Google Fiber Has Accomplished More For Broadband Than Our National Broadband Plan Ever Did
from the the-best-laid-plans dept
Back in 2010 under the leadership of Julius Genachowski, the FCC released a "national broadband plan." While it did help subsidize some middle and last mile rural deployment and directed the FCC to actually start using real world data to make policy decisions (ingenious!), it somehow managed to float like a butterfly over the U.S. broadband industry's biggest and most glaring problem: the lack of broadband competition. Even the agency's $300 million broadband coverage map birthed by the plan couldn't be bothered to actually list broadband service pricing, lest site visitors conclude that they're paying too much for too little.As the years ticked by, it became increasingly clear many of the plan's action items were little more than political show ponies, paying empty lip service to issues like the digital divide, with ankle-high "goals" the government knew full well would have been achieved without government lifting a finger. Even the plan's architect Blair Levin has acknowledged the FCC was quick to offer a "one-note narrative of self-praise," instead of disrupting the status quo. Basically, it took 36 public workshops, 9 field hearings, 31 public notices and 376 pages to create the illusion the government was doing something about the nation's rotten duopoly problem.
Hindsight now has many people realizing that a search giant with bottomless pockets probably did more for broadband in the last five years than our massive national broadband plan ever did. Google Fiber's deployment of symmetrical gigabit service for $70 a month has helped drive a new national conversation about broadband competition. It has also driven a number of previously sleepy, uncompetitive ISPs to drive upgrades users wouldn't have seen otherwise. And as MIT Technology Review notes, it's kind of miraculous that Google Fiber happened at all:
"The unnerving thing is that so much of the present and future of broadband has come down to the whims of a single company, and a company that, in many ways, doesn’t look or act much like most American firms. If Google didn’t have such a dominant position in search and online advertising, giving it the resources to make big investments without any requirement of immediate return, Google Fiber wouldn’t have happened. And if Google’s leadership weren’t willing to make big long-term investments in projects outside the core business, or if the company didn’t have a dual-share structure that preserved its founders’ power and somewhat insulated its executives from Wall Street pressure, gigabit connections would more than likely be a fantasy in the United States today."Of course, while Google Fiber has received endless media adoration, the actual hard deployment impact is currently tiny, with only a few thousand users in Kansas City and Provo actually currently getting service (though Austin, Salt Lake City, Nashville, Atlanta, Charlotte and Raleigh/Durham builds are underway). A lot of the incumbent ISP response to Google Fiber has similarly been rather theatrical in nature ("fiber to the press release"), with carriers offering gigabit speeds to a few high-end housing developments and then pretending they're revolutionizing the broadband space, while millions of consumers remain stuck on sub 6 Mbps, $60 DSL lines with 150 GB monthly usage caps.
So make no mistake: the lack of competition is still a huge problem.
But Google Fiber's most important contribution has been two-fold. One, as Google intended, Google Fiber placed a huge, national spotlight on the nation's broadband market failures. Cities clamored on top of one another to be the next in line for service, every paper in the nation highlighting simultanesouly that the service they received from the regional duopoly simply wasn't very good, and that we could do something about it. Two, Google Fiber also brought the public's attention to an issue that most had spent the last decade ignoring: the fact that ISPs have spent the last fifteen years gleefully writing horrible protectionist state laws designed to protect their regional fiefdoms from the competition bogeyman.
Contrary to what some will say, the botched national broadband plan was not necessarily the fault of "government," just shitty government. Former FCC boss Genachowski was a professional fence sitter; so afraid of making tough policy decisions he'd make no decision at all, often dressing that inaction up as a mammoth accomplishment. It's easily arguable that current FCC boss Tom Wheeler has accomplished more for broadband in a little over a year in office (net neutrality and Title II reclassification, municipal broadband, and a notable crackdown on ISP fraud) than the last three FCC bosses combined.
But the real lesson from the last five years is that it was a collaboration between sensible, balanced regulation, risk-taking private industry and grass roots citizen activism that finally pushed the needle on broadband after fifteen years of dysfunction, which is how it's supposed to work when you're not (quite intentionally) distracted by a nasty case of partisan nitwit disease. Wheeler's building a basic framework to protect consumers in the absence of vibrant competition, Google Fiber's applying some much needed competition to apathetic incumbents, and municipal broadband operations are trying to shore up coverage and competition gaps in markets the incumbent providers couldn't care less about.
That seems notably more constructive than our broadband policies of the fifteen years prior, which vacillated between devising wimpy, elaborate plans that accomplished little to nothing, willfully pretending the broadband market wasn't broken, and proudly declaring that if we just left AT&T, Comcast and Verizon alone -- they'd collectively build us a magic free-market broadband Utopia powered by rainbows and puppy love.
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, competition, fcc, fiber, national broadband plan
Companies: google
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Of all the topics in the world, you're back to flacking Google Fiber! Next will be the Russian propaganda again!
Just blank out all other industry investments and spread of tech to give all credit for the last ten years to Google! Only good sign is my mockery has made you state that it's a TINY deployment...
People: take the Copia link on any Techdirt page to see the direct connection between Google and this soppy puff-piece.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Of all the topics in the world, you're back to flacking Google Fiber! Next will be the Russian propaganda again!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Of all the topics in the world, you're back to flacking Google Fiber! Next will be the Russian propaganda again!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Of all the topics in the world, you're back to flacking Google Fiber! Next will be the Russian propaganda again!
I am now writing this response to you from said boat. My multi-color Google slippers (made from real Sable fur, I believe) are very comfy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Of all the topics in the world, you're back to flacking Google Fiber! Next will be the Russian propaganda again!
Well done. Such trollery laid on think, the satire and sarcasm could have lept from the screen to a blind man.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Of all the topics in the world, you're back to flacking Google Fiber! Next will be the Russian propaganda again!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Of all the topics in the world, you're back to flacking Google Fiber! Next will be the Russian propaganda again!
Don't you DARE compare the people here to those irritating little yellow pill things from Despicable Me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Of all the topics in the world, you're back to flacking Google Fiber! Next will be the Russian propaganda again!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Of all the topics in the world, you're back to flacking Google Fiber! Next will be the Russian propaganda again!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Of all the topics in the world, you're back to flacking Google Fiber! Next will be the Russian propaganda again!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Of all the topics in the world, you're back to flacking Google Fiber! Next will be the Russian propaganda again!
Karl is a joke and so is his "reports/news".
[ 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 ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
for the most part, well done Google! just dont go along with this damn spying, for yourself or anyone else!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fiber where?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Fiber where?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Fiber where?
That said, they've also shown a spotlight on the fact that many towns and cities were being prohibited from building their own broadband via ISP-crafted state law. They've also been teaching towns and cities how to get out of the way and encourage investment.
Again, the real benefits to Google Fiber go being the admittedly piddly actual deployment footprint. Still, we definitely have huge coverage issues that it's very clear we need better solutions for.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Fiber where?
Wow, that's not even a sentence. Meant to say the real benefits "go beyond."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Fiber where?
And your muni nor Google is your better solutions its private company and co-ops. Tax payer money is NOT an answer. Especially since you do not need HSI nor Fiber to live.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Read first, then comment
Then it's probably a good thing he didn't say that.
'Absolutely! They've actually made "cherry picking" fashionable again, which is one of the huge downsides of this kind of approach.'
Also, good point on the taxpayer bit, guess all those tax-exceptions or grants handed out to the cable companies to lay out or improve their networks better be eliminated. Certainly can't have the public paying for that sort of stuff after all, and I'm sure the companies will have no problem footing the bill, all of it, on their own.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Fiber where?
Also to show the rest of the country how much better their service could be.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Fiber where?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Fiber where?
Well I live in an urban area and I'd LOVE a shakeup of any kind for my internet access. The only 'improvement' I've seen is the price increasing such that I'm now paying almost double what I was paying 5 years ago. The performance: no difference!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Fiber where?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Fiber where?
You're mostly correct. But a little wrong.
Rural citizens clamoring for universal service have every reason to do so. But for the most part:
- the contrast between our pitiful urban broadband speeds haven't been that different from your pitiful rural speeds.
-The contrast between our 1-2 providers hasn't been that different from your 0-2 providers.
NOW, if city slickers got 1GB connections, and you still had your lame satellite connection...well, then, you'd have a real case to argue that you are relatively disadvantaged, and need some love from the FCC and Universal Service Fund. Rural areas will always get broadband enhancements AFTER the urban areas. It will be through demanding gov't intervention that economically unattractive regions get upgraded.
But also, if ruralites get to enjoy the open spaces, less traffic, fresh air, less noise from neighbors, less crime, less graffiti, less litter, etc....Well, you also get to enjoy fewer shops, fewer services, slower broadband, etc. Has it ever been any different for humanity?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Fiber where?
Take a look at the digital issues the reservations in this country are dealing with - at least in the west. Some of them are willing to toss massive amounts of money to the incumbent ISPs for broad band (Navaho Nation for example) and ATT won't even talk to them. I am betting they will be building out their own systems as soon as the BIA allows it. No other options to get broadband to the schools and local populations.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Google!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Major Innovation Needed...
Hopefully, Elon Musk is holding part of the solution! If he can actually get some of his satellites up into orbit anytime in the next year or two, that could provide the competitive challenge the isp's need to finally get their shit together!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Major Innovation Needed...
They know that if they actually have to compete, on price and service, that their obscene profits might actually take a hit, and they'll fight that with everything they've got.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Again with MIT Technology Review?
Great things come out of MIT. MIT Technology Review isn't one of them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Server
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Server
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Server
Today, you could run your own email server for just your family, ftp server, etc and not make a dent in the traffic meter.
Setting up a server for the world to use and then you're in trouble (and more than just bandwidth issues)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Server
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Server
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Google Fiber
"which is how it's supposed to work when you're not (quite intentionally) distracted by a nasty case of partisan nitwit disease."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They started a movement
The summary is as follows: The Feds and State built a backbone and middle mile; The laws of Mass. for telecomm are somewhat arcane; here are a list of folks to get you started navigating the politics and technology; the biggest problem is how to fund the infrastructure.
A very large percentage of Mass. towns were bypassed by the incumbents and there are several towns which the incumbents would like to abandon.
Many municipalities are moving forward using general obligation bonds.
The pointer to the handout: cyber.law.harvard.edu/research/broadband
The bottom line, in my opinion, is that the tactics used by the Rural Electrification Act in the early 1900s should be applied here. Estimates abound that suggest a federal stimulus of $150Billion ( a couple F35s ) would hook everybody up with fiber. The incumbents have bent the wording and the laws, most recently in NYC, to take subsidy and not deliver. My town is moving forward, one hurdle at a time and are especially happy to be in a state that allows this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Irony
[ link to this | view in chronology ]