Rogers' Scare Tactics and "Unsafe Public Wifi"

Rogers' Scare Tactics and "Unsafe Public Wifi": "

As I tweeted
yesterday, I had a surprising experience with Rogers customer service
yesterday. I was calling to add a text plan to my wife's
cellphone account (the fact that her current plan - which includes
hundreds of voice minutes, 1 GB of data, and an assortment of
additional services - still charges 15 cents (soon 20 cents) per text
is fodder for different post). After I agreed to pay a few more
dollars each month to cover texts, the agent asked if used my laptop to
access public wifi networks. When I said that I did, he asked if
I knew the dangers of using public wifi, which I was told included the
possibility of hackers accessing my data or inserting viruses onto my
computer. Given the risks, the agent continued, might I be
interested in the Rogers'
Rocket Stick?

In my view, these scare tactics are shameful. Mobile internet services
are good products that can and should be sold on the basis of the
convenience they provide, not by scaring consumers into thinking that
alternative access services are unsafe. Yet the Rogers agent went for
the FUD approach despite the facts that:

• Rogers operates hundreds
  of public wifi hotspots across the country. When promoting its
  hotspots, it describes them as providing 'high-speed, secure access to the Internet.'


• Rogers permits Internet tethering from many smartphones. Many users may find that tethering provides a more cost effective solution than purchasing yet another mobile Internet device. The agent did not mention this alternative.
  


• There are risks with public wifi, but those can be mitigated through a variety of steps on users' computers. Advice on what do include Microsoft's advice on public wifi networks, Lifehacker on how to stay safe on public wifi networks, and Ars Technica on staying safe at public hotspots.

Bad or inappropriate customer service can happen in any company, but when taken with the Competition Bureau $10 million fine for Rogers' misleading wireless claims and the CRTC's concern with its non-compliance with Internet traffic management disclosure requirements, it does not paint a pretty picture of one of Canada's dominant communications companies."