TIME

Shy Bladder Advocacy Group Takes Offense at Rob Lowe Commercial

Hilarity For Charity's (HFC) 3rd Annual Los Angeles HFC Variety Show
Rob Lowe attends the 3rd Annual Hilarity for Charity Variety Show to benefit the Alzheimer's Association, presented by Genworth at Hollywood Palladium on October 17, 2014 in Hollywood, California. Araya Diaz—WireImage

"It's a situation that a lot of people don't understand"

An advocacy group for people who suffer from shy bladder syndrome has taken offense at a DirecTV advertisement that features actor Rob Lowe standing at a urinal, unable to relieve himself due to excessive shyness.

Steve Soifer, CEO of the International Paruresis Association, told the Associated Press that advertisement pokes fun at a real-life ailment that afflicts roughly 7% of the population.

“We don’t mind if people have a little fun with it,” Soifer said in an interview with AP. “In this particular case, the portrayal is making it look ridiculous, that this guy is a loser for having a problem.”

A DirecTV spokesperson said they would continue running the ad, and that it was not meant to be taken literally.

[AP]

TIME celebrity

These Ads Show Rob Lowe Like You’ve Truly Never Seen Him Before

As in, really ugly and creepy

Well, this is literally the most hideous we’ve ever seen the notoriously gorgeous (and possibly ageless?) Rob Lowe look.

A new ad campaign from DirecTV features the West Wing and Parks and Recreation actor as a few distinct versions of himself. First, there’s him as a DirecTV customer, which is a regular, handsome, gregarious Rob Lowe. But there’s also him as a cable user, which is a disgusting and creepy Rob Lowe (see above) along with a completely hideous Rob Lowe (see below.)

We have to admit that this is some pretty effective advertising. If you’re saying that using DirecTV will make me as hot and youthful as Rob Lowe (even though he’s 26 years older than me), sign me up.

 

MONEY

How to Watch Every NFL Game This Season Without Going Broke

guys on couch cheering for football team
Michael Cogliantry—Getty Images

The 2014 NFL season starts Thursday, September 4. Here are 5 essential tips for tuning in to all the NFL action your eyeballs can handle throughout the regular season, and beyond.

Watching the NFL used to be simple. Fans could just plop down on the couch on Sunday afternoon, click on the local broadcast station, and they’d be contentedly screaming at the ineptness of the local team before they knew it. Then came exclusive NFL contracts with pay TV providers and sports channels, plus Thursday Night Football, plus a wide range of streaming options. Let’s not forget about the advent of fantasy football, which brought about the “need” for fans to keep tabs not just on their local team, but on the players they drafted across the league and relied upon to stomp on the teams run by their college buddies and office mates.

Stuff got complicated, at least compared to how it used to be. For help sorting out how and where to watch the NFL this season without spending a fortune, here are some handy tips.

All fans can watch some Thursday Night Football for free. According to NFL.com, “Thursday Night Football” starts one week from today, on September 11. That’s silly, of course. Even CBS Sports acknowledges that Thursday Night Football begins tonight, September 4, with rival NBC broadcasting the season-opening matchup of the Green Bay Packers versus the Super Bowl champion Seattle Seahawks. Anyone with access to free network TV can watch the game.

What the NFL is referring to is that September 11 is when the NFL Network begins its airing of Thursday Night Football. But even then, it’s not necessary for fans to have a pay TV package that includes the NFL Network. For the first time, seven Thursday night games, between September 11 and October 23, are being broadcast on both the NFL Network and CBS. An additional Thursday night game will be aired on NBC on Thanksgiving night. So unlike in the recent past, when the NFL Network had exclusive rights to almost all Thursday night games, even cheapskate fans without a pricey pay TV package get to tune in to some pro football on Thursdays. What’s more, whereas in the past Thursday night games tended to be dominated by mediocre matchups, this year’s lineup features several premier rivalries of teams with big fan bases, including Steelers-Ravens (September 11), Giants-Redskins (September 25), and Jets-Patriots (October 16).

On Sundays, check out networks for free, or DirecTV at a price. Fox and CBS will broadcast NFL Sunday afternoon games featuring local-market teams—and another game or two, usually—and NBC is yet again the network destination for Sunday Night Football.

For fans who want the freedom of tuning into any NFL game their hearts desire on Sundays, DirecTV is the go-to provider. Thanks to an exclusive contract with the NFL, DirecTV offers two packages to subscribers: the NFL Sunday Ticket ($40 per month for six months) and the supersized NFL Sunday Ticket Max ($55 per month for six months). Both options allow subscribers to tune in to any out-of-market NFL game on Sunday. The Max package comes with extra features including the Red Zone Channel (shows highlights and scoring plays of all Sunday games) and, notably, the ability to stream Sunday NFL games on your computer, tablet, or phone.

ESPN has a stranglehold on Monday Night Football. Nothing new here: ESPN has the rights to air Monday Night Football. The MNF action begins with a double header on Monday, September 8, starting with a 7:10 ET kickoff of the Detroit Lions hosting the New York Giants, followed immediately by a matchup of the Arizona Cardinals hosting the San Diego Chargers at 10:20 ET. If you don’t have a pay TV package, or you don’t have a package that includes ESPN, you’re out of luck (though there are some less-than-fully-legal streaming methods out there). Monday Night Football is available for streaming—for subscribers only—at WatchESPN.com. Subscribers have the option of tuning in via desktop, tablet, Google Chromecast, Xbox Live Gold, and several other methods, but not through phones.

Here’s how to watch games in just 30 minutes. In addition to ESPN and DirecTV streaming options, a variety of Game Rewind packages are offered by the NFL, allowing fans to watch full game replays on-demand on your choice of devices after they’ve aired on TV. As a bonus, subscribers can use a Condensed Game feature, in which the typical, stretched-out 3.5-hour football viewing experience is boiled down to roughly 30 action-packed minutes. Fans have the option of buying Game Rewind for a single team ($30 for the season) or all teams ($40) during the regular season. A Season Plus package ($70) includes all of the above, as well as access to view the NFL playoffs and the Super Bowl—on-demand, after they’ve aired on TV.

(The alternative to Game Rewind is simply recording games on a DVR, then fast-forward or replay to your heart’s content.)

Yet another streaming option is available for subscribers to Verizon Wireless More Everything plan. Verizon used to charge $5 monthly for subscribers to live stream nationally televised games on Monday, Thursday, and Sunday nights, but it dropped the fee for this season. Fans can also use their devices for live streaming local-market games on Sunday afternoons.

For now, hated blackout rules remain in effect. In recent years, the NFL has received pressure from fan groups as well as the FCC to get rid of blackout rules, which stipulate that networks will not broadcast local home games if the stadium isn’t at least 85% sold out within 72 hours of kickoff. The rules threatened to ruin several Sundays for many fans around the country last season, even during the playoffs, but several teams ran last-minute ticket promotions to boost attendance and thereby avoid blacking out broadcasts. In a few cases, local corporations or the NFL franchises themselves bought thousands of tickets and distributed them free of charge so that games wouldn’t be blacked out.

Lately, the league has been threatening to move all NFL games to cable if the FCC insists on eliminating the blackout rule. That, in effect, would black out the games for everyone who doesn’t have a pay TV package. So for now at least, the blackout rules remain, and fans of local teams that have trouble selling out—Jacksonville Jaguars, Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Buffalo Bills, we’re looking at you—are likely to face the choice of paying up for a ticket or missing the game a few times this season.

TIME technology

Comcast, AT&T Say They’re Not Big Enough Yet

Comcast
The Comcast Corp. logo is seen as Brian Roberts, chairman and chief executive officer of Comcast Corp., right, speaks during a news conference at the National Cable and Telecommunications Association (NCTA) Cable Show in Washington, D.C., U.S., on Tuesday, June 11, 2013. Bloomberg—Bloomberg via Getty Images

At a Senate hearing ahead of major merger melees

Two of the biggest players in the telecom industry faced off against a public interest group, a trade group and a satellite company at a Senate hearing Wednesday in a debate that will help set the stage for upcoming battles over the future of broadband, television and streaming video.

The hearing comes just as federal regulators are staffing up to review two mammoth mergers: One between Comcast and Time Warner Cable, and another between AT&T and DirecTV. To some degree, the hearing was only ceremonial: Congress won’t have any direct say over whether federal regulators approve or deny the mergers. But political winds in Washington can affect regulators’ moods, and the back-and-forth gave members of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation a chance to publicly speak their minds on the mergers.

While the discussion at the hearing was unflaggingly respectful, it touched, just below the surface, on what has become a fiercely ideological war with regard to the future of TV, with each side presenting a vision incompatible with the other’s.

Comcast and AT&T argued that massive consolidation in the telecom industry is good for consumers, good for innovation, and good for the free market. They warned that if the government does not allow the mergers to go through, incumbent telecom companies would no longer be able to invest in basic Internet infrastructure, leaving consumers to pay more for fewer Internet and TV options.

Representatives from advocacy group Public Knowledge, a TV writer’s guild, and satellite TV company Dish made the opposite case. They said that recent consolidation in the telecom industry has been terrible for consumers, driven up prices and driven down the quality of customer service. They also said the lack of competition has squashed innovation and investment in broadband infrastructure.

At the center of the discussion was Americans’ shifting TV-viewing habits. When Americans want to watch TV, they’re increasingly bypassing traditional set-top boxes, instead opting for their smartphones, tablets, and laptops. Online video consumption grew by 71% in the U.S. between 2012 and 2013, according to Nielsen.

That trend has been the driving force behind skyrocketing broadband subscriptions—a major cash cow for cable companies and for telecom companies that offer services faster than DSL. AT&T’s revenue from its U-Verse high-speed broadband business was up 29% from last year according to a recent quarterly report, for example. Comcast, which already has more than 21 million broadband subscribers, says the broadband business is one of its fastest-growing offerings.

That so many Americans are streaming more video online has also made online TV and video content companies, like Netflix, YouTube and Vimeo, fundamentally dependent on telecom companies’ pipes to reach customers. Public Knowledge’s Gene Kimmelman argued that no online video streaming company can exist without going through broadband providers like AT&T and Comcast, whose services are necessary to deliver streaming content to consumers. That sets up a potential problem, as Comcast could be incentivized not to carry Netflix or YouTube content as quickly as its own video offerings (Comcast owns NBCUniversal, a major content production company).

“Everyone who wants to make the online video system works needs to make a deal with Comcast,” he said.

Also addressed during the hearing was many Americans’ frustration at having to pay large bills for pay-TV—bills that have risen faster than inflation—to receive hundreds of channels. The non-profit consumers rights group, Consumers Union, has said that at least two-thirds of pay-TV customers [PDF] would prefer to pay less for a handful of programs that they actually watch. The disconnect between these two methods—known as “bundling” versus “a al carte”—is at the heart of the future of online video.

“The younger generation doesn’t want to spend $120 for 500 channels,” said Jeffrey Blum, a senior vice president of Dish, the second-largest satellite company in the country after DirecTV. But fixing the problem, he said, requires going up against incumbent telecom companies, like Comcast, AT&T and Verizon, which rely on bundling to underwrite their pay TV services, and would lose out if most Americans simply cut their pay-TV bill and began streaming shows online. Popular networks like ESPN would also lose out; in the current system, the telecom companies pay them large fees to redistribute their content.

Still, Blum said, there is already “too much power in the hands of too few” in the broadband space. A combined Comcast-Time Warner Cable “will have the incentive and ability to stifle competition,” he said.

Both Cohen and AT&T’s senior executive VP John Stankey dismissed concerns about anticompetitive behavior. In previous testimony before Congress, Comcast’s executive VP David Cohen has said that the merger between Comcast and Time Warner Cable will not affect competition since the companies do not currently compete in any geographic region, and that Comcast has “only to gain” from more people streaming video online. The more demand there is for online video, “the more demand there is for our broadband service,” he said at a previous hearing.

In February, Comcast made a bid to buy Time Warner Cable for $45 billion; in May, AT&T’s bid for DirecTV was worth $48.5 billion. Neither deal has yet to pass regulatory muster.

Both Cohen and Stankey also reiterated their companies’ commitment to the Federal Communication Commission’s now-defunct rules on “net neutrality,” the notion that broadband providers treat all content that passes over their pipes equally. While both expressed their opposition to some public interest groups’ hopes that the telecom industry would be recategorized as a “Title II” industry, giving the FCC much more regulatory control over broadband, they said they supported the FCC’s newly proposed net neutrality rules.

Those rules have come under fire because they allow broadband companies to redirect some content to a “fast lane,” while relegating most content to a slower, regular lane. Cohen said that while he “didn’t understand” what “fast lanes and slow lanes” even were, he said it was a non-issue. “We don’t have any,” he said. “We don’t have any plans to develop any.”

MONEY Customer Service

How To Break Up with Your Cable Company

140716_EM_cable_1
Getty Images

...or at Least Drive a Hard Bargain

If your relationship with your cable provider is driving you mad like this man, brace yourself. It’s only going to get worse.

The average monthly cable TV bill is rising 6% a year. It’s projected to hit $123 a month next year and top $200 by 2020, according to market research group NPD. To be fair, part of the surge is because the cost cable providers pay to license shows is getting steeper. But the near-monopoly that cable TV companies have in many places is to blame, too.

Most areas have just one or two pay-TV providers. And even if you’re lucky enough to have more choice, that will probably change if the Time Warner Cable-Comcast and AT&T-DirecTV deals are approved. And less choice means that the providers that remain don’t have to go above and beyond on customer service. As if they did already.

Can’t live without your favorite programs but fed up with the bill? Here are four moves you can make to cut the cost—and not all require you to cut the cord.

Downsize. How many of the 700+ channels that you get do you actually watch? A growing number of pay-TV providers are offering pared-down packages. Verizon recently rolled out its Select HD no-sports package that’s $15 a month cheaper than its $65 a month standard Prime package. Last year, Time Warner Cable launched Starter TV, a bundle of 20 premium channels plus HBO for $29.99 a month—40% less than its 200-channel, no-HBO option. And Cox Communication’s TV Starter is $24.99 a month for 155 channels vs. $49.99 for its Advanced package of 220 channels.

Play hardball. Despite their dominance, pay-TV providers are still loathe to lose customers, says digital media analyst Dan Rayburn. Call the cancellation department to talk with a retention specialist trained to hang on to customers. Ask about promotions or a discount if you’re a long-time customer. They’ll try hard to keep you, but if they don’t give, you can likely get a better deal as a new subscriber if you have a satellite dish or cable competitor where you live.

Go a la carte. Even though the Aero service that delivers low-cost broadcast TV via Internet shut down thanks to the recent Supreme Court ruling, there are still plenty of other lower cost alternatives for those who want to cut the cord, says technology industry analyst Jeff Kagan. Hulu Plus costs just $7.99 a month and shows many current programs the day after they air. If you can wait a season or two to catch up with your favorite shows, Netflix is $7.99 a month (though will go up $1 or $2 for new subscribers). Amazon Prime Instant Video, which comes with Amazon’s $99 a year Prime membership, gives you unlimited streaming movies and TV shows.

NetFlix, Hulu and Amazon are also spending millions on high quality original content. In May, Hulu announced that it would be tripling its budget for exclusive programs and launching six new shows this year, including the much-buzzed-about reality show parody Hotwives of Orlando, which premiers tonight.

Get an antenna. Today’s antennas aren’t the rabbit ears of your parents’ generation. An HD antenna for your roof or TV set top will cost you about $30 to $100,and you can get local TV channels for free. You won’t get cable programs, but you’ll pick up more than 30 broadcast networks (such as ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, FOX). And picture quality is even better than cable, says Kagan.

TIME mergers

Dish Network Slams Potential Comcast-Time Warner Cable Merger

Dish Network
A satellite television system is installed at a residence in Denver, Colorado, on Aug. 6, 2013. Bloomberg—Bloomberg via Getty Images

Satellite operator Dish Network has come out against the proposed merger of Comcast and Time Warner Cable.

Updated July 9, 4:45 p.m.

Satellite operator Dish Network has come out against the proposed merger of Comcast and Time Warner Cable. The pay-TV giant voiced its concerns with the pending merger in a meeting with the Federal Communications Commission earlier this week, according to a filing released Wednesday.

“The pending Comcast/Time Warner Cable (“TWC”) merger presents serious competitive concerns for the broadband and video marketplaces and therefore should be denied,” Dish wrote in its filing. “There do not appear to be any conditions that would remedy the harms that would result from the merger.”

Specifically, Dish said that a merged Comcast-Time Warner Cable would be able to undermine over-the-top video services such as Netflix by altering streaming speeds either on the so-called “last mile” of the Internet delivered into people’s homes or at interconnection points where video content is transferred among various Internet providers. Dish also argued that the merged company would be able to leverage its size in anti-competitive ways by forcing programmers to offer content at a lower cost. Smaller providers such as Dish would end up being forced to pay more to make up for networks’ lost revenue, the company argued.

In a response, Comcast Vice President of Government Communications Sena Fitzmaurice said Dish not wanting stronger competitors wasn’t surprising or new. “Dish has long been one of our most vigorous competitors, and unlike us has a national footprint available in tens of millions of more homes than a combined Comcast –Time Warner Cable,” she said in an email. “Any issues regarding NBCUniversal programming and other video services, whether they be traditional or over the top are already amply covered by pre-existing FCC rules and deal conditions.” (As part of the terms of its deal to purchase NBCUniversal, Comcast agreed to adhere to certain net neutrality principles until 2018).

Dish is one of the odd men out at a moment of mass consolidation in the pay-TV industry. In addition to the proposed Comcast-Time Warner Cable deal, AT&T and DirecTV are also seeking regulatory approval to merge. Dish said that merger also presented “competitive concerns” because the combined company would be able to leverage programming content to the detriment of customers.

TIME mergers

Mega-Mergers Are Killing Innovation

The latest mega-merger in the telecommunications sector, that of AT&T and DirecTV, would be the fourth largest in history, and it comes only months after the nation’s largest cable operator Comcast announced that it was buying Time Warner Cable, the second largest cable operator. Nor is telecommunications the only sector to see such acquisitiveness. Microsoft purchased the devices and services business of Nokia for $7.2 billion late last year, Google snapped up Nest for $3.2 billion in January, and Facebook bought WhatsApp for $19 billion in February.

Such consolidation can be good for consumers as bigger companies have the resources to innovate and provide new products and services which might otherwise never materialize. However, the vertical integration of the telecommunications and technology sectors can also restrict innovation due to decreased competition and the limitation of research to specific technologies that support existing business lines.

Take, for example, the acquisition of WhatsApp. Facebook’s primary reason for acquiring the company is to utilize the chat technology on its social media platform to bolster its existing messaging application, which currently lags WhatsApp in the smartphone market. Beyond that, Facebook will no doubt try to leverage WhatsApp’s own user base, currently more than half a billion, to promote its social media offering. But either way, the integration of Facebook with WhatsApp is the main goal and driver of value instead of some trailblazing technological development in the chat space itself.

Similarly, Comcast’s acquisition of Time Warner Cable enables the company to enter complementary markets without actually having to build new infrastructure in those markets or to innovate in any way. Such plug-and-play growth engenders laziness and deprives the U.S. of necessary infrastructure improvement and development. The U.S. is currently ranked a pitiable 35th in the world in broadband capacity according to the World Economic Forum, with even smaller nations outpacing us in cutting edge telecommunications.

Even when it comes to ‘pure’ or fundamental science that can form the basis of future technology, the relentless drive for commercialization limits its destiny to whatever fuels profits in the short term and can impede future research that does not support that. True, third parties could conduct research for other applications but the ironclad patents that major corporations hold on their technology can make such efforts unprofitable. In other words, the acquisition of promising technologies by major corporations can actually limit them by forcing them along proscribed lines in the future.

Some of the greatest scientific discoveries that have fueled mankind’s advancement were made in the vacuum of human curiosity without the profit motive that has now become the norm. Today, unless the process of discovery is sponsored by some major corporation or has an obvious application to industry at the outset, there is little motive to pursue it. Even research institutions, which have historically been neutral havens for such discoveries, now require corporate money to survive and are bound by corporate rules. This is a loss for the spirit of innovation that drives human achievement.

That is not to say that all acquisitions are bad or that our biggest companies don’t move us forward technologically, but if the pace of consolidation by major players continues, it could shrink the playing field to such a degree that innovation will become the sole domain of a handful of companies who, for the most part, will only finance targeted research that promotes their own bottom line, and use patents to prevent others from advancing that technology in other directions. That may be a win for commerce but not necessarily for the type of unexpected discoveries that could improve our world in the future.

Sanjay Sanghoee is a political and business commentator. He has worked at investment banks Lazard Freres and Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein, as well as at hedge fund Ramius. Sanghoee sits on the Board of Davidson Media Group, a mid-market radio station operator. He has an MBA from Columbia Business School and is also the author of two thriller novels. Follow him @sanghoee.

TIME directv

How the NFL Could Blow Up the AT&T-DirecTV Merger

Direct TV
Reed Saxon—AP

Forget the federal regulators—it’s actually NFL commissioner Roger Goodell who could have final say in whether AT&T’s proposed $48.5 billion acquisition of DirecTV comes to pass.

AT&T is trying to swallow up the satellite television provider to get access to its 20 million U.S. subscribers, large international footprint and healthy cash flow. But those American customers may start jumping ship if DirecTV fails to keep hold of its most valuable exclusive property, the National Football League’s all-you-can-watch Sunday Ticket package. DirecTV’s contract with the NFL for Sunday Ticket, which offers live coverage of every out-of-market game each Sunday, expires at the end of next season. In an SEC filing, AT&T revealed that if the deal is not renewed, it reserves the right to back out of the merger. DirecTV won’t be on the hook to pay AT&T damages for the botched deal as long as the company uses “reasonable best efforts” to woo the NFL.

For now, the merging companies say NFL negotiations are on the right track. On a conference call with investors Monday morning, DirecTV CEO Mike White said both he and AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson had already talked to Goodell and that negotiations for NFL Sunday Ticket should be completed by the end of the year. “I am still highly confident that we are going to get our deal done,” he said.

DirecTV pays about $1 billion per year for Sunday Ticket, which has around 2 million subscribers. The fact that football has been placed at the crux of this mega-merger will give Goodell significant leverage to ask for even more money at the negotiating table. The cost for Sunday Ticket could rise by as much as 40 percent to $1.4 billion, according to the Los Angeles Times.

TIME The Brief

AT&T Dials Up DirecTv

Welcome to #theBrief, the four stories to know about right now—from the editors of TIME

Here are the stories TIME is watching this Monday, May 19:

  • AT&T will buy DirecTV for $48.5 billion in an attempt to keep up with Comcast.
  • The United States formally charged Chinese military officials of economic espionage. This marks the first time the U.S. has charged state actors for explicitly acting at the behest of a foreign government in cyber crimes.
  • Flooding in the Balkans continues with heavy rains threatening to unearth buried land mines.
  • A holographic Michael Jackson came back from beyond the grave to perform at the Billboard Music Awards.

The Brief is published daily on weekdays.

TIME media consolidation

Critics Are Mercilessly Slamming the AT&T-DirecTV Deal

Public interest groups argue that none of the proposed mega-deals will benefit consumers

Prominent public interest groups criticized AT&T’s plan to buy satellite giant DirectTV in a deal worth about $48.5 billion, calling it an example of out-of-control media consolidation that will do little to benefit consumers.

AT&T’s proposed purchase of DirecTV comes as U.S. broadband leader Comcast is trying to convince federal regulators to let it buy Time Warner Cable in a $45 billion deal. That merger would combine the two largest U.S. cable companies.

“AT&T’s takeover of DirecTV is just the latest attempt at consolidation in a marketplace where consumers are already saddled with lousy service and price hikes,” Delara Derakhshani, policy counsel for Consumers Union, the advocacy arm of Consumer Reports, said in an emailed statement. “The rush is on for some of the biggest industry players to get even bigger, with consumers left on the losing end.”

AT&T will add its five million U-verse television subscribers to DirecTV’s 20 million satellite customers, in a deal that will “redefine the video entertainment industry and create a company able to offer new bundles and deliver content to consumers across multiple screens – mobile devices, TVs, laptops, cars and even airplanes,” AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson said in a statement.

“The captains of our communications industry have clearly run out of ideas,” Craig Aaron, president and CEO of Free Press said in a statement. “Instead of innovating and investing in their networks, companies like AT&T and Comcast are simply buying up the competition.”

Both mergers will face intense scrutiny from the Justice Department, which is charged with ensuring the deal doesn’t violate antitrust laws, and the Federal Communications Commission, which must ensure that the tie-ups don’t harm the public interest.

DirecTV has the second largest pay-TV subscriber base in the country but lacks a competitive broadband Internet offering. AT&T is forging ahead with its own broadband plans but wants DirecTV’s satellite-TV business. “The industry needs more competition, not more mergers,” John Bergmayer, senior staff sttorney at Public Knowledge, said in a statement “The burden is on AT&T and DirecTV to show otherwise.”

Taking a page out of the Comcast-Time Warner Cable playbook, AT&T said it would abide by the FCC’s now-defunct 2010 Open Internet order for three years, in a concession aimed at winning over federal regulators. But that pledge rang hollow for some open Internet supporters.

“I don’t think the open Internet should come with an expiration date,” says Josh Stearns, a veteran public interest advocate. Interestingly, AT&T said it will use the merger to build and enhance high-speed broadband service to 15 million customer locations, in an effort “to be completed within four years after close.”

A combined AT&T-DirecTV would hold a vast swath of wireless spectrum — the public radio signals that make smartphones and tablets work — and would also be better positioned to compete against Comcast, the industry giant.

“AT&T already has overwhelming spectrum holdings relative to most of the wireless industry,” says Bergemeyer. “AT&T will need to explain how this merger wouldn’t harm wireless competition, and how whatever new services it plans to offer by combining with DirecTV would offset any harms to wireless and video competition.”

Your browser, Internet Explorer 8 or below, is out of date. It has known security flaws and may not display all features of this and other websites.

Learn how to update your browser