US "lags" in internet access

[The_Right_Honourable_Brit]

Despite a rosy picture painted by the Federal Communications Commission, America's access to affordable, high-speed Internet lags far behind the rest of the digital world.

A report released by Free Press, the Consumer Federation of America and Consumers Union shows that a recent FCC assessment of broadband Internet access is misleading and glosses over serious problems behind an ever-widening digital divide.

"Despite claims to the contrary, the digital divide in America remains large and will continue to grow unless some real changes are made," said Ben Scott, policy director of Free Press. "By overstating broadband availability and portraying anti-competitive policies as good for consumers, the FCC is trying to erect a façade of success. But if the president's goal of universal, affordable high-speed Internet access by 2007 is to be achieved, policymakers in Washington must change course."

A July 2005 report from the FCC hailed recent progress in improving broadband access in the United States. But upon closer scrutiny, the claims made in the report — and a subsequent op-ed by FCC Chairman Kevin Martin published in the Wall Street Journal — are, at best, wildly optimistic.

"Broadband Reality Check," a new report by Free Press research fellow S. Derek Turner, calls into question the FCC's conclusions. Among its findings:

• The FCC overstates broadband penetration rates. The FCC report considers a ZIP code covered by broadband service if just one person subscribes. No consideration is given to price, speed or availability of that connection throughout the area.

• The FCC misrepresents exactly how many connections are "high-speed." The FCC defines "high-speed" as 200 kilobits per second, barely enough to receive low-quality streaming video and far below what other countries consider to be a high-speed connection.

• The United States remains 16th in the world in broadband penetration per capita. The United States also ranks 16th in terms of broadband growth rates, suggesting our world ranking won't improve any time soon. On a per megabit basis, U.S. consumers pay 10 to 25 times more than broadband users in Japan.

• Despite FCC claims, digital divide persists and is growing wider. Broadband adoption is largely dependent on socio-economic status. In addition, broadband penetration in urban and suburban in areas is double that of rural areas.

• Reports of a broadband "price war" are misleading. Analysis of "low-priced" introductory offers by companies like SBC and Comcast reveal them to be little more than bait-and-switch gimmicks.

• The FCC ignores the lack of competition in the broadband market. Cable and DSL providers control almost 98 percent of the residential and small-business broadband market. Yet the FCC recently eliminated "open access" requirements for DSL companies to lease their lines, rules that fostered the only true competition in the broadband market.

"The FCC is trying to put the best face on this problem it can, but the people who can't afford or don't have access to high-speed Internet know the truth," said Mark Cooper, research director of the Consumer Federation of America. "Affordable high-speed Internet means stronger economic growth, more educational opportunities and exposure to diverse points of view. If the FCC continues to ignore reality, the gap between the haves and have-nots will become too wide to bridge."

The three groups call on Congress to take notice of these alarming trends and enact clear policies that will free the broadband market from domination by a handful of large cable and telecommunications companies.

Their recommendations include ensuring open access to all high-speed communications networks, removing restrictions on public entities that seek to offer broadband services to consumers, and opening up more of the broadcast spectrum for wireless Internet applications.

"Fudging the facts won't provide high-speed Internet access to those who need it most," said Jeannine Kenney, senior policy analyst for Consumers Union. "If the FCC is content to let cable and phone companies control the broadband market, then consumers need a third option — wireless broadband that is less expensive and which doesn't depend on DSL or cable modems. It offers the best and perhaps now the only way to close the digital divide."

You would think it's the end of the world (for America that is) judging by this report.

 

[playkiller no.2]

Pssst! hey America over here we screwed without the vasline.
Bunch of babies you want bad Adsl try ours you scream for mommy the minute you click the connect button.

 

[Moederloos]

"The United States remains 16th in the world in broadband penetration per capita. The United States also ranks 16th in terms of broadband growth rates, suggesting our world ranking won't improve any time soon. On a per megabit basis, U.S. consumers pay 10 to 25 times more than broadband users in Japan."

10-25 times MORE than Japan - that makes us 1 googol times more expensive than the East....

 

[AntiThesis]

Heheheh... damned first world countries.

And to think they were moaning that their petrol had gone up to the equivalent of R2.65 (ish) a litre...

 

[Moederloos]

Heheheh... damned first world countries.

And to think they were moaning that their petrol had gone up to the equivalent of R2.65 (ish) a litre...

True, but the Brits are at R12-R15 / l, so we are OK there

 

[Clipse]

I think our rating would go on a richter scale of 9, which equates to about 150billion times more expensive than japan.

re: fuel comparison to average income, SA is shockingly behind even when doing straight conversions. So that doesnt work.

 

[BandwidthAddict]

Missing the point

There is something that needs to be pointed out. I hope your statement above was made in jest because it's the fact that these consumers value their time and money enough to actually do something when they perceive that they are losing out, which allows them to have the kind of services we dream about.

The MyAdsl site is making a good effort at doing exactly the same; informing those in charge of a problem, and should they show that they prefer the existing system, take the word to the street so that people can either vote with their money, or their ballots. This is consumer activism and it is how governments, and large corporations, are prevented from owning the economy.

Until middle class South African’s shrug the shroud of apathy, the heavy cost of our, by first-world standards, average lifestyle will continue to limit the potential of the economy. Since the cost is exorbitant, the majority of our population do not share in the benefits, increasing the allure of statist mechanisms such communism and it’s ilk.

In my opinion, if we truly want to see a strong South Africa, we need to encourage the majority to take a more active role in the economy; providing services, building businesses and taking a keen interest in ensuring that government does not gain control over their lives. The only way to do this is to make the middle class lifestyle more affordable such that it seems attainable instead of only within the province of the “white” or “elite” folk. With that in mind, I believe the current state of affairs, the actions of the government and Telkom are deplorable.

I commend the members of this forum that have been doing, instead of talking, as they are the true patriots and show that they really care about South Africa and all South Africans.

Regards.

 

[Emjay]

In my opinion, if we truly want to see a strong South Africa, we need to encourage the majority to take a more active role in the economy; providing services, building businesses and taking a keen interest in ensuring that government does not gain control over their lives. The only way to do this is to make the middle class lifestyle more affordable such that it seems attainable instead of only within the province of the “white” or “elite” folk. With that in mind, I believe the current state of affairs, the actions of the government and Telkom are deplorable.

I agree.

 

[The_Right_Honourable_Brit]

The problem is that the majority (aka ANC supporters) think that they serve the govt. while in reality, it should be the govt. serving the people.

 

[ettubrute]

It's like this morning in the office: Colleague arrives, and starts chatting about the raids on Zuma's house. Our esteemed AA colleague starts defending Zuma, saying he likes the guy and he believes Zuma is innocent. We try to explain that Zuma must be guilty by implication from the Shaik trial, but he refuses to accept this, and calls us racists, because Zuma is a good guy, and served the community at large! While the majority of them keep thinking like this, and refuse to be educated, the situation will likely stay as it is!

PS. Don't start flaming me as a racist. That's not what this post is about!

 

[mbs]

The problem is that the majority (aka ANC supporters) think that they serve the govt. while in reality, it should be the govt. serving the people.

Somewhat OT, but I had to respond to this, which is a misinterpretation based on a misunderstanding of the reasons for the ANC's massive support base. Very simply put, its support comes from its unique role as an organisation formed from truly representative bodies from all walks of society since the year dot, which no other organisation can claim. That historical role will be replayed in future elections until viable/credible opposition develops, which is highly unlikely at the moment. It's not a question of 'think that they serve the govt.' If anything, methinx that sheeple mentality is on the wane, witness the disturbances due to non-delivery of services across the country.