FCC Finally Admits US Broadband Competitiveness Sucks; Broadband Co's Then Order Their Favorite Politicians To Trash FCC
from the gee,-who-coulda-thunk-it dept
Every year, the FCC is required to come out with a report on broadband competitiveness. Every year, it's a joke. Way back in 2006, the GAO looked at the 2005 report and pointed out that the FCC's methodology sucked and was highly inaccurate. Basically, the FCC looked at whether or not a single node in a zip code was wired for broadband (defined at some laughably low rate), and declared that the provider offered service across that entire zip code. On top of that, it relied on the broadband providers themselves to let the FCC know who was covered. So, in theory, you could have a zip code where only two houses were covered by broadband, and the FCC would define that entire zip code as not only covered, but a competitive market. That was in 2006. Yet, the FCC basically ignored the GAO and kept putting out its bogus reports each year, even as the GAO continued to highlight the problems of the report.So here we are, years later, and the FCC has finally, finally, finally changed its methodology and for the first time released a report admitting that all is not well in the US broadband market. As Broadband Reports notes:
The report ditches the inaccurate zip code determination, and takes the long-overdue step of bumping the minimum definition of broadband from just 200 kbps, to at least 4 Mbps downstream and 1 Mbps upstream.I should admit, by that definition, even I don't have broadband at home. To be honest, I'm less concerned about the amount of people who have access to broadband, as I am about the actual level of competition, which isn't really covered by this report. Still, it's amusing to see how angry the telcos and some elected officials are about the FCC finally telling the truth.
A telco lobbying organization, US Telecom immediately trashed the report saying it "strained credulity." And, it didn't take elected officials long to start grandstanding as well. Rep. Cliff Stearns wasted little time blasting the FCC report, saying he was "perplexed" by the report.
Perhaps we can clear up some of the confusion. You see, it appears that over the course of Cliff Stearns career, the single largest contributor to his campaign was (you guessed it) AT&T. Oh, and as for this year's campaign, it's probably worth noting that while AT&T is still his top contributor Comcast and Verizon are number two and three respectively, and closing in fast. And, of course, in the last election (2008), Stearns' top two contributors were AT&T and the National Cable & Telco Association. Verizon was fourth. But I'm sure that has nothing whatsoever to do with Stearn's confusion over the FCC report. Couldn't possibly be... And people wonder why every day citizens think that DC is corrupt.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: broadband, cliff stearns, politics, telcos
Companies: fcc
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
So?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So?
- People usually choose the lesser of two evils ... big choice.
"they can't all be on the take, can they"
- I detect sarcasm
"DC is no more corrupt and stupid than the American people who for vote for such legislators"
- Bullshit. What choice is there ... dont vote ? It would be nice if there was a "none of the above" check box.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So?
There is such a disconnect in the States these days with regard to our politicians, it's unbelievable. They flatout making voting as difficult as possible so they can control turnout. More to the point, as someone earlier pointed out, you're choosing between corrupt asshole and corrupt douchebag. Yay!
Remember, the way you control elections is NOT by manipulating votes, cheating, or any other nefarious deed that can be traced back to you. You simply make it so that no matter who wins, that person is your guy. And that pretty much sums up lobbying efforts here....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: So?
Actually I had an economist friend who recently worked for a few years in the States, and he said that he could not believe the degree of corruption that he saw there - even saying that basically, businesses regularly impose taxes on the population through legislation.
This practice would imply a very high tax burden, but I believe that actually taxes are very low in the States, compared to other Western counties, so what gives? Is everything just being put down as "deficit" in the national budget? Somebody will have to eventually pay the bills...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: So?
"DC is no more corrupt and stupid than the American people who for vote for such legislators."
"I believe that actually taxes are very low in the States,"
- Not so. there are many different taxes, add them all up and it is significant.
"Somebody will have to eventually pay the bills"
- Yep. And those who influenced the spending are most reluctant in efforts to pay it back.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: So?
Most of this money isn't collected as tax, but as telecom rate increases. In an interview just out on SmartPlanet, David Cay Johnston states that we've forked over $350B worth of rate increases specifically to fund "the information superhighway"; over how many years he didn't say.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So?
Yes they can be worse than the people that elected them, it involves the tipping point theory.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So?
It's a wonder his elections weren't more of a landslide.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
LightSquared Broadband
http://arstechnica.com/telecom/news/2010/07/get-ready-for-lightsquared-broadband-verizo n-and-att-not-fans.ars
LightSquared broadband is "the nation's first wholesale-only integrated wireless broadband and satellite network." It's 4G LTE backed up by satellite. Hopefully, this will be the final straw toward a single bill for communications access. No more phone, then internet, then TV, then cell phone, then cell internet bills. Hopefully.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: LightSquared Broadband
It is nice, but not enough.
People need to take ownership of their fiber.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: LightSquared Broadband
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: LightSquared Broadband
You mean "wants to be" not "is." Certainly would be nice, but for decades now we keep hearing about miraculous satellite broadband providers and they all suck. It's too expensive to set up and maintain the infrastructure, and the latency is dreadful. I'll believe it when I'm actually surfing it and the latency isn't dreadful.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: LightSquared Broadband
Me too, but I wouldnt hold my breath. In fact, I would say its nearly impossible, barring any kind of entanglement-like breakthrough. The satellites sit 22K miles out, so you are bumping up against physics there, and when you add in all the necessary routing and ground hardware, it can only work so well. You can thank Einstein and relativistic physics for that. Doesnt seem like much, but 44K+ miles round trip is a decent chunk of the speed of light (per second) and that just kills latency. Even now, with good broadband, latency can vary from 20ms to 100ms, which is good and just this side of perceptible (for, say, a phone call) and OK for gaming. Anything over 100ms and you start to get problems, and satellite links are WAY over that and can basically never be below a certain point due to the distance.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: LightSquared Broadband
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: LightSquared Broadband
Mike is right "wants to be" is the correct phrase as there is currently no LTE in the US. Carriers are planning on moving that way, but it is not commercially available anywhere yet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Opposed to here in France
Maybe we should propose a merger between France and the US, in which we would keep France's DSL operators and USA's mobile ones...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
1. Death;
2. Taxes; and
3. Corrupt politicians ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
1. Death;
2. Taxes; and
3. Corrupt politicians ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
1. Death;
2. Taxes; and
3. Corrupt politicians ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wealth Distribution in the US
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
speeds
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I remember the switch from dialup to broadband. I would never switch BACK to dialup if you told me to. But if Lightsquared gets a following I sure as hell would look into it. I'd be one of the first to switch.
And if they offered Google-like speeds you can damn sure bet the "poor me" of the telcos would be cut short immediately.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Now about speeds, the U.S. is a sorry place for people.
In Europe in some places you can get at your home something like.
25Mb/s or in megabytes that would be 8 MB/s down and 16Mb/s or in megabytes that would be 2 MB/s.
Now for people who don't understand that or are using an Apple operating system that uses a different definition of what 1 mega means(i.e. Apple uses 1000 to refer to thousands and not 1024) lets say what that means in seconds.
150 Megabytes(in megabits this would mean 150*8=1200 megabits or 1.2gigabits) takes less than 20 secs to download.
150 Megabytes upload takes about 30 secs.
CNN was noting how in montana and other places not normally seem as tech hubs one funny thing is happening, people are getting jobs using teleconference to offer help and teach others, this is only possible if people can have real broadband.
Telcos are hurting the economy!
End of rant.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
LightSquared Broadband
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mike calls it like it is
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The corporations will pay through the roof to keep their interests at the top of the DC wish list
Pathetic but normal
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
there is no REAL COMPETITION in the United States
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Highspeed Internet
[ link to this | view in chronology ]