"Etecsa is disconnected" from reality: Criticism also comes from the official press

From the pages of Escambray comes one of those critical texts expected from any press that claims to think and represent the people. Journalist Elsa Ramos, author of a measured analysis of the unpopular ETECSA package, stated that the company "disconnected itself, and not just from its phones or the internet. It disconnected itself, perhaps unintentionally, from Cuban reality."

With these words, he opens his analysis, published in the Sancti Spiritus newspaper, where he denounces that the state-owned company implemented the "most unpopular measures in recent years" without anticipating their impact or adequately communicating them.

The dawn of Cubans, he wrote, was “spoiled—more than by the annoying blackouts—” by a brief note that “plunged them into a cauldron of opinions that seem to have no end in physical and digital spaces.”

The reaction forced a rectification

Ramos questioned the fact that "only a few hours after implementing the measure, part of what was initially conceived had to be modified in response to widespread public backlash." He added: "It's an understatement that the entity [...] has ignored timely information."

He recalled that Etecsa announced its changes "as if it were a currency exchange or an announcement to someone that they will die without the right to defend themselves."

An unaffordable rate for most

When analyzing the new rates, the journalist stated: “It boils down to: you talk or connect more if you pay extra in national currency with
That somersault from 360 pesos to more than 3 or 000 for data packages. You talk or connect much more if you top up in dollars, from abroad."

He emphasized that the imposed fees "affect almost all of society," and that they not only harm university students, "the first to benefit from the changes already being made in the heat of national discontent."

More inequality in an increasingly divided Cuba

"The new measure makes banking more difficult than it already was," Ramos warned, explaining that many Cubans will be unable to pay for services like EnZona, which require a connection to operate.

He added: "It's not just that the new tariffs further polarize our social divides; as a consequence, they limit the use and consumption of academics, teachers, students at all levels, doctors, remote or in-person workers, children, and even housewives or retirees."

“Etecsa has topped the charts of dissatisfaction in just a few days.”

Ramos recalled that Etecsa recently celebrated the nearly eight million active mobile lines in the country, but that now "the measure is affecting, in a negative way, almost the entire society."

He also criticized the arbitrary use of terms like "correcting an economic distortion," while quipping, "It boils down to: you talk or connect more if you pay extra."

According to the journalist, "the impact has reached so many megabytes because the measure coincided with other factors such as prolonged blackouts, chronic shortages of supplies and medicines, intermittent bread, rice in debt, liquefied gas without inventory, ATMs without cash."

“Rectifying is a matter of wisdom, even if it is driven by pressure.”

In another section of the text, the question was asked: "Did society have to be in turmoil for Etecsa to sit down and evaluate what has been a long-standing demand?"

He complained that the company hadn't responded to specific situations: "Why, if some people don't use everything they buy at the end of the month, isn't that money carried over? Why, if […] connectivity is affected and it's not possible to use all the hours purchased for Nauta Hogar, can't they still be carried over to the next month?"

He also stated that Etecsa has a good understanding of its customers' behavior: "Technology allows them to understand within their customer base that not everyone has the same conditions, nor do they all use their hours in the same way."

"How can a bankrupt company afford exorbitant salaries?"

Ramos questioned the sustainability of Etecsa itself: "What is difficult to understand is how a company that has sold its image of a successful organization for years […] now appears to be on the verge of financial collapse."

And he posed a direct question to the government: "How can a bankrupt company command exorbitant salaries compared to the national average, even when they are protected by resolutions?"

He concluded that the company, with its "socialist state-owned name," must be much more careful: "It needs to be careful several times before disconnecting from social reality."