Get out the popcorn: Verizon vs. AT&T is sure to be a thriller
Verizon Wireless and AT&T, the top wireless carriers in the country, are about to engage in a fierce legal battle after AT&T sued claiming that Verizon’s “There’s a Map for That” TV ads are misleading.
The ad in question, viewable above, compares the two carriers’ 3G U.S. coverage maps. 3G is the fastest kind of cellular data network currently in use in this country, and it’s no lie that Verizon has more 3G coverage than AT&T. Verizon’s whole network is 3G, whereas AT&T has only deployed the technology in major metropolitan areas. AT&T’s grounds for the lawsuit is that the ads make people believe they offer no cellular data service in the “white” areas, when in fact they do offer the slower 2G service in those areas.
Coverage map shown in the Verizon commercials.
If you take a look at the map to the left, is seems extremely clear that this map is talking about 3G data, not data overall. It’s saying that if you want a faster network, Verizon is a better choice for your cell phone dollars. There is nothing misleading about the ad in any way, it’s not saying “AT&T doesn’t provide data service in 3/4 of the country, but simply “We have faster speeds in 3/4 of the country than AT&T,” which is true.
Verizon is already on the defensive, issuing a statement about the lawsuit defending their ad from their competitor’s criticism.
AT&T did not file this lawsuit because Verizon’s “There’s A Map For That” advertisements are untrue; AT&T sued because Verizon’s ads are true and the truth hurts.
It seems this issue is turning into an all-out PR smackdown. The funny thing, however, is that AT&T isn’t even disputing the content of the ad–which shows the 3G map exactly as it’s depicted on AT&T’s site, but instead the fact that they believe the average American isn’t intelligent enough to decipher it.
This whole thing really brings AT&T’s judgement into question. Why would they bring so much attention to the fact that they have an inferior network? If it wasn’t common knowledge already, it will quickly become so as news of the lawsuit spreads and people get interested in the content of the ads. It seems like AT&T is trying to use the court to hide its network’s shortcomings.
Maybe AT&T could take the money they’re spending on legal fees for this lawsuit and spend it on, you know, improving their network? As of right now, they definitely do not have more bars in more places.
What’s the difference in population served? Probably not that much. Most of the red area that’s white on the blue map is rural. Name a major metropolitan area, and AT&T probably covers it.
I first off, love the at&t advertisement at the end of the slandering “article”. Next, people are too dumb to “decipher” the Verizon commercials. The person is smart and can look at the advertisement and think critically about it, but when it comes right down to it, people are dumb, ignorant, and are scared of the inferior. So, if Verizon portrays the Maps as Superior to that of AT&T’s people will run from the inferior. It is a good marketing scheme to steal a coined phrase “There’s an App for that” from the very device that haunts Verizon and apply it to their rival, but it paints a negative light to the overall coverage of AT&T. The advertisement should be restructured.
Is there a problem with an ad painting a negative light to AT&T’s coverage? Apple points out its competitor’s shortcomings over and over (and over) again in the tiresome “Hi, I’m a Mac” ads. It’s not against the law to call your competitors out on something in an ad, it’s only illegal if you’re libeling.
Have you ever attempted to call AT&T’s customer service? “There should be an app for that!”
Im glad they lost the fight. I use Straight Talk which runs on Verizons Network and well its comforting to have the biggest and best coverage!
Ive got a great package of unlimited data minutes and sms’s for only $45.
I think more people should know that and use all this hype to see where the good deals are and move.
Why didn’t the new AT&T commercial also compare the 3G coverage maps?
I guess AT&T “forgot” to include the little part about Verizon having 5 *TIMES* the coverage. (Not double, not triple, but *FIVE* times.)
I think AT&T should have shown the maps.
(And then filed a lawsuit against itself!)
I would just like to know why none of the companies are bothering to put Alaska on their maps? Hello?!
Well I live in AK and I have great AT&T 3g coverage, no clue what verizon offers in this area.