Connected Nation, Created By Telco Lobbyists, Gets Millions In Gov't Funding To Hide Broadband Data From The Gov't

from the well-that's-helpful dept

While many were surprised that the first few grants of broadband stimulus money did not go to the telco lobbyist boondoggle known as Connected Nation, you knew it had to come eventually. There were cases where Connected Nation was given deals despite being more expensive and having less experience. Or, in the case of Minnesota, the governor just decided the state should go with Connected Nation, before a state task force (appointed by the governor to explore this issue) could even weigh in.

So it should come as no surprise that (right before the holidays) it's been announced that a big chunk of broadband stimulus money is going to Connected Nation (including, of course, in Minnesota). It's a really sweet boondoggle. The operation was set up by telco industry lobbyists, with the claim that it will accurately map broadband penetration (an important factor in figuring out a broadband plan). But, rather than actually mapping the data, and actually revealing the details, Connect Nation basically hides and obfuscates the data in a way that protects the telcos. Aren't you glad that your taxpayer money is now being used to support this effort?

Filed Under: boondoggle, broadband, broadband policy, broadband stimulus
Companies: connected nation

Connected Nation Bails On Its Home State Of Kentucky

from the oddity-of-oddities dept

The bizarre story of Connected Nation continues. While the telco-backed broadband mapping organization that politicians all seem gaga over has been able to sweep politicians in Minnesota and Florida off their feet, despite dubious qualifications and/or reviews, Connected Nation has apparently decided to bail out on bidding for the broadband mapping opportunity in Kentucky. This is significant, because Connected Nation is from Kentucky. It was originally Connect Kentucky, and it was the group's supposed "success" in mapping broadband deployments in Kentucky that led to the formation of Connected Nation. In other words, not only does Connected Nation actually have experience in Kentucky (unlike those other states), it should already have the maps. And yet it's suddenly claiming that it can't meet the deadlines laid out in the proposal? Art Brodsky questions the claim:

Is the deadline issue what chased Connected Nation out of Kentucky? Perhaps. There may be other factors at play, including that the Commonwealth wanted the vendor to work with all providers, and two of those significant sectors -- cable and municipals -- are not happy with the telephone-dominated nature of Connected Nation. It's also worth noting that the Kentucky state government, aware of the criticism of Connect Kentucky's efforts, was planning a very strict follow-up procedure for the stimulus mapping program. The Request for Proposals mentioned there would be a third-party verification of "any and all data at any location." That condition would seem to conflict with the general Connect philosophy of controlling access to the information. But we digress.

Given all this, it's worth asking: does the state of Kentucky have the broadband mapping data that Connect Kentucky did for it earlier? Can it give that data to other providers? Or must those providers start from scratch as Connect Kentucky takes its data and goes home?

Filed Under: boondoggle, broadband, broadband policy, kentucky, mapping
Companies: connect kentucky, connected nation

Minnesota Governor Pushes Connected Nation Before Panel He Appointed Has Its Say

from the inside-track dept

We already pointed to the rather questionable situation in Florida where Connected Nation was "chosen" to run the broadband mapping project (and get a bunch of stimulus cash) over a competitor, despite issuing a bid that was more than twice as high, and without any local endorsements (and... oh yeah... one of the voters, the one who voted on CN by the highest margin just happened to have worked at one of the telcos that now backs CN). It looks like something fishy is going on in Minnesota too. According to Broadband reports, Minnesota's governor, Tim Pawlenty has already signed a letter supporting Connected Nation for mapping broadband in Minnesota... totally pissing off a member of the state's Ultra High Speed Task Force, who the governor (at the demands of the legislature) appointed to look into this very matter. But, why wait for them to investigate the details and choose wisely, when you can just select who you want. Again, Connected Nation has done an amazing job getting politicians to sing its praises, despite serious questions about how its mapping process works.

Filed Under: broadband, minnesota, tim pawlenty
Companies: connected nation

Questions Raised As To Why Connected Nation Selected In Florida Despite Costing More Than Double

from the doesn't-look-good... dept

We've already discussed how Washington DC darling Connected Nation appears more and more like a telco sponsored boondoggle to control gov't mapping mandates and collect gov't money, without having to give up real data on broadband access. But, for some reason, politicians just seem to love Connected Nation (CN). Last time I was in DC, it was all anyone was talking about concerning broadband policy. However, there are more and more questions being raised now. Apparently, Connected Nation got a big win in Florida recently, despite the fact that its bid for mapping was more than double the next runner up, ISC. Connect Florida -- a brand new "affiliate" of Connected Nation, bid $7.1 million. ISC, which is actually based in Florida and has worked with Florida gov't agencies in the past, bid $2.8 million. ISC used references for its actual work on the ground in Florida, including "the Florida Department of Health, the Florida Department of Transportation, the Florida Department of Agriculture and two local businesses, including an Economic Development Council. The ISC application also listed 11 contracts the company has with Florida state agencies." Connect Florida, on the other hand, named out-of-state references who were involved in other Connected Nation projects, raising questions about Connect Florida's understanding of the Florida market. So how did Connect Florida win?

According to sources, one of the five judges gave ISC the win, with an eight-point differential over CN. Two other judges gave CN a two-point win. One other judge gave CN a 15-point win over ISC. Yet in another curiosity, one judge gave CN a 51-point win. That judge was Bill Price, currently the broadband stimulus program manager for the state of Florida, a position he has held for the past three months. According to his profile on the Linked-In social networking site, Price was vice president for business development for BellSouth Business.

Remember how Connected Nation is really closely connected to the telcos? And a former telco exec who only recently got the state gov't job suddenly happens to rate it up massively over the second place competitor? Doesn't that at least raise some ethics questions? Perhaps there's more to it, and perhaps there are good reasons why Connect Florida is better than ISC. But it sure does seem like Florida owes the public an explanation of what those good reasons might be.

Filed Under: connected nation, florida
Companies: connect florida, connected nation, isc

Kentucky Cable Companies Point Out That Connected Nation Isn't All That

from the well,-look-at-that dept

It's seemed like a foregone conclusion that the US gov't was going to hand over lots and lots of cash to Connected Nation -- a group favored by the telcos -- to handle all of the "broadband mapping" needed for a better national broadband plan. There have been plenty of concerns about Connected Nation's close relationship with the telcos, as well as its proposal which wouldn't give a very fair or accurate picture of actual broadband offerings around the US. But a funny thing just happened. Connected Nation is really based on Connect Kentucky, where this experiment was first run, and the cable companies there have suddenly stood up to oppose Connect Kentucky, questioning its ability to accurately map broadband in the state. Looks like maybe the telcos should have cut the cablecos in on the deal before backing Connected Nation.

Filed Under: boondoggle, broadband, broadband policy, cable companies, kentucky
Companies: connect kentucky, connected nation

Broadband Stimulus Plan Keeps Looking Worse And Worse

from the that's-not-stimulus dept

From the beginning, we've questioned the broadband stimulus plan, which was designed not to actually stimulate broadband so much as it was designed to stimulate jobs by getting people to install broadband in places where people weren't that interested in getting broadband. It had little to do with actually increasing broadband in a meaningful way. For that... all we kept hearing about was about how we'd also get some magical broadband mapping solution with hundreds of millions of dollars given to Connected Nation -- an organization favored by incumbents, because it lets them retain control over the mapping process. And, indeed, it looks like the broadband stimulus remains something of a boondoggle. As Stacey Higginbotham notes, there's "no map for success," and the plan itself has been watered down. The mapping plan has been cut back to appease telcos, and the focus of stimulus money will go to those not served by broadband, rather than those underserved by broadband. Installing broadband in far off places where there's no current access may sound good, but those are sparsely populated areas where broadband doesn't do all that much. Meanwhile, folks in densely populated regions have only one or two very slow options. Focusing on boosting broadband competition and speeds in those areas would seem to have a lot more bang for the buck... but doesn't seem to be in the current plans.

Filed Under: boondoggle, broadband, broadband policy, broadband stimulus
Companies: connected nation

Exploring The Connected Nation Boondoggle

from the sneaky,-sneaky dept

Last year, we discussed whether or not Connected Nation broadband mapping group, was really just a big telco boondoggle designed to get gov't money and allow telcos to avoid really providing broadband data. For some reason, politicians are absolutely in love with Connected Nation, though. When I was in Washington DC recently, they talked about it like it was the solution to our country's broadband needs. That seems quite bizarre no matter how you look at it. First, it's just a "mapping" organization and it's run by the telcos themselves, allowing them to continue to fudge the data to make markets look a lot more competitive than they really are. And, yet, thanks to all the political love that goes out to Connected Nation, it looks like they're about to get hundreds of millions of dollars in broadband stimulus money.

Broadband Reports points us to Art Brodsky's "final warning" about Connected Nation, before we hand over tons of tax money to it, and it's not pretty. He notes the ridiculousness of politicians complaining that the gov't agency in charge of getting accurate maps has failed (solely because the telcos refuse to give them the data) and deciding the best "response" to this is to simply hand the whole project (and lots of money) over to the telcos who refused to give the data up in the first place:

The fruit is not the product of the state agency, however. Faison used his announcement to criticize e-NC: "Until now, we have not had a map showing street address availability of broadband. e-NC has generated maps based on information disclosed by the providers which are based on the average number of customers with broadband access in a wire center. Unfortunately, information provided in this fashion does not allow you to see where broadband is and where it is not, it does not allow you to see the holes in the Swiss cheese, and depending on the area the hole may be larger than the cheese."

Note the circular logic here. Faison and other members of his committee are criticizing e-NC for their maps, which were based on information supplied, or not, as it were, by the telecom industry. The state agency has been hampered by AT&T's unwillingness to supply broadband data and its insistence on a very restrictive non-disclosure agreement for information the company did supply.

Instead of pushing the industry to stop stonewalling e-NC, Faison and the others trashed e-NC's work and commended the work of – AT&T, the very company that hamstrung e-NC. Here is Faison’s praise for the industry: "In the face of legislation recommended by the Committee which would have required the providers to disclose precise information to the Legislature for our staff to generate a detailed map of availability, the providers have come together and collectively decided to provide the information through Connected Nation, to not only provide the "street address" map but also to make the map both accessible and interactive through the internet. Special recognition should be given to AT&T, Embarq, Sprint, Time Warner Cable, The Cable Association, the Telephone Co-op association, and Alltel for their work on this matter."

Brodsky goes on to show a Connected Nation map, and note how useless it is in actually giving granular data, and then compares it to another group's map, with much greater detail. I certainly agree that better data is important, but I have to admit I'm still somewhat confused as to what real problem we end up solving with mapping alone? Yes, it will give us more data to figure out just what the current situation is when it comes to broadband deployment, but that's got little to do with actually improving our broadband infrastructure.

Filed Under: boondoggle, broadband, broadband policy
Companies: connected nation

Connected Nation: National Broadband Policy Or Big Telco Front?

from the questions-questions dept

For years, we've pointed out that, unlike most every other nation these days, the US lacks any sort of comprehensive broadband policy. Whether or not you think that's a good thing may depend on your perspective -- even among free market supporters. If you believe that broadband is a national infrastructure question involving a natural monopoly (a la the highway system) then it's a shame that there's no national broadband system that allows competition at the service level. If, instead, you think that broadband is not a natural monopoly then perhaps competition at the infrastructure level makes sense, even if it decreases competition at the service level. However, there's definitely been a lot of clamoring from folks that the US needs a national broadband policy. For years, the big telcos have resisted this push, often with incredibly misleading statements about how the government needs to keep its "hands off" their network. That's misleading because they leave out how much of that infrastructure was subsidized by the government -- whether through direct subsidies, grants of rights of way or tax breaks.

Either way, it appears that the telcos have recognized that they need to get behind a "national broadband policy" before one is handed to them -- so they've created their own, called Connected Nation. We discussed this back in February, when there was some question about whether Connected Nation really was a reasonable policy or just a front for the telcos. One of the biggest problems? The more you look at Connected Nation, the more difficult it is to figure out what it actually does. Broadband Reports is taking a look at the problems with Connected Nation, noting that the big telcos are all claiming that it represents a good national broadband policy, but that's hardly supported by the details.

For example, Connected Nation's broadband plan doesn't seem to involve anything resembling consumer advocates, or any objective look at ways to get broadband to those not served by it. But what does Connected Nation actually do? Basically tells the rest of the government that everything is groovy and not to do anything. Officially it takes taxpayer money to create its own questionable maps about broadband penetration, most of which come back showing that there's plenty of broadband penetration (nothing to see here, move along now). Then it sends out marketing material to local leaders about the importance of broadband -- effectively advertising incumbent telco broadband offerings with taxpayer money. Whether or not you support a national broadband policy, this seems pretty questionable all around. It seems to just divert taxpayer money to broadband advertising, without doing much to actually improve broadband.

Filed Under: broadband policy, telcos
Companies: connected nation