AT&T to Google: Your trumpet stinks
I'm glad the net neutrality dispute that broke out this week between AT&T (T) and Google (GOOG) has nothing to do with Apple (AAPL).
The two companies' arguments are so cynically self-serving and the common carrier issues they have locked horns over so thorny and impenetrable that I don't know where to start. (If you want to pursue it, the New York Times' Saul Hansell does a good job laying the groundwork in his latest Bits column.)
But there's one thing in AT&T's letter to the Federal Communications Commission that deserves comment, and it has nothing to do with intercarrier compensation, call termination fees or pornographic chat lines. It concerns the English language.
In his carefully footnoted letter to Sharon Gillett, chief of the FCC's wireline competition bureau (with copies to the four FCC commissioners and chairman Julius Genachowski), AT&T senior vice president Robert W. Quinn Jr. refers to Google as
"one of the most noisome trumpeters of so-called 'net-neutrality' regulation."
I can just hear the screams of anguish from high school vocabulary teachers all across the country.
Like them, I'm delighted that Bobby Quinn remembers that the word "noisome" exists. But I can't believe he made the classic rookie mistake about its usage.
Noisome, from the late Middle English "noy" (short for annoy) means having an extremely disagreeable smell.
It has nothing to do with noise, trumpets or, for that matter, net neutrality.
See here for a copy of AT&T's letter and here for Google's response.
"But language is a treacherous thing, a most unsure vehicle, and it can seldom arrange descriptive words in such a way that they will not inflate the facts–by help of the reader's imagination, which is always ready to take a hand and work for nothing, and do the bulk of it at that." – Mark Twain
WOW! I didn't know we had so many language experts cruising the internet just looking for someone to bash. Too bad we don't have this kind of expertise when it comes to picking our politicians.
To whoever appended the definition to my suggested rewrite, I was pointing out the beast of a sentence beginning the second paragraph. But perhaps "locked horns over" is an enhanced English idiom relating to an aerial antler clash.
I am surprised that there has been no discussion on the fact that most Executives don’t fully write their own releases. And even if he actually did write his own, one would think he has others screen/proof read before it’s launched.
Okawa, Yes AT&T has issue with there network, but they working on those issue’s investing billions to continuously upgrade, I have AT&T service had it for 10 years, never had an issue.
Not sure why you, any many other Jackasses out there think that AT&T, Verizon and many other wireless telecoms should invest billions to build the network, but then allow competing products that have zero investment in the infrastructure. As The FCC pursues Google’s goals for free phone service on the Telecoms networks, where is the revenue going to come from to continue expanding them ? I don’t know, do you?
Google has the resources to build out is own network, I assume that they have not done so because they don’t want to invest billions, then have to share with everyone for free.
Stay away from AT&T their customer service is worse than comcast's I didn't think it could be possible but it is.
So. I would then say that the ATT wireless service is "Noisome". Because your service REALLY STINKS, ATT! LOL
Oh the day that Verizon gets the iPhone…
…over which they have locked horns…?
ex ped: "locked horns" is an English idiomatic expression that means to clash, collide, contend, grapple, meet head-on. It's derived, I believe, from way animals with antlers fight.
Yeah! AT&T's trumpet stink's! Here they say they have a "superior" network, yet we can't even stay connected when talking to someone. They're blaming it on other people like Google. Their just out to impede innovation and hog up all the customers just like they have done with the AT&T Apple deal for the iPhones. That needs to stop, AT&T needs to stopped their ridiculous behavior.
Perhaps he thinks Google's proposal stinks, and he put in a way that is too witty for some of you to grasp.
PED,
I'm disappointed. Your articles are typically more insightful. This is amusing, perhaps, but not worth an article. A footnote, maybe, nothing more.
Disclosure: I enjoy the odd choice of words people sometimes make, too.
=G=
Meriam-Webster's 11th Collegiate Dictionary has this to say:
Main Entry: noi-some
…
1 : NOXIOUS, HARMFUL
2 a : offensive to the senses and especially to the sense of smell b : highly obnoxious or objectionable
…
I suppose that Mr. Quinn could resort to definition 1 or 2b to wiggle out of this one. What do you say we just dock his annual salary by a million bucks and call it even?
Google wants to provide services that the masses can use to make everyday living easier. Att is the phone company. Can Att's money continue to buy politicians.
that just shows to go you, how bad outsourcing can be,all their cm support is outsourced to foreign countries and at&t execs are starting to sound like their contract customer care agens
Look at your own thorn first, which would be "The two companies' arguments are so cynically self-serving and the common carrier issues they have locked horns over so thorny and impenetrable that I don't where to start". Try putting "know" or something similar between "don't" and "where" That is a good place to start since you don't "know". People have typos, misprints, or incorrect use of words all the time. You just proved it. You might want to write about something else. People make mistake. Sometimes intentionally, which is why I left the "s" off mistake intentionally. Yours was a single mistake. I probably have other mistakes in this comment. The point is what they were trying to say even if they did not say it correctly. I understood your point, and you wanted to make fun of someone else.
Are you sure he misused the word? I believe there are several companies (trumpeters) trumpeting about net neutrality. Of those trumpeters, isn't possible he is referring to Google as the most offensive of the group?
I'll leave you to look up the online definitions and synonyms of noisome (such as "offensive" "foul"), but I don't think he is referring to Google as a noisy trumpeter as you suggest.
I believe he is saying that Google is the one that is really stinking up the joint.
Hi Philip:
No offense intended, but you may be making a mistake in criticizing Mr. Quinn's usage of the word "noisome". You are correct about its definition and its roots. However, you are assuming that Mr. Quinn is confused and was pairing "noisome" with "trumpeters" , thinking they both dealt with noise. It is just as likely he was focusing on the root of the word, "noy". If that was his intent, he is spot on. Simply replace "noisome" with disagreeable, annoying or unpleasant and you will see my point. I suggest you owe Mr. Quinn an apology, if his intent is as I describe.
Regards,
Scott
While one definition of "noisome" can mean (according to Merriam-Webster) "offensive to the senses and especially to the sense of smell (noisome garbage)," it can also mean (again MW) " highly obnoxious or objectionable ." So in using the second definition, it was used correctly by AT&T.
Maybe you need to refer to your dictionary as this word was used correctly.
ex ped: What dictionary are you using?