Back to top Jump to featured resources
Article filed under Broadband

Community Broadband Media Roundup – February 1

| Written by Rebecca Toews | No Comments | Updated on Feb 8, 2015 The content that follows was originally published on the Institute for Local Self-Reliance website at https://ilsr.org/community-broadband-media-roundup-february-1/

The mayors of 38 US cities came out this week to let the FCC know they want the authority to build high speed Internet networks. Jon Gold with Network World covered the story and reminded readers of the more heavy-handed tactics of our Comcast and TWC. 

Three U.S. senators introduced a Community Broadband Act this week. Mario Trujillo with The Hill reported that the bill would forbid state and local governments from “creating a ‘statute, regulation, or other legal requirement’ that bars communities from creating their own municipal broadband network.”

Kate Cox with the Consumerist broke it down:

“In other words, the Community Broadband Act makes it legal for a town to start a network and illegal for the state to stop them, but doesn’t provide any assistance for towns who want to build networks. It simply gives them the opportunity to pursue their own funding. To that end, the bill specifically encourages public-private partnerships.”

Henry Grabar with Salon wrote about the ideological debate that is “taking the country by storm.” 

Broadband Definition

Jon Brodkin with Ars Technica wrote about the FCC decision to raise the definition of broadband speed: “Tons of AT&T and Verizon customers will no longer have ‘broadband’ tomorrow.” This after the FCC upped the definition of broadband from 4 Mbps to 25 Mbps download speed. 

Under the proposed definition of 25Mbps down and 3Mbps up (which is opposed by Internet providers), 19.4 percent of US households would be in areas without any wired broadband providers. 55.3 percent would have just one provider of “broadband,” with the rest being able to choose from two or more. Rural areas are far less likely to have fast Internet service than urban ones.

In another article about the decision, Brodkin explains why the cable industry is opposed to the changes.

Alina Selykukh with Reuters covered the increase as well.  The new definition should force upgrades to fiber to the home, but it could also have a real impact for lower-income families. 

“The FCC could also press Comcast to commit to faster speeds in its Internet Essentials program, a discounted Internet service for low-income families, if they decide to use it as part of the merger review, analysts said.”

 

Muni Editorials

This week several prominent newspaper editorial boards have come out in favor of community broadband. 

The Boston Globe’s board wrote that Congress should let cities provide their own Internet

“A better approach would be for Congress to settle the issue itself, by preventing states from interfering with cities and towns that want to start their own Internet services. On Jan. 22, Democratic Senators Cory Booker of New Jersey, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, and Ed Markey of Massachusetts filed a bill that would invalidate the state laws, and prohibit states from enacting new ones. This effort will almost certainly face stiff resistance from Congressional Republicans. But this shouldn’t be a partisan issue, and it isn’t one on the local level. Red states like Georgia, Kentucky, Iowa, Oklahoma, and Utah all have successful municipal Internet programs. Politicians tempted by campaign contributions from the telecommunications lobby, or skeptical of any proposal backed by President Obama, should remember that consumer protection is an issue that voters of all stripes support.”

The LA Times also weighed in: 

“Just as advances in microchip speed and hard drive capacity have led to more powerful software programs, faster broadband networks lead to more data-intensive applications and services. But the shortage of broadband competitors and the high cost of building networks in the United States have slowed the spread of the kind of ultra-high-speed services such as the ones found in much of Asia and northern Europe… Regardless, the decision about whether a local agency should get into the broadband business should be left to the people who bear the risk — local officials and the people who elect them.” 

The Iowa State Daily praised Republican Governor Branstad’s “Connect Every Acre” proposal: 

“Bringing Internet access to all Iowans or Americans will only increase the number of educational and economic opportunities in our state. Cedar Falls is already a powerhouse in Iowan and national E-commerce, so expanding similar capabilities across the state will strengthen Iowa’s standing on the national economic stage.”

More residents and op-ed writers have chosen to write about community broadband as well. Andrew Kocis wrote in the Eastern Echo that he wants to see faster speeds, more competition and better service.

Ansel Herz continues to bite at the heels of Seattle’s decision-makers.

“Seattle is a bustling, high-tech metropolis with a highly regarded public utility company. We’re the fastest growing large city in the country, according to census data, and the city expects that over the next 10 years, 75 percent of the city’s new residents will move here for jobs in the tech sector. So why, when it comes to the internet, are we so far behind cities like Cedar Falls and Chattanooga—or closer to home, for that matter, towns like Mount Vernon or Sandy, Oregon?”

David Amor wrote to keep his paper, the Galesburg Register-Mail, in check after a recent article only told half of the story about broadband in his Illinois community. 

The South Coast Today out of Massachusetts is introducing a series devoted to helping residents learn more about municipal networks:

The first question is “Why would Middleboro want to become an ISP (Internet Service Provider?”.  The simple answer is:  To provide quality high speed Internet at the lowest possible price and to protect our citizens from the blood thirsty piranhas that they currently have to contend with.  A municipal ISP would have the effect of keeping the other providers honest.  Competition would force everybody to offer the best possible rates instead of what we have today – Internet superhighway men and corporate grifters who are charging as much as they can get away with after luring you in with temporarily low rates.

 

Community Broadband City Update

Paul Bunyan Communications in Bemidji, MN connected its first “gigazone” customer this week. Zach Kayser with the Forum News Service reported on the technological revolution that is happening in rural northern Minnesota. Once completed, the GigaZone will be one of the largest gigabit networks in the United States.

Bryan Lund with the Rochester Post Bulletin is reporting about his city taking steps toward community broadband. Rochester, MN city council member Mike Wojcik says he’s been bombarded with letters from residents disgusted with their Charter service, and that’s sparking them to look into other options. 

“Broadband is key for information for a lot of people, particularly younger generations, and going forward, it becomes more and more critical… Ultimately, if the city of Rochester, if the citizens of Rochester, are not willing to invest in broadband themselves, nobody else is going to invest in it for us. There are more than 30 cities around the country now that have jumped in and are positively cash-flowing broadband for their citizens. Typically, they have better service, better speeds and better pricing than Rochester gets.”

Barbara Rodriguez with the Associated Press reported on Gov. Branstad’s broadband legislation. In the Quad City Times, Barb Ickes wrote that the Iowa city’s leaders have a responsibility to understand how broadband service can benefit their constituents. 

Allison Oligschlaeger with the Deseret News reports that the mayor of Murray, Utah has a plan to increase UTOPIA customers.

In Albany, New York, Chelsea Diana with Biz Journals wrote about how Albany businesses have fallen behind for competitive speeds. She found that 70 percent of upstate New Yorkers cannot get access to broadband at 100 Mbps, which many European cities enjoy. 

Richie Davis with GazetteNet in Massachusetts wrote about Leverett’s community broadband success, which was featured in the White House’s broadband report.

“President Obama’s call Tuesday for Internet expansion to “help folks build the fastest networks, so that the next generation of digital innovators and entrepreneurs have the platform to keep reshaping our world,” had a special ring for people in this town.

Obama’s State of the Union shout-out to the 21st-century businesses’ need for “the fastest Internet,” and his visit to Cedar Falls, Iowa, last week to spotlight that city’s municipal gigabit-per-second broadband service, came as little surprise to Leverett Broadband Committee members, who are gearing up for 1-gigabit-per-second LeverettNet service — 100 times faster than the national average — to be turned on this spring for residents.”

Boulder, CO residents will soon be reaping the benefits from their recent Internet ballot initiative. Erica Meltzer with the Daily Camera writes that the city will launch free public wi-fi in downtown areas this Spring. 

And in Loveland, CO, Saja Hindi with the Reporter Herald reports on elected officials there are discussing how municipal broadband could improve the town’s economy. 

“[City councilor John] Fogle said it’s not just large cities taking advantage of this idea but smaller ones as well because it’s about being a catalyst for business and for education… A business developer at the retreat affirmed Fogle’s comment, stating there’s a possibility of a company looking to locate the manufacture of helicopters in Loveland at the airport next year and because the headquarters are in Switzerland, having a fiber optic line would be very beneficial.”