Communications Daily is a service of Warren Communications News.

AT&T Denies Speaking Appearance to Lawyer Alleging Carrier Favors Rich

The civil rights attorney threatening action against AT&T over alleged income-based discrimination in Cleveland won’t get to speak at Friday’s shareholder meeting, the lawyer and the carrier said. Parks and Crump attorney Daryl Parks sent a letter asking to talk…

Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article

Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!

about a National Digital Inclusion Alliance report alleging AT&T denied high-speed internet access to low-income neighborhoods in Cleveland (see 1704250046). But AT&T Assistant General Counsel Stacey Maris sent a fax denying the request, Parks told us Thursday. Maris also didn’t address the lawyer’s request for a meeting or the merits of his letter’s allegations, Parks emailed. “This is 100% ‘stonewalling’ and it is a profound mistake on AT&T’s part. We will not be disrespected and this issue will not disappear." Parks plans “to generate a national dialogue about unequal and unfair essential broadband services,” he said. “And we fully expect to move AT&T from its current posture of denial to one of acceptance, and thence to one of correction, change, and reconciliation.” AT&T told Parks it would share Parks’ concerns with the board, an AT&T spokesman emailed. “Doing so was not only appropriate, but a corporate governance best practice. We expect to continue our dialogue with Mr. Parks after the Board reviews his letter as he requested. We also explained that our agenda for our Annual Meeting was already set, but we warmly invited him to attend.” AT&T doesn’t redline, the spokesman said. “Our commitment to diversity and inclusion is unparalleled. Our investment decisions are based on many factors relating to the cost of deployment and demand for our services. Household income, wealth, race and ethnicity are not factors in these decisions.”