David
Cassel
(destiny@cloud9.net)
Thu, 9 May 2002 19:29:00 -0800
B i g M i s t a k e s ~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~ The screen on AIM Today was supposed to display names of AIM users. But on April 27, it was displaying pornography. http://www.aolwatch.org/aimthack.htm http://salon.com/tech/feature/2002/04/27/aim_hack/index.html http://makeashorterlink.com/?N213317D A security hole in the list of names had turned it into a hacker bulletin board, where profanity-laced sound files played automatically behind X-rated pictures and animation with dozens of graffiti-like comments. The security hole lasted for eight hours, and while it's difficult to say how many AIM users spotted the gaffe, Instant Messaging Planet reports that AIM has over 100 million subscribers. And AIM Today launches automatically whenever users log on to recent versions of AOL Instant Messenger. It's not the first time AOL inadvertently pointed its users towards pornography. Newsbytes reported in November the "Just for Fun" section of AOL's Kid's Only page linked to a site called 100% Girls -- but "Web surfers who followed the link reached a pornography site advertising 'XXX' images and other adult entertainment." http://www.newsbytes.com/news/01/172388.html http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/2001/11/27/aol-porn.htm This time screen names were created containing HTML code that corresponded to sound and image files elsewhere on the web. When a list of the names was generated, AIM Today automatically pulled in whatever the pranksters had specified. Ultimately the lists included everything from sound files to links for an Aryan organization. Text was displayed including countless shout-outs of screen names, plus at least one remembrance of recently-deceased Alice in Chains front-man Layne Staley. One of the attackers later identified himself as "Neon," a 16-year-old living in Michigan. Another perpetrator -- "Sirk" -- identified himself and co-conspirators "Dime" and "Toast" as 17-year-olds living on the East Coast. In an online interview Sirk argued that security holes became evident "when teenagers can get the best of a multi-million user ISP." What message was he trying to send with the April attack? "[T]hat they can't just program everything like 7th graders." AIM users worried about security "should do a little research," Sirk suggests, "and find out that this is all part of the territory. If you're using a program that's got as many loopholes and gaps as Swiss cheese, then prepare for the consequences." Indeed, in January the Associated Press reported that AIM hackers had discovered a way to seize control of any AIM user's computer and then "delete files on the computer or take over the machine." Two years earlier it was discovered any AIM account could be hijacked if the corresponding AOL screen name hadn't also been created. And though AOL told MSNBC they had fixed that hole -- a computer security consultant later discovered that they hadn't. In fact, Sirk believes that "usually more exploits come around the second time." Newsbytes even reported an earlier security hole that allowed hackers to take over AIM accounts and "in some cases, access AOL members' credit cards." One technology reporter ultimately concluded that "[C]ompanies using AIM for business communication should be aware that AOL -- unlike a telephone provider -- has no legal responsibility for securing communication over its services." http://www.nandotimes.com/technology/story/209392p-2020627c.html http://www.salon.com/tech/log/2000/01/25/aol_hack/index.html http://www.salon.com/tech/log/2000/03/27/aim/index.html http://content.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB20010223S0008 http://www.newsbytes.com/news/00/158882.html http://www.tnl.net/who/bibliography/aimsecurity.asp Coincidentally, the X-rated attack occurred while AIM's home page was boasting "Potential AIM Security Issue Resolved." But it may be only the tip of the iceberg. Weeks ago a Wisconsin newspaper reported one 16-year-old had single-handedly conned almost 200 AOL users out of their passwords. Posing as an AOL staffer, he'd pulled in at least 10 credit card numbers each day -- which he then used to buy over $1600 worth of computer equipment. He told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel he'd been committing similar crimes for four years. http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/mar02/31664.asp But some subscribers are accusing AOL of doing nearly the same thing. In February a class action lawsuit was filed citing dozens of consumers who said AOL simply billed them for products they didn't order -- everything from stereos to electric toothbrushes. http://makeashorterlink.com/?O160315C It's a problem that dates back several years. "They sent us a digital camera in the mail just out of the blue," one subscriber remembers. "They automatically took the money out of our checking account." After returning the camera and haggling for a year, she still couldn't get AOL to return the money. As early as 1997, Mad magazine was joking that the president of "America Onhold" would brush off questions about a famous hacker by saying "My subscribers' card numbers are accessible to someone far more dangerous than him... ME!!" http://aolwatch.org/hotelaol.htm http://aolwatch.org/madvisit.htm Ironically, AOL now owns Mad magazine (as part of their acquisition of Time-Warner). Some users may now be wondering where AOL's desire for control ends. Two weeks ago it was discovered the AIM installation program itself was also secretly disabling security settings on the installer's PC. This created an unpublicized back door that granted an AOL-owned web site special access to a user's hard drive -- while a security analyst noted it also left users vulnerable to malicious hackers! http://www.instantmessagingplanet.com/security/article/0,,10818_1014151,00.html Business setbacks are also plaguing AOL. Monday the stock price of AOL Time-Warner dropped lower than it's been since 1998. "We've got -- a record quarterly loss," read the Oakland Tribune headline just a few days before, as AOL racked up a one-time charge of $54.2 billion dollars. It's a pile of red ink larger than anything any corporation has ever reported, the Los Angeles Times noted -- "more than the annual gross domestic product of Ecuador, Croatia, Uruguay, Kenya or Bulgaria." http://latimes.com/business/la-042402losses.story Last week MSNBC's Christopher Byron warned that "perhaps as much as $100 billion more could disappear before the carnage is complete." And while two years ago the AOL and Time-Warner stock combined was worth $290 billion, a whopping $205 billion -- 70% of that amount -- has apparently vanished, the Times noted, with AOL Time-Warner now worth just $85 billion. http://www.nypost.com/business/46726.htm http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,51388,00.html AOL Time-Warner owes another $10 billion to AT&T, and $28 billion more to Bertelsmann -- and their profit margins appear to be slipping. "Even though AOL actually raised prices back in July by two bucks," New York Magazine noted, "it's making less money per subscriber." In February C|Net also reported another disturbing statistic. While AOL said their ad and commerce revenue dropped only 7 percent in 2001, a footnote added that a fifth of this money had come from other divisions of AOL Time-Warner -- and without it, the yearly drop was a staggering 27 percent! http://biz.yahoo.com/djus/020426/200204260149000072_1.html http://www.nymag.com/page.cfm?page_id=5500 http://news.com.com/2100-1023-828014.html http://us.imdb.com/StudioBrief/2002/20020430#8 One promotional campaign even went horribly wrong. "Dozens -- and possibly hundreds -- of AOL users were mistakenly told they had won as much as $10,000," the Associated Press reported. http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/2001-07-17-ebrief.htm http://multimedia.tbo.com/multimedia/popup/MGATLR3BGTC.html http://multimedia.tbo.com/multimedia/MGATLR3BGTC.html http://members.aol.com/jack4343/aolquiz.htm The "winners" of the contest are now furious with AOL and contest sponsor Coca-Cola. "We are very serious about this and we have dedicated ourselves to go the distance with it until we reach a fair resolution," read one e-mail to AOL Watch. But it's not the first AOL sweepstakes ending on a sour note. In a 1997 contest, subscribers clicking an icon to submit their entries were told "Location to send request is unknown." AOL then displayed a message stating "Thanks for entering" -- and an ad. http://www.aolsucks.org/contbung.htm http://www.aolwatch.com/list/0078.html Eight months ago AOL Time-Warner had already begun laying off 1,700 employees -- about 7 percent of their work force. This January MSNBC's Christopher Byron wrote that AOL's quarterly results conference was "a disappointing effort at spin control," criticizing the company's "obvious gaming strategy: To wrap itself in the American flag and blame Osama bin Laden for the company's deteriorating business outlook and finances." Last week Byron went further, complaining that "The company's financials are so fogged up with pro forma projections and 'trending schedules' that it is impossible even for their own financial spokesmen to answer questions about what's what." http://www.nypost.com/business/46726.htm http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,51388,00.html http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/08/22/BU118908.DTL&type=business In fact, as the accounting practices of entertainment companies become more complex, one analyst told the Los Angeles Times that "It's become like a sleight-of-hand routine at a carnival. 'Don't watch this hand -- watch my other hand.'" Earlier this month the New York Times stated that "AOL has suffered because of comparisons to companies like Enron and Adelphia, which had illusive balance sheets." Forbes pointed out last year that historically, if AOL had been forced to pay its volunteer work force from the beginning, "it would not have shown a profit until fiscal year 1999 -- seven years later than it actually did." http://latimes.com/business/la-042402losses.story http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/12/technology/12AOL.html http://www.forbes.com/asap/2001/0219/060.html Amazingly, AOL's performance has been so abysmal that it's contributing virtually nothing to the value of the stock, Reuters reported -- raising the possibility that AOL could in effect be "un-merged" from Time-Warner. "Size has been the only pay-off from its merger," MSNBC's Byron wrote in January, "for in just about every other way that matters, the merger has turned out to be a disappointment." Other analysts echo his concerns. "By now, every investor recognizes that Time Warner made a very large mistake by merging with AOL," one hedge-fund manager told MSNBC. New York Magazine believes Time-Warner's CEO "made what is now universally regarded as the worst deal ever made in corporate history: He mistook AOL for being worth some $50 billion more than it was." And in the Washington Post an Atlanta financial analyst calls the merger "an absolute mistake." http://www.nymag.com/page.cfm?page_id=6006 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43992-2002Mar31.html http://biz.yahoo.com/ri/020419/media_aoltimewarner_1.html Reuters reported today that AOL's corporate bonds fall into the third-lowest ratings category -- barely better than junk bonds. And some short-sellers, betting the stock will go down, are speculating about a fierce culture clash between Time-Warner's media boosters and the computer geeks who would expand AOL's technological capabilities. Inside.com warned that "without the geeks, the value of AOL Time Warner will diminish over time. And the shorts won't just profit, they'll bring the company to its knees." http://biz.yahoo.com/ri/020509/media_aol_bonds_1.html http://www.thestandard.com/article/0,1902,22273,00.html Morale may already be low. "Inside AOL Time Warner," wrote CBS MarketWatch, "employees make gallows humor-type jokes about how they wouldn't be surprised to see coin-operated locks on the company's bathrooms to help it make a few extra bucks." http://makeashorterlink.com/?C2DF324C Yet despite the company's problems, last month it was discovered Steve Case and AOL CEO Gerald Levin had each been awarded $76 million in stock options. Unfortunately, while growth used to seem inevitable for AOL, "it's running out of seducible Luddites," New York magazine notes. "[M]ost people know what the Internet is and have already decided either to use it or to ignore it." The growth rate of AOL subscribers dropped six percent last year, Smart Business reports. And the previous year, it had dropped another six percent... http://us.imdb.com/StudioBrief/2002/20020327#4 http://www.nymag.com/page.cfm?page_id=5500 http://www.smartbusinessmag.com/article/0,3658,s=101&a=25133,00.asp Maybe it's the end of an era. An AnchorDesk correspondent warned that AOL's price-hike last May "is like charging customers for one extra month...every year," asking the question "Have you outgrown AOL?" Other critics agrees. "AOL may have critical mass, but its moat is merely a stream that can be easily jumped," they told AOL Watch. "If only AOLians would open their eyes to the expansive world outside their provider's walls." http://www.zdnet.com/anchordesk/stories/story/0,10738,2764462,00.html The price hike made AOL nearly 20 percent more expensive than competing internet services. ("You've got a large bill," one headline pointed out.) And then one million more AOL users were hit with a new price hike in January. In fact, SmartBusiness magazine reports that in the next ten years, the monthly subscription rate could explode up to $159. "In recent months, AOL executives have said they hope to raise monthly subscription fees by a factor of 600 percent or more over the coming decade." http://makeashorterlink.com/?N3E0225C http://www.smartbusinessmag.com/article/0,3658,s=101&a=25133,00.asp AOL subscribers received notice of this last price hike through a pop-up window -- after an advertisement for a digital camera. Customers calling to cancel their accounts waited on hold for several minutes, during which AOL played more advertisements. While it may be bad for customers, it's good for AOL. The latest hike should bring the company close to half a billion dollars a year in extra revenue! Steve Case apparently wanted to hide from federal regulators AOL's monopoly-like power to raise prices for as long as possible. "It would be unwise in days of getting merger closed to do anything on pricing," Case had explained in January. "That wouldn't be smart." http://www.zdii.com/industry_list.asp?doc_id=ZE507404 http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-4666523.html?tag=rltdnws Asked about the timing of previous price hikes, an analyst told CNN Financial News it was made "because Steve Case thought he could get away with it." http://www.aolwatch.org/list/0089.html But some AOL users feel they're now paying more for less service. "Why would I pay an extra $1.95," one subscriber complained bitterly to the Washington Post, "when I can't use AOL 30 percent of the time?" Recently Wired News cited an August Consumer Reports survey in which 60 percent of AOL users complained their connections had been interrupted that month -- the worst record of any service in the survey. "I like AOL for some things," one tech industry worker commented, "but as an internet service provider they suck." One subscriber told AOL Watch problems with AOL's browser had even prevented them from accessing TheHungerSite.com -- a web page for charitable donations! http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,49965,00.html The problems keep coming. In February C|Net reported AOL web pages were sporadically unavailable. Salon reported at least one subscriber to AOL's cable internet service found their account disconnected due to an apparent mistake about uploading of a copyrighted movie. An error in dial-up listings also seems to have proven expensive for AOL subscribers in California. "My sister was billed about $500 for long distance," writes one AOL Watch reader, "as were hundreds of other persons in the Fortuna, California area!" In the past AOL has even mistakenly publicized the toll-free numbers of other companies as their own. One New York businessman discovered how much traffic this could generate when AT&T published his toll-free phone number as America Online's by mistake. The president of a Roller Hockey facility found himself talking distressed AOL customers through the procedure for unfreezing their computer screens. "We would answer the phone 'America In-Line'..." he told CNN, "And they'd say 'Thank God we got a person on the phone'..." http://news.com.com/2100-1023-827901.html http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2001/08/23/pirate/index.html http://www.cnn.com/TECH/9701/21/aol.mixups/ http://www.aolwatch.com/list/0105.html#othernums Now even AOL is doubting its own software. A year ago they'd insisted all AOL Time-Warner employees use AOL-produced software for email. But in March the Wall Street Journal reported that "management got months of complaints from both senior and junior executives. The email software frequently crashed, staffers weren't able to send messages with large attachments, they were often kicked offline without warning, and if they tried to send messages to large groups of users they were labeled as spammers and locked out of the system." And sometimes, "e-mails were just plain lost in the AOL etherworld and never found." The Journal cites an internal memo to Warner Brothers executives warning that 2% of the company's email was simply disappearing. Dissatisfied AOL Time-Warner employees switched to sending FAXes or Federal Express, and at one point resorted to simply printing an important email and then taking a taxi to deliver it! http://online.wsj.com/article_email/0,,SB1016753151274202960,00.html http://www.thestandard.com/article/0,1902,24706,00.html http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/16/technology/16AOL.html Last month AOL Time-Warner executives admitted defeat, and announced they would no longer require their employees to use AOL's email products... But it's not just AOL employees who are having problems with AOL's system. Just three months ago AOL also deleted hundreds of thousands of emails that Earthlink's customers had sent AOL's subscribers. (And AOL also failed to correct the problem for ten days!) In December AOL deleted emails from Harvard University telling students they'd been accepted to the college. Even the last edition of this newsletter was blocked by AOL from reaching approximately 10,000 of its subscribers. According to an AOL mail official this was a mistake, attributed to malfunctioning spam filters. In fact, in an attempt to block unsolicited commercial email, "AOL is blocking entire domains," one angry AOL Watch reader reports, "including some mistakenly identified as sources of Spam. "E-mail that is blocked in this way is 'black-holed'. That is, it is destroyed and irretrievable." http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/2001-03-20-aol-earthlink.htm http://www.mailinglists.org/aol http://www.latimes.com/technology/la-000000276jan02.story?coll=la-headlines-technology In the past AOL has also stopped delivering email from the Microsoft Network, as well as other internet services including FlexNet, Fuse.net, En.com, Cybercom.net, and Gorilla.net. http://www.aolwatch.org/flexnet.htm http://www.aolsucks.org/list/0011.html http://www.aolsucks.org/list/0009.html http://www.aolsucks.org/list/0081.html http://www.aolsucks.org/list/0080.html Yet some AOL subscribers still refuse to switch services. "Could this blind loyalty be a result of subliminal messaging in AOL ads?" one AOL Watch reader asks. "I'm 14, and my parents are extremely loyal to AOL, and refuse to switch despite any reasoning!" "P.S." they added. "I lost my connection twice trying to write this." Even users attempting to cancel their AOL accounts encounter problems. AOL disabled the ability to cancel accounts online, AOL Vice President of Member Services told the Wall Street Journal in 1997, because too many members were actually using it to cancel their accounts! Two years ago some subscribers attempting to cancel AOL by phone discovered that AOL simply didn't have any phone operators to take their call. A recorded message told them to call again later -- then hung up. http://aolwatch.org/hotelaol.htm http://www.aolwatch.com/list/0091.html "I've had literally dozens of responses from consumers saying they experienced similar problems," Boston Herald reporter Robin Washington told AOL Watch. Determined users ultimately discovered that they could also cancel their accounts by mailing AOL at P.O. Box 1600 in Ogden, Utah 84401 or by FAX-ing 801-622-7969, if they specify that they're cancelling, give their full name, phone number and address, and either their primary billing contact's AOL screen name or the last four digits of their payment method. But one angry subscriber suggested AOL should simply re-write its slogan. "You're so easy to use, it's no wonder we're number one." Now pollsters are detecting currents of suspicion. In a Harris Interactive poll last August, a whopping 37 percent of internet shoppers said they were "highly distrustful" of AOL. Out of every 20 people interviewed, just three said they had high levels of trust in AOL. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54723-2001Aug23.html In a possible attempt to counter this suspicion, AOL purchased television advertisements that began "America trusts America Online (to make getting online easier)," repeating the word trust again in the 30-second ad. But important new questions are rising about the policies of AOL's far-reaching empire. Last August AOL provoked concern with their approach to the Chinese government. "Should the new AOL Time Warner ever offer any content in China, it should be careful not to compromise journalistic principles and values, and human rights, for the sake of profit," one commentator warned. "Should it accept censorship, government-edited news and intrusion into Chinese citizens' private lives, its credibility worldwide would go down the drain." http://ojr.usc.edu/content/ojc/commentary.cfm?request=606 http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/archive/19237.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A10954-2001Aug28¬Found=true The way AOL treats its customers is becoming increasingly important. Half of all time spent online is already spent either on AOL's sites or sites owned by just three competing media companies. http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1373000/1373291.stm http://www.ecommercetimes.com/perl/story/10222.html Even if you aren't using AOL's service, they may still be acquiring information about you. Already users aren't allowed to install the latest version of AIM without divulging their zip code -- or without being asked if they'd like to switch their default home page to Netscape. Last summer AOL told Upside that major web sites like eBay, FedEx, Travelocity, and Office Depot would soon pool their membership databases with AOL. And in September a study posted on The Privacy Foundation web site warned that "if you are looking for a job on Monster.com, information from your job search activities may be sent to AOL whether you are a member of AOL or not." Former Monster.com employees told the researcher "AOL required that Monster.com allow it to track any Monster.com visitor as part of the overall business arrangement." Even if you're not using an AOL account to access the Monster.com site, still "job seekers are telling AOL what jobs they are looking at, when, and if they have applied for the jobs." http://www.upside.com/DigitalMedia/3b60a14d7_yahoo.html http://www.privacyfoundation.org/privacywatch/monster.asp#AOL http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,46559,00.html Ironically, some of those job seekers may be former AOL employees. More than 400 CNN employees were laid off by AOL after the Time-Warner merger was completed, the AP reported -- plus a total of 2,000 employees throughout the Time-Warner empire. http://www.thestandard.com/article/0,1902,21721,00.html Could AOL exert even more control? They may be prohibiting their competitors from advertising high-speed internet access on AOL Time-Warner's cable TV channels. Last June a phone company executive complained that "We've been forbidden, if you will, from being able to advertise DSL on the cable networks as a competitive service to cable modems." ISP Planet even procured a recording showing an AOL Time-Warner representative refusing an AOL competitor's ads! http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/08/technology/08CABL.html?searchpv=day01 http://investor.cnet.com/investor/news/newsitem/0-9900-1028-6227159-0.html http://isp-planet.com/business/2001/aoltw_autocrat.html By owning the cable TV channels -- including CNN -- AOL may also affect how programs get delivered on cable TV. Last summer the Los Angeles Times noted that CNN's Talkback Live was already promoting AOL Instant Messenger. Then the paper spotted an even bigger AOL promotion... When CNN's Headline News channel launched in August, it included suspicious on-screen tickers plugging TV shows appearing on other AOL-owned channels! This questionable favoritism towards AOL's shows was a mistake, CNN spokespeople claimed -- but in the same breath conceded that they'd never show ads for programs appearing on rival networks like MSNBC or Fox News. To increase distribution of its CNN financial news, AOL Time-Warner has even considered paying "bounties" to buy their way onto additional cable channels. http://us.imdb.com/StudioBrief/2001/20010514.html#13 One internet activist sees danger when large cable companies like AOL Time-Warner control the actual flow of online information. Cable companies offering high-speed net connections "have a view of what the network should be used for. And they're beginning to pick and choose what kinds of content will flow quickly.... They, not the user, decide what the network should be..." Today, entrepreneurs develop products to distribute over the internet. "Soon, you will need the permission of network owners." http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/02_19/b3782610.htm And AOL's world-view may surprise you. Recently an AOL Time-Warner executive said people who don't sit through commercials during a TV show are thieves. http://research.yale.edu/lawmeme/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=198 In fact, AOL favoritism already may be occurring online. Users of AOL's search engine get results that point to AOL's sites before non-AOL sites, PC World suggests -- and other companies can apparently also purchase higher placement in the search engine results -- for a price. http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,86884,00.asp http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A13448-2002May1.html AOL executive Barry Schuler once said -- proudly -- that he was "the guy who turned the Internet into Happy meals." But AOL's pro-advertising philosophy may ultimately spread back to its news channel. During CNN Headline News broadcasts, advertisers have recently been allowed to purchase placement of their logos. One day AOL's policies could even affect other networks. Last May there were rumors that CNN would form a merger or news alliance with CBS or ABC. http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0107.koerner.html? http://us.imdb.com/StudioBrief/2001/20010510.html#6 http://us.imdb.com/StudioBrief/2001/20010516.html#8 Where does AOL's influence end? A web site parodying CNN was targetted with legal action. And AOL may even have exerted influence over whether or not a book parody could be published. CNN's legal counsel had filed a friend of the court brief arguing in favor of its publication. But the book parodied "Gone With the Wind," whose movie rights belong to AOL's Turner Entertainment. Ultimately CNN's name was removed from the brief, and the legal counsel who'd signed it abruptly resigned. And AOL's own book contracts, meanwhile, drew strong criticism from America's largest professional writers organization last summer. http://wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,41566,00.html http://neirp.com/ http://www.law.com/cgi-bin/nwlink.cgi?ACG=ZZZ7FU1QVPC http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/27/business/media/27CNN.html http://www.authorsguild.org/pripublish051701.html The AOL Time-Warner empire is even more vast. They own classic films like Casablanca, plus major blockbusters like Harry Potter, Ocean's 11, and Lord of the Rings. AOL has taken possession of D.C. Comics' Batman and Superman, and owns the production companies behind popular TV shows like Friends, West Wing, and The Sopranos. In fact, one out of three shows nominated for an Emmy in 2000 was produced by one of AOL's companies. http://www.thestandard.com/article/0,1902,21480,00.html AOL's influence also extends to a vast range of celebrities. Madonna, Chris Rock, Jackie Chan, Sylvester the Cat, Sylvester Stallone, Rob Lowe -- all were marched up to the microphone to record the phrase "You've Got Mail," along with "Welcome," and "Goodbye" for an AOL promotion. Even Elmo interrupted a skit on Sesame Street for the phrase "You've Got Mail" last summer. AOL has also struck a deal to include AOL applications in Sony Playstations, and has already created an educational online service targetted specifically at grade school students. http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1006-200-5928280.html http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0106/27.aol.shtml http://www.salon.com/tech/inbox/archives/2001/05/09/1323/ Dozens of political cartoonists warned about the dangers in a world where AOL owns Time-Warner... http://cagle.slate.msn.com/news/aol/ But as soon as the merger was approved, consumers found AOL exploiting their leverage. Last summer fans seeking the tickets to a Madonna concert discovered they were available to AOL members only. First new AOL subscribers, then existing AOL subscribers, received exclusive ticket-purchasing rights, with left-overs then made available to non-AOL users. Unfortunately, using AOL to purchase tickets apparently presented problems for one subscriber. "I was online trying non-stop attempts, and I got nothing," they reported "but finally, was told that the tickets have been sold out at 7 p.m." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/washtech/columns/webwatch/A4991-2002Apr6.html In fact, in the year 2000, 20% of the money earned by all magazine ads in the United States went to AOL Time-Warner properties. AOL also owns 64 magazines, including People and Sports Illustrated -- and they were able to bring on 100,000 new subscribers each month by forcing AOL's subscribers to view ads for the magazines when they signed on. http://www.thestandard.com/article/0,1902,21480,00.html http://www.aoltimewarner.com/companies/time_inc_index.adp http://www.thestandard.com/article/0,1902,22273,00.html But not all their properties are happy. After AOL acquired Business 2.0, they laid off most of its staff while retaining the publication's name. And "TW Skateboarding" magazine -- now owned by AOL Time-Warner -- was furious when its editors discovered all the magazine's subscribers had received the latest issue bundled with AOL floppy disks. "We here at the magazine didn't even find out about the atrocity until some of the poly-bagged bulls--t made it into the office," they wrote in their November issue. "We feel just as violated as you." http://news.com.com/2100-1023-268072.html?legacy=cnet http://makeashorterlink.com/?Z4DE518C http://pigdog.org/auto/celebrityspotlight/link/2117.html AOL has sent out so many free-trial disks, Forbes magazine was able to uncover an amazing statistic. Last June while AOL had 23.5 million customers in America, "an estimated 4.6 million, or 20%...weren't paying!" Even subscribers calling to cancel their accounts are often enticed back with offers of free months of service, with the end result apparently being millions of AOL users who weren't paying for their service. http://forbes.com/2001/08/02/0802simons.html One web site has even begun scanning pictures of the different AOL CDs they've collected. Another site has collected over 23,000 AOL CDs, and promises when they receive one million "we will make our quest across America to give them all back to their rightful owner, AOL and say 'stop doing this'." http://www.angelfire.com/my/aolcollection/Group1.htm http://www.angelfire.com/my/aolcollection/ http://wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,45585,00.html http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/21180.html http://nomoreaolcds.com/ One man ultimately asked the question: if you don't want to receive the CDs, is there any way to get a company as large as AOL to respond? After the 13th floppy disk, Thomas Kyle contacted AOL customer service -- three times -- asking that they stop mailing him disks. Each time AOL customer service assured him they would. When the disks kept coming, he filed complaints with the Better Business Bureau. But the disks kept coming. His quest continued when he filed a U.S. Postal Service "prohibitory order" form. Less than a month later, he received another floppy disk. And another disk two months later. Then another a month after that. And the next month.... But he fought back. "I filed a small claims case," Kyle told AOL Watch last week -- and a court date has been set for June 18. "I discussed this case with my attorney, and I have have plenty of evidence to support my claim," Kyle says. Since AOL's supervisor (twice) indicated the disks would stop, Kyle says he's suing for invasion of privacy, mail harassment, and private nuisance. And he's seeking $1500 per disk. http://www.geocities.com/tekyle2000/id48.htm http://aolwatch.org/kyle.htm http://www.larrystone.com/comics/stone_tablet/halloween.jpg THE LAST LAUGH On April 27, next to AIM Today's pornography-filled melange, the AIM software obliviously continued serving its ads for TV shows on the AOL-owned Warner Brothers network like Charmed or Felicity. At one point an image depicting an X-rated scene appeared under a MasterCard banner ad suggesting "Spoil Mom this mother's day." David Cassel More Information - http://salon.com/tech/feature/2001/06/26/locking_up_the_web/index3.html http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/jan2002/nf2002014_2489.htm http://www.jokeaday.com/7aolexe.shtml http://www.latimes.com/business/printedition/la-000094943nov29.story?coll=la%2Dheadlines%2Dpe%2Dbusiness ~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~ Please forward with subscription information. To subscribe to this list, send an e-mail to MAJORDOMO@CLOUD9.NET where your email address appears after the phrase "SUBSCRIBE AOLWATCH" SUBSCRIBE AOLWATCH youremailaddressgoeshere To unsubscribe from the list, send a message to MAJORDOMO@CLOUD9.NET where your email address appears after the phrase UNSUBSCRIBE AOLWATCH ~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~
Copyright © 2002 David Cassel, All Rights Reserved. Web service provided by Cloud 9 Internet |