But all our big cities are doing pretty well.
Emmanuel Macron spent the summer campaigning for the new law.
Canada Border Services Agency officers have the authority to charge a traveler with a criminal offence for refusing to provide the password to their device.
We're 102nd for cell phone use, right after Zimbabwe.
A new study out of Sweden indicates that talking on cellphones and even cordless phones can be related to a certain form
The government, seizing an opportunity to capitalize on deep public anti-cell-phone-company sentiment, claims that Canadians needed more competition in the wireless business in order to lower prices and improve service for consumers. But if the problem isn't lack of competition, but lack of transparency and terrible customer service, then expensive ad campaigns are not the answer, nor is artificial, taxpayer-funded, unsustainable interference in the market to force more competition. We need facts, not propaganda.
Last time, I took the Commission to task for trying to build excitement over the level of cellphone penetration in Canada in their consultation video. Why? Because the only metric that really counts in 2012 is the takeup of smartphones: smartphones do data, feature phones don't. Let's consider penetration in a more meaningful context.
Back in the summer of 2010, the CRTC decided to get the public's input online as part of its proceeding on the "obligation to serve." Big mistake. There's a habit that's getting entrenched at the Commission: treating online consultations as a substitute for both educating Canadian consumers and conducting real research.
Some wonder why it's a good thing that the likes of Wind can now be bought by foreign entities. Simply put, it's better than the alternative -- the smaller companies are having a hell of a time competing against the big guys. It's trendy to bash the government as being pro-big business, but in the past week that hasn't been the case.