for an account there two years ago. Here’s what it would have looked like:

Company: Indigo Books and Music
Date: Sept. 24, 2007
What they were selling: Book bargains
Email service provider: ThinData

Indigo’s email followed what has apparently become an industry standard of having people fill out web forms before they can unsubscribe from email lists. And like other companies, it assumed I have an account and wouldn’t let me unsubscribe unless I logged in. But Indigo responded promptly to my initial complaint with a thorough investigation.

Well, actually ThinData found a blog post I wrote with the complaint and then alerted the company. Within two days I had a response from Indigo’s customer service director explaining that someone else (my mother) had used the address to set up an account in 2005, and they have “only recently been reaching out to our past customers.” He unsubscribed me from the list and apologized for problems I had unsubscribing. Both Indigo and ThinData provided copies of extensive privacy and anti-spam policies.

The original message violated some best practices for email marketing that ThinData swears by, such as providing a simple one-click way to unsubscribe. Nevertheless, the provider accepted the response from Indigo and said they “consider this matter resolved.”

That last part sort of irked me. Despite promises that they’re 100% against spam, these companies seem to defer to their clients when it comes to actually determining whether policies are being followed. Explanations are accepted at face value and no independent investigations are done.

The article also includes some suggested best practices for commercial email marketers, compiled from industry sources and the Canadian Task Force on Spam. Hopefully some companies will be a bit more strict about conforming to them.

I’ll let you know if any of these companies decide to respond now that the article is out. In the meantime, do you have any spam gripes about companies that should know better?

January 15, 2008 | Business, Montreal, TV

Rogers TQS?

TQS - Le mouton rouge de la télé!

La Presse has a rumour (and CBC/CP rewrites that rumour) that Rogers is going to be buying the Montreal and Quebec City TQS stations, while Radio Nord (which already owns TQS stations in Outaouais and Abitibi) would buy stations in outlying regions.

Rogers won’t comment and Radio Nord denies they’re buying the stations.

I suppose it makes sense. Rogers owns what’s left of Citytv, a network without a station in Canada’s second-largest city. (I can just imagine the kind of outcry we’d have if they tried to convert TQS into an anglophone City station.) And if they are buying TQS out, chances are it would be for a significant discount.

TQS’s creditor protection lasts until Thursday.

UPDATE: Meanwhile, at Le Devoir, Paul Cochon looks at the blame game, and wonders why Quebecor (which owns TVA) isn’t being blamed in the same way Radio-Canada and the CRTC are.

UPDATE (Jan. 16): TQS gets its extension, and now has until Feb. 29 to decide what to do with itself. Meanwhile, Steve Proulx doesn’t think La Presse’s “scoop” is any more than idle speculation, and he thinks the CRTC is more to blame for TQS’s troubles than Radio-Canada.

December 6, 2007 | Business, Navel-gazing

My Rogers nightmare continues

Rogers

Today was bill-payment day, when I login to my bank’s website, remember that Firefox somehow causes Desjardins an “internal error,” switch to Safari, login again, and pay my bills for the month.

Two bills, for cable/Internet and hydro, I get in the mail. One bill (credit card) still goes to my parents’ house, but I have all the info online anyway so I don’t need it.

And then there’s Rogers. A few months ago I switched from paper billing to online billing because I wanted a copy of my call history. And the only way I could get that for free was to have online billing. But since then it’s been a nightmare trying to get access to my bills. And even when I do get access, my “call history” is either entirely blank or throws up an error when I try to read it.

Today, my login was “unsuccessful” and my account suspended for no apparent reason (the password was good, and it was my first login attempt). I gave up and decided I’m going to have them switch me back. And since I can’t login to their website, it’ll have to be by phone.
My request was simple: switch from online to paper billing

I press 8 for English, and go through their voice menu. I have to answer a bunch of questions (is my problem “billing” or “account management”?), get stuck in dead-ends (no I’m not trying to pay my bill) and after a half-dozen of these menus (finally telling it I want to speak to a representative), I get another menu asking me if it’s for wireless, cable, Internet or other, then another asking if it’s about a cellphone, blackberry, pager or other, then another asking me to enter my 10-digit phone number, then I’m put on hold.

First representative asked for my phone number, my name, my postal code and my date of birth. She’s very nice and after I tell her my problem she explains that she’ll need to send me to something called “E-care” and they’ll fix it right away. She also says I can do it online much easier, but when I tell her Rogers.com is a nightmare to use she’s sympathetic and says something along the lines of how some people have problems.

Second representative asked for my phone number, my name, my postal code and my date of birth. I tell him my problem and he says the system that takes care of this is “not available to (him) at the moment”, so he’s going to transfer me to another representative who’ll take care of it right away.

Third representative asked me for my phone number, my name, my postal code and my date of birth. I tell her my problem and she explains that her computer can’t make that change and she’ll need to send me to “e-care” so they can reset it. She also says I can do it online. I am confused, because I already thought I was at “e-care”, but she corrects me. So I guess Rep #2 screwed me there.

Fourth representative has a thick Indian accent. He asks me, one at a time, for my phone number, my name, my postal code and my date of birth. I tell him my problem, and he asks me why I want to change. Rather than spend 20 minutes trying to argue with this guy about the hellhole that is Rogers.com, I bite my tongue and just say I prefer paper billing. He explains I can do it online, but he can do it himself as well.

He explains he’s made the change and now my previous bills (that were only online) are now inaccessible. I ask him how the heck I’m supposed to get copies of them for tax purposes now. He says he can put me back on online billing, and I can download the bills and then switch back. I figure now I have to tell him about not being able to login, and he unlocks my account lockout. I login (with the same password I used before) and I get access to the system. He explains (“Do you see the girl on the couch? Just under her…”) what to do and I end the call.

Total call time: 12:37.

I go to this month’s bill, and click on the button that gives me a PDF version. I get this:

System Error / Erreur système

We’re sorry, the epost service you have requested is temporarily unavailable. Please try again shortly. We apologize for any inconvenience.

Désolé, le service postel que vous avez demandé est temporairement inaccessible. Veuillez essayer à nouveau un peu plus tard. Nous nous excusons de tout inconvénient que cela pourrait vous causer.

So I can’t download my bills, which means I can’t unsubscribe from online billing, which means I just wasted 20 minutes.

Thanks Rogers.

Online billing, paper bullshit

But, I hear you ask, what about all the trees I’ll be hurting?

Well, since I’ll need to print my bills out anyway, the effect is pretty minimal. They pay postage, so that’s not a factor.

Besides, Rogers doesn’t really seem to care about the environment themselves, as evidenced by a letter I received in the mail this month.

The letter, by Rogers Wireless president Rob Bruce, has nothing but bullshit marketingese like “continued loyalty”, “never take for granted”, “working hard”, “committed”, “exceed your expectations”, “unprecedented”, “Canada’s Most Reliable Network” (capitalized, of course), “clearest reception and fewest dropped calls.*” (their footnote, not mine), “moving forward”, “even more innovative technology”, “improve your experience with us”, “our commitment” and “work relentlessly”. And he wishes me and my family a “happy upcoming holiday season.”

What gets me about the letter is that it was mailed to me on thick bond paper (about as thick as a business card) in a thick envelope. Could they not have just emailed this BS to me?

November 19, 2007 | Business, Opinion, Web design

Rogers not above outright spam

Going through my spam folder again today, I noticed an email from Rogers, my wireless provider. It was a promotional message (as opposed to the one I get every month telling me my bill is ready) announcing, and I kid you not folks, that they redesigned their website.

(Email sent Nov. 13, 2007. Click to embiggen)

Since I’m not a fan of spam, especially from large companies that should know better like Chapters/Indigo and CIBC (the latter — a bank — has still not responded to my request for an explanation beyond assigning it a support ticket number), I couldn’t let this one go without mentioning it as well.

The big difference here is that I am a Rogers customer, so they didn’t harvest my email or take it from an old form gathering dust in their basement. But I call it spam because I never asked for it and it’s purely promotional in nature.

Also problematic:

The email is not personalized, even with my name, violating one of Rogers’s own anti-fraud policies. Further complicating matters is that I’m invited to click on image links that bring me to addresses that start with http://mailtrack.rnm.ca… (which redirects me to a Rogers website).
The message is HTML only, with no plain-text version
Clicking on links to visit the “new” Rogers.com brings me to this horribly-designed web page which asks me to choose my province (and language). Don’t they already know this information? They provide me wireless service after all.
Like a lot of these messages I see, there’s a tiny link at the bottom for people who want to “opt-out of future email communications” (which I can assume implies I never opted-in in the first place). That link brings me to a login page. Once I login, I’m brought to the standard homepage with no clue given on where I should go to opt out of emails. I’ve looked around for about 10 minutes now and still haven’t found it.
I’ve had to login three times browsing the site. And now they’ve just suspended my account for 24 hours because the password I used 5 minutes ago is no longer the right one. Oh wait, it hasn’t. My previous login is now still valid. Top-notch security there, Rogers.
There’s no difference between the “new” Rogers website and the old one, except for a few trivial changes. It looks exactly the same. The entire purpose of the email is put into question.

I’ve filled out an “abuse” form and emailed the sender of the email message asking for an explanation of how I got this email. I’ll update if I get one.

October 25, 2007 | Sports, TV

Rogers Sportsnet 2: Judgment play

The CRTC has approved a specialty TV service for Rogers called Rogers Sportsnet 2 (really? Couldn’t come up with anything better than that?), which is focused exclusively (90%) on soccer, cricket and rugby (also known as “the lesser team sports that only old British people watch). In fact, the license specifically prohibits the channel from carrying anything related to men’s ice hockey, basketball, U.S. and Canadian football and baseball (in other words, NHL, NBA, NFL, CFL, MLB, their minor leagues, junior leagues, amateur leagues, pee-wee leagues, street leagues or any other versions of these sports where the players have penises). This is to prevent competition with existing networks like TSN and RDS.

The application got two interventions, one from CTVglobemedia (which owns TSN), asking for a tougher restriction (Rogers initially offered a prohibition only on the major leagues, but agreed to the change), and the other from the Asian Television Network, which has its own cricket channel called Cricket Plus.

The latter got a funny-sounding response from Rogers, who said that because their channel focuses also on soccer and rugby, “the proposed service would not serve the interests of the cricket enthusiast as effectively as Cricket Plus.” Which is kind of like saying that because RDS carries baseball and football, it won’t serve the interests of hockey enthusiasts as well as the NHL Network. The idea of national exclusivity contracts (which is why NHL Network doesn’t carry any Canadian games) wasn’t brought up.

But that’s neither here nor there, since Cricket Plus doesn’t enjoy any guarantee from competition. What is interesting however, is that Cricket Plus is carried by Rogers cable, and so if the channels do end up competing with each other, it might be in Rogers’s interest to either remove Cricket Plus from its cable lineup or otherwise make it fail.

But perhaps I’m just being paranoid.

September 28, 2007 | Media

Big media mergers remind us of past mistakes

The CRTC has approved two big media ownership changes:

Astral Media, owners of The Movie Network, Teletoon, Astral Photo, and lots of radio stations in Quebec and Atlantic Canada including the Énergie (CKMF 94.3) and Rock Détente (CITE 107.3) networks, will take over Standard Broadcasting, which owns stations in Western Canada, but also three English Montreal stations — CHOM 97.7, CJAD-800 and CJFM Mix 96. Montreal is the only market where there’s any overlap, and even then they work in two different languages.

Rogers (telecom, Maclean’s, Rogers Sportsnet, OMNI and 51 radio stations) will buy Citytv (5 stations in Toronto and Western Canada) after CTVglobemedia (Globe and Mail, CTV, TSN/RDS, Discovery Channel Canada, Comedy Network, MuchMusic, Bravo! Canada, A-Channel, your first-born child) was ordered to divest itself of the competing TV network in its acquisition of CHUM Ltd.

I can’t pay my bills, and I’m cranky

So I’m trying to pay my monthly bills tonight, and boy is it needlessly complicated. You see, I tried going to my bank’s website and logging in like I do every month, but they’re having “internal server problems”, so I’ll have to wait.

So I went to the Rogers website, where my cellphone bill has to be paid by tomorrow, and tried to login there so I can pay by credit card or something. But the site wouldn’t accept my password, and then locked my account. I tried calling them to have the account unlocked, but they’re experiencing a “higher than normal volume of calls” (at 11:30pm!), so I gave up after a few minutes.

So instead of paying my bills, I’m going to criticize Rogers on their email policies. And since I’m particularly cranky, I’m going to be harsh.

Last month, I was forced to sign up for online billing because that’s the only way Rogers will provide me with a log of what calls I make. (Actually, they don’t. Every time I try to download this log, it shows me a blank page.)

So this month, instead of a letter in the mail with my bill, I got an email that looked like this. Here’s the problems:

The shortcuts for “forget your password” and “forget your id” are www.rogers.com/forgot and www.rogers.com/forget respectively. And that’s not a mistake. A past-tense forgetting is about passwords, and a present-tense forgetting is about IDs.
The first link, to check out your bill, says www.rogers.com but actually links (in the email) to a page at www.shoprogers.com. A link that gives one domain and actually leads to another is a textbook example of a trick used in email fraud. How am I supposed to know shoprogers.com is owned by rogers.com?
The email does not use your name or any identifying information about you other than your email address and an internally-generated 9-digit account number.

This doesn’t inspire confidence.

June 18, 2007 | Business

Some tales of customer service woe

Roberto Rocha’s Your Call is Important to Us series is off to a … start. His blog has received five comments so far, and all but one are about Bell. He even has a cute little video explaining how the series will work for those with ADD who can’t read the article or blog posts.

In honour of the series, here are a couple of tales of my own about recent experiences with customer service: