Kyle Brady: Blog » Corporate Lies

How MySpace Advertising Steals Your Ad Money [Expose]

Kyle Brady — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 23:43:33 +0000

On the surface, advertising on MySpace would seem like a relatively basic and fruitful enterprise: create a 728x90 banner, setup the ad, get seen by millions of users, and reap the rewards – there’s no weird custom ad decisions to make, like with Facebook. MySpace even makes it easy by using a single form to setup CPM vs. CPC, ad rates, daily/lifetime budgets, and all the other details.

However, they like to steal your money.

When I was setting up an ad for my company’s graphic design services that cater to artists/bands, I discovered the first stick in the mud: there’s a minimum daily rate, no matter what. We wanted to spend $100.00 stretched out over two months, letting the advertising system figure out when to display it, and this would not have been a problem with Google AdWords, but it’s MySpace, so you have to deal with their crap. After some tweaking, I found that they wanted a $5.00/day minimum, which would only net us 20 days – not quite the exposure we wanted. Deciding that spending a little more for longer exposure was acceptable, I setup $5.00/day for 25 days. It came back with an error message, giving complaining about the daily budget, so I clicked on “Lifetime Budget” and set it to $125.00, assuming that it would distribute the $125.00 over the 25 day campaign period.

Save. Billing. Confirm. Activate. Emails came saying it was pending, then approved, and finally active.

Imagine my surprise when I wake up to an email early the next morning saying that our account had been charged $100.35 for less than a day of activity. But instead of questioning it, I naively assumed that they were precharging our account for some reason, and let it go. Fast forward another day, and an email comes saying we’ve been charged $53.65 – now I’m pissed. I pause the campaign, fire off an email to Ad Support, and investigate on my own.

When I viewed the campaign’s settings… surprise! We had a $125.00/day budget, despite what my initial settings which were twice verified after activating the campaign. And there’s another $15.00 that they want me to pay for activity not-yet-billed, since the campaign’s been paused.

It took a few hours, but I received a vanilla response that treated me like a halfway literate child, stating the obvious: the daily budget was set to $125.00/day, and we were being charged according to our ad behaviors and settings. Naturally, I was even more pissed, and responded to let them know that I believed it was a technical error or glitch and that we wanted a refund.

Well, if you’ve ever dealt with a company’s billing or sales department before, you should recognize their response: it wasn’t a technical error, it was my fault, and they won’t give us a refund, but they’ll give us a $50.00 campaign credit. My reply was less than friendly, because, at this point, I feel like I’m dealing with mob bosses, and demand a larger campaign credit. This time they take a full 16 hours to respond, only to say that $50.00 was all they can offer, and then attempt to end the conversation. There has been no credit to the account.

For a small company with a very small advertising budget, these events are detrimental – we decided, for the first time, to advertise our services in a grand fashion, and MySpace spent more money than we had ever intended… in the first two days. A total of $169.00 has been billed to us by MySpace Advertising - $44.00 more than what we had set as a Lifetime Budget. And it’s been wasted over a brief <48 hours exposure that netted zero results.

Even with a $50 credit, which is only a few days’ worth of advertising, we’ve lost $119.00 to corporate theft and customer support evasion. No more advertising for us.

Thanks, MySpace. You’ve been an entertaining asshole for the last few days – would you like my lunch money? Or maybe the keys to my car? Actually, I don’t even need my girlfriend, so why don’t you go out with her?

I hope you die in a fire.

--- --- ---

Update (10/18/2009 4:20pm PST): I've been working with Steve Wilcox, MySpace's Marketing Director, since within an hour of posting this on Friday, and we've reached a solution after a few rounds of phone- and email-tag.

We received a full apology and a credit for the full amount charged, in addition to receiving a "good faith credit" for the amount we wanted to spend on advertising in the first place. The end result is that our advertising budget has now essentially doubled, and we're going to give it another try - hopefully with better results.

As of right now, we're very happy with the way this has been handled, as well as the outcome.

--- --- ---

Correspondence

From: Me

To: MySpace Advertising

Date: 10/15/2009

We set up the campaign very carefully to be $5/day, lifetime budget of $125 for 25 days.

How did this get changed to $125/day?

We've now been charged, in two days, more than we had ever intended to spend. Not only is this illegal, it's outrageous, since I have emails showing the setup of our campaign as such.

Please refund our money and fix this ASAP.

From: MySpace Advertising

To: Me

Date: 10/15/2009 12:20pm PST

Hello,

Whenever you create a new campaign, you will be asked to set a daily or lifetime spending limit for your campaign. You cannot have both a daily & lifetime budget at the same time. It's either a daily budget or a lifetime budget.

When the campaign was created it was setup with a Daily Budget of $125.00 which is why your campaign spent $125 in 1 day.

If your goal is to only spend $5 per day then you want to create a Daily budget of $5.

If your goal is to only spend $125 throughout the entire campaign then you want to create a Lifetime budget of $125.

Thank you for contacting MySpace MyAds.

Thank you,
MySpace.com

From: Me

To: MySpace Advertising

Date: 10/15/2009 2:10pm PST

It most certainly was not. I selected "Lifetime Budget", and input $125.00.

Your code-level error is not my responsibility, and I demand a refund, or at least gratis advertising for the remainder and parameters of what should have been our campaign.

From: MySpace Advertising

To: Me

Date: 10/15/2009 3:23pm PST

Our records show this was not a technical error. When creating the campaign you choose a daily budget of $125 instead of a lifetime budget.

MySpace MyAds is a Self Service platform and you are responsible for managing your campaigns.

We can offer you’re a $50 credit towards your campaigns however MySpace will not refund the $125 charge.

Thank you for contacting MySpace MyAds

From: Me

To: MySpace Advertising

Date: 10/15/2009 3:39pm PST

It was an error. You're honestly going to tell a customer of yours, one that just unexpectedly paid you over a hundred dollars, that they're wrong?

Do you really think I'd be bringing this issue up if I wasn't surprised at the situation results? And, given the nature of the company and what we do, do you really think I'm technically incompetent enough to have made such a dumb human error? The answer is no.

A $50 credit is a good start, but $100 would be more palatable, given how that is approximately how much we spent on the first day of our campaign, rather than almost the entire 25 day set.

From: MySpace Advertising

To: Me

Date: 10/16/2009 9:53am PST

Unfortunately a $50 credit is all we can offer.

Thank you for contacting MySpace MyAds.

From: Me

To: MySpace Advertising

Date: 10/16/2009 2:40pm PST

And where is this credit?

You guys fail once again.

The Fall of AT&T Began on 7/26/2009 [OpEd]

Kyle Brady — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 07:05:07 +0000

On Sunday, July 26th, 2009, AT&T made a grave miscalculation in their attempt to garner ever more customers to their internet-related plans (DSL, ADSL, U-verse, etc.) , as they moved from merely traffic-shaping and lying about their packages to actually blocking sections of the internet. The target, in this instance, was a highly visited dark corner of the nerd world known as 4chan, specifically the portions of the site dependent on the “img” subdomain such as the /b/ image board. - at a time when the FCC is moving towards further telco regulation in the vein of Net Neutrality.

The quickest way to explain /b/ is this: “a mostly-anonymous, no-archives message board with only light moderation that ranges from intelligent topics to highly NSFW imagery, while managing to spawn most Internet ‘memes’ and serve as an organizational method for the anti-Scientology movement known as ‘Anonymous’ and other such truth-minded endeavors”. The caveat to the prior statement is that the activity on /b/ is occasionally legally questionable, and usually ethically murky at best – unless the /b/rothers are targeting lying salesmen, cat killers, or being otherwise noble.

AT&T has apparently admitted to blocking traffic to “portions of the internet site 4chan.org”, which is easily tested by comparison of a user’s connection+response to the results of a site like downforeveryoneorjustme – the question is no longer “are they really?”, but “why?” and “what happens next?”. The “why” will probably never be satisfactorily answered, since there are entire legions of people and organizations that would love to see /b/ blocked, and would pay for it to happen, but the current excuse is that DDoS attacks were originating from AT&T’s internet services – obviously it’s a better solution to block the endpoint of an attack than to deal with the hassle of monitoring your own customers for highly illegal and destructive activities.

The “what happens next?” is a considerably easier question to answer: the estimated 1.5 million people who call themselves /b/tards or /b/rothers will be very angry, if they aren’t already. Anon already has a considerable history of viciously taking down anyone that opposes it or its interests, and blocking access to their most beloved of websites qualifies as an opposition of interest. AT&T can expect many lost customers, even if this issue is “resolved” quickly, complaints to the FCC, and any number of other attacks on both the company’s integrity and profits.

However, the supporters of AT&T's ethically ambiguous behavior are already beginning to make their voices heard, such as Bill Belew of the “Christian Worldview Examiner”. These people are the same that have always lauded the shutdown of 4chan or the arrest of "moot" (the owner/administrator) as a solution to their problems – free speech is free speech, and Net Neutrality has no caveats. Censorship in any form, whether it’s traffic-shaping or an outright ban, is not only uncalled for, but illegal. Especially in America.

Regardless of the reasons for AT&T's banning of portions of 4chan to their customers, the important point is that they took such an action, and not whether such sites should exist - it is not the place of network administrators to decide what is and is not appropriate, if anyone at all. Many individuals and organizations, usually religious in nature, don’t like the numerous porn sites that exist across the Internet, but until now they have merely had to bite their tongues. Banning any data endpoint, for any reason, sets a dangerous precedent, especially in the lobby- and interest-driven society of the modern world.

7/26/2009 could mark a turning point in the life of AT&T, when the future looks back on history, as the day that the shady practices of an ethically challenged company finally caught up with them: traffic filtering, site banning, and lying about service packages can only continue for so long before the FCC, along with the bill-paying public, takes a stand.

Update (7/27/2009 12:50pm PST): AT&T has made an official statement that the blocking of 4chan was due to a DDoS - which could very easily be a lie. However, it doesn't matter for "why" - the blocking of access to content is the exact definition of censorship, and that doesn't change the nature of this offense. The block has also apparently been removed.

GigaOm, you disappoint me by yet again siding with the people that pay your bills.

Update (7/27/2009 1:20pm PST): 'moot' has weighed in that some of their hardware caused AT&T to think there was a DDoS going on, and that AT&T had a "disproportionate response". While I'm inclined to believe this account of the story, AT&T's reaction was still shady at best, not to mention ethically questionable.

U.S. Broadband – A Call to Arms [Expose]

Kyle Brady — Thu, 07 May 2009 22:08:29 +0000

Broadband providers seem to be in the news every week for one reason or another, but an important issue is arising in New York: companies are finding they have to compete with each other for customers, which really just means they can't sell "we're going to screw you over" packages anymore, and they actually are being forced to deliver on their promises.

Despite the many hopefuls out there, I'm skeptical. I've had problems with AT&T and them lying before, and the situation isn't getting any better.

I'd love to have a blindingly-fast internet connection that's not filtered, shaped, or anything else... just a raw pipeline. Some people seem to think this is coming. I would willingly pay $99/mth for consistent 50Mbps download speeds, and I would jump on Verizon's FiOS bandwagon the minute it's available in my area (if ever). But keep in mind that lots of small and random countries, like Estonia or Japan, have much better connectivity than we (the U.S.) do - and they continue to stay one step ahead of the game.

There is really only one hurdle to achieving high connectivity: corporate reluctance and profit margins.

Until a few years ago, American ISPs were relatively normal companies- they provided a service that customers paid for, end of story. But wave after wave of corporate lies and greed [1] [2], copyright abuse [1] [2], and traffic filtering/shaping [1] [2] are quickly proving that these companies don't have the best interest of the customers in mind - they're interested in obtaining maximum profit for minimal work, usually via overloading their networks or blocking/filtering/slowing certain kinds of traffic.

Where are the regulators in all of this? Where is the heavy-hand of the government that is supposed to defend our freedoms and liberties? They spend huge amounts of time, money, and effort defending our physical freedoms, but what about our intellectual and digital freedoms?

The RIAA is breathing down the neck of copyright law, trying to use it in ever more creative ways for destruction, all while looking to have the terms of copyright (and punishment for violation) extended to new heights. Lobbyists in Washington, in tandem with their corporate sponsors, are in a frenzy to prevent any sort of telco regulation related to their activities - even if the point is to protect their customers. Large portions of Congress are even in the telco companies' pockets, and are defending them voraciously - which includes the takedown of competition via government friends.

If the Internet is going to survive in any freedom-having format, then a few key events need to occur: Net Neutrality needs to be established in the U.S., setting a standard for other countries to follow; the FCC needs to heavily regulate what telcos can and cannot do regarding their broadband services/customers; and inquiries into the delivery of said services (connectivity, downstream, upstream, persistence, filtering, etc.) need to begin within the highest levels of government possible.

We already have countries clearly violating their citizens' rights (like Sweden), but the problems in America stem from corporations, not the government - do you really imagine Time Warner or Comcast would refuse to collect data on their users for the government? They already participate in shady activities, what's one more?

America could be turned into a highly-dense checkerboard of fiber, creating massive pipes to every home, and it wouldn't matter. What good is a fast connection when you can't use it? Or when you do, it gets downgraded, blocked, filtered, or otherwise interfered with?

American citizens need to stop sitting quietly in the background, and make it widely known such practices are not only despicable, but need to be flat-out illegal. For far too long these companies have operated on a policy of "screw the customer, they have no control" and the situation continues to quickly degrade in the absence of action from a slow-to-care government.

When the Internet becomes only a small conglomeration of sites you're allowed to visit, then will you (both the American people and the Federal government) care? That day is fast approaching - but don't depend on the Internet to find out about it.

It's probably blocked.

--- --- ---

Update (5/9/2009 11:55pm PST): It appears the EU has beaten us to the punch. While I applaud this and wholeheartedly endorse the movement, it's embarrassing that we didn't approach the issue with legislation first.

AT&T and Their ADSL Package- Continuing to Screw Me [Expose]

Kyle Brady — Mon, 04 May 2009 19:51:42 +0000

For a quick history, see my post regarding AT&T and .torrent files. It's from a year ago, but not a whole lot has changed since then... Also, you can skip to the takeaway points of this, rather than reading the entire, rather lengthy, piece.

I changed apartments a few months ago, and in doing so I had to transfer my AT&T ADSL service from the old location to the new one... I haven't written about it until now, because I didn't have good enough reason to, but they screwed it up. Big time. And as of writing this, months later, the issues aren't fully resolved.

Oh, and they still filter my traffic too.

The Great Escape

To make a long story short, I requested them to transfer my service from Location A (old and then-current apartment) to Location B (new apartment) by Date C (about a week and a half from when I called). Within 24 hours, my modem mysteriously broke (killswitch?), and after calling in again to receive a new modem (free only by agreeing to a verbal contract of a year of service), I discovered that my transfer request has "disappeared" from their system. We created a new account request for Location B, active once again on Date C, with the modem to be received within 48 hours at Location B.

The modem didn't show at the new apartment, and it still wasn't there a week later. Having been without service for at least a week (in either location), I called after I received a bill. As it turns out, they misspelled my address and didn't include an apartment number, so it had been sitting in the closest UPS facility for the last 7 days. UPS had told AT&T to contact me to pick it up, so they sent a note to my address (not calling me once) - which I never received, because they didn't address it properly. The people at UPS said this is a regular event from AT&T.

The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly

Now having a modem, and managing to avoid any other idiotic issues when connecting to my service at the new apartment, I was content. However, a month and a half later (two weeks ago) I received two bills: each for a different account, totaling $130.

I spent two hours on the phone with the Billing Department, listening in as they spoke to different departments for my benefit. Apparently what had happened was that I had two accounts for the same service, in the same location, one of which was the "missing" account from the original transfer request.

While on the phone, they asked for one account to be closed, but not physically disconnected, via the Disconnect Dept., since I still had an active and valid account at the same address. They credited a payment from the false account to the true account, and placed a "billing changes pending" marker on the account - supposedly filing a bunch of notes for future reference along the way. I spoke to a supervisor, non-outsourced, who promised to call back within 48hrs. with an update on how much was being deducted from my account balance based on false accounts, lack of service, etc.

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas

Less than 24hrs. later, I had no service, and had instead a blinking red status light on my month-old DSL modem - at 10am. Someone had come out from the Disconnect Dept., and disconnected me, despite being told not to.

Before doing any normal-life things like eating breakfast, making coffee, or showering, I called AT&T and spoke to the Line Dept., bypassing Tech Support completely, briefly explaining the situation. After asking the agent to look at the notes on my account, he enlightened me to the fact that no notes existed whatsoever.

Despite AT&T causing my problems, by being absolutely retarded, the earliest they could come out was the following Monday... I was calling on a Thursday morning. My request for escalation was processed, and I received a robot-call telling me it was denied 5 minutes later, no explanation.

Fight Club

My internet was reconnected by a very helpful field contractor, who gave me his cellphone so I "don't have to wait for AT&T to schedule a call whenever they feel like it", and I was again content. But further consultation with the Billing Dept. has shown that they also have no notes on my account, nor any reference to a supervisor callback that I never received - and they won't discuss my billing issues with me since I have an account change pending.

The very change that was placed on my account to prevent late fees being assessed while things were straightened out.

Romeo and Juliet

In the last 3 months, I've been without service a minimum of 2.5 weeks, none of which has been credited to me, and they claim that I actually had service during these periods. My connection is highly spotty, sometimes reconnecting multiple times within the span of a minute, but my hardware is all brand new, so it's not a local issue.

I pay $45/mth for "ADSL Pro Elite", purporting to have 6.0Mbps downstream - which I demonstrably don't have anything close to. They still filter my traffic in terms of torrent files and other file downloads, taking over an hour to download a single standard-definition TV episode (of, say, South Park) or needing to wait a few minutes to build a buffer when watching Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles on Hulu. I still get penalized if they feel I used enough bandwidth for an arbitrary time period, such as slowing my connection to a crawl if I even dare to watch a streaming Netflix movie, resulting in picture quality that I could produce in my bathtub with a handful of crayons - with similar audio.

Count Dracula

At this point, I don't have many options: AT&T refuses to acknowledge that most of these events that have even occurred, they "lose" account notes that may have not existed in the first place, and generally screw me over in the use of their service. Comcast, being the only local cable provider, is not an acceptable replacement, for obvious reasons. Verizon doesn't provide service in my area, let alone FiOS, and none of the other major telcos don't either. I can't even use a Verizon satellite-card connection, because it wouldn't support having a home network like I do.

I'm painted into a corner. Paying too much for a service that doesn't deliver, to a company that lies, without options to go elsewhere.

What I really need is someone like Covad to provide solid, dependable, and quality service, downgraded in both specifications and price to a consumer level. If there ever was a reason for the Federal government to be involved in net neutrality and the internal network operations of the telcos, and not just "let the free market sort it out" (because total free reign has worked so well elsewhere!), this is one.

Maybe the real question is: who wants to form a telco startup?

p.s. Yes, it was worth the time it took to write this epic saga of lies, deceit, and backstabbing by AT&T. I feel slightly better now.

--- --- ---

Update (5/11/2009 9:30pm PST): I received a notice/bill/warning from a bill collecting agency today for part of the payment that is disputed and AT&T was supposed to be looking into... even though I've kept my account current monthly, while the other fees are "investigated" (or not... who knows, maybe they lost those records too). The saga continues.