Broadband access in the United States is even worse than you think

[Commentary] Given the dismal state of broadband connections in America, it was illuminating recently to hear a major telecom executive paint a rosy picture of where the country stands. When Wall Street Journal Deputy Managing Editor Alan Murray asked how the United States ranks in broadband, Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg didn't hesitate: "One. Not even close."

But Seidenberg is deliberately conflating "access" and "adoption"—the difference between who has the option of buying broadband service and who has actually done so. Using Seidenberg's logic, Americans also have universal access to health care, college, and employment. Dispelling this sort of misinformation, however, isn't always easy. One of the big problems in this debate is that the data about broadband are as spotty and unreliable as the connections themselves. And, taking a page from the playbook of big oil and tobacco, the telecom companies are spending millions to further confuse the issue, spending about $100 million in 2009 alone in lobbying fees. With all the bogus information out there, hucksters like Seidenberg can lie through their teeth and get away with it.

The the FCC can mandate that all ISPs provide a "broadband nutrition label" that clearly lays out the details of what's actually being offered so that customers can make informed decisions about which service to buy.

The FCC should systematically collect information on the speeds, pricing, and adoption of broadband across the country—especially in un- and underserved areas.

The FCC needs to address the duopoly in the United States and formulate a competition policy that will bring back a meaningfully competitive market.

If we don't put these solutions in place, the United States could end up on the wrong side of the international digital divide.