A reader asks: “Hmmm – why am I thinking about the central residential core of New Albany?”
AT&T hit with second complaint of discrimination against low-income neighborhoods, by Harper Neidig (The Hill)
A prominent civil rights attorney is accusing AT&T of discriminating against low-income minority communities within Detroit in a complaint filed with the Federal Communications Commission on Monday …
… The Monday complaint alleges that AT&T is responsible for a “pattern of long-term, systematic failure to invest in the infrastructure required to provide equitable, mainstream Internet access to residents of the central city (compared to the suburbs) and to lower-income city neighborhoods.”
Asked for comment, an AT&T spokesman referred to a statement the company put out in response to the August complaint.
“We do not redline,” Joan Marsh, AT&T’s chief regulatory and external affairs officer, said in the statement. “Our commitment to diversity and inclusion is unparalleled. Our investment decisions are based on the cost of deployment and demand for our services and are of course fully compliant with the requirements of the Communications Act. We will vigorously defend the complaint filed today.”
We’ll continue wondering why AT&T is such a slovenly big-biz presence downtown.
… I took a few snaps of the rubble in front of AT&T — the scrawny bushes, tree stumps, exposed black plastic, rusty faded signs, random fence poles … and in back, there are buckets of cigarette butts contributed by the women at St. Elizabeth fleeing their smoke-free campus, and in summer, lots of shimmering hot asphalt on all sides.
It’s something to be proud of, AT&T. It makes the city look so much better. When I become dictator, remind me to nationalize the utility monopolies — and can someone find me a nice wall for roll call?
Maybe ordinance enforcement doesn’t apply to corporate monoliths?