The lion’s share of discussion around the digital divide has centered around access, but the prices rural consumers are paying for the services available to them are worth paying attention to as well. According to our research, roughly 146 million rural Americans do not have access to a low-priced plan for wired broadband internet. That’s nearly 45 percent of the US population. We define “low-priced” as a broadband plan with a monthly cost less than or equal to the 20th percentile of all plan prices, or around $60 per month. Rural homes are paying more for slower speeds, and it serves to illustrate that the issues surrounding the digital divide are worse than we perceive them to be. 

So, what can be done to improve the current state of rural broadband internet access? One immediate step toward achieving this goal involves improving the process by which coverage reporting happens. Communities, for their part, can invest in programs that foster competition, such as municipal broadband operations and “dig once” policies. Finally, new subsidies are necessary in order to help bring vital infrastructure improvements to underserved (and unserved) areas. 

[Tyler Cooper is a Consumer Policy Expert at BroadbandNow]

Arkansas is the least connected of the 50 states. Since 2011, the state has banned cities and towns from building their own networks, outlawing a local solution that has been hailed as an effective way for communities to connect themselves when they don’t have internet providers. In 2019, however, AR appears to be having a change of heart. Under the weight of constituent complaints about lousy internet—and after years of waiting for subsidies to goad telecommunication giants into expanding the infrastructure—the state legislature in Feb passed a bill to repeal its ban. Gov Asa Hutchinson (R-AR) said he will sign it. Institute for Local Self-Reliance's Christopher Mitchell sees the change in AR as a milestone: It’s a red state, and constituent concerns overrode telecommunication interests and ideology. 

The disadvantages inherent to rural towns – geography, low population density and lack of fiber density – compound one another to make sourcing middle-mile transport unusually difficult for rural municipalities. In addition, incumbents that might provide backhaul generally aren’t thrilled with the prospect of losing market share. They may view municipal network initiatives as competitive threats and resist working with municipalities on sourcing middle-mile transport and/or lobby to fight them in their quest to modernize. The good news is that despite these challenges, over the last several years costs for backhaul services have decreased and are no longer major deterrents for municipalities. Instead, navigating tricky relationships, finding fiber resources, and managing the overall complexities in the fight to modernize have become more problems of logistics and expertise – still often a daunting task for most municipalities that already face many challenges and complexities in building and operating fiber networks.

[Offir Schwartz is president and founder of Capcon Networks, which delivers advanced connectivity solutions to service providers]

Verizon needs mid-band spectrum for 5G, but could have difficulty obtaining it, argues a new research note from telecom financial analysts at MoffettNathanson. Verizon 5G spectrum strategy has emphasized high-frequency millimeter wave spectrum for both fixed and mobile services, but according to the analysts, “millimeter wave spectrum is suited for a supporting, not a starring role.” AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon have all said they plan to use a combination of millimeter wave and lower-frequency spectrum to support 5G, but Verizon executives on numerous occasions have emphasized the benefits of the millimeter wave band, which is expected to support the highest 5G speeds but over relatively short distances. Distance limitation are expected to increase deployment costs in that band — although Verizon has downplayed those concerns, arguing that it will be able to use much of its existing wireless network infrastructure to support 5G in the millimeter wave band.

In the age of technological innovation, people of color find themselves embattled with upholding the same fight for equal rights. This time, the fight is online and offline. One such area is algorithmic bias. Algorithms are quantitative data, a process or set of rules involving mathematical calculations that produces more data that helps people make decisions. Algorithmic bias (machine learning bias) or AI bias, is a systematic error in the coding, collection, or selection of data that produces unintended or unanticipated discriminatory results. Algorithmic bias is perpetuated by data scientists who train algorithms based on patterns found in historical data. These bias results are then used by humans to make decisions with implications that are systematically prejudiced towards communities of color.

[Dominique Harrison is a Senior Project Manager at the Aspen Institute Communications and Society Program]

Local franchising officials don't want the Federal Communications Commission to cut cable operators some new tech slack when it comes to how they send mandatory notifications to customers about service and rate changes. The FCC is considering whether to allow notifications by electronic means other than e-mails, like texts or app-based notifications or via the TV. It has concluded that notice must not simply be any method "reasonably calculate" to reach subscribers. The National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors (NATOA) told the FCC in recent comments that "While it may be the case, as NCTA -the Internet & Television Association asserts, that cable operators currently send 'millions of texts each month to their customers on a wide variety of matters,' this does not support the idea that mandatory written notices should be one of those texts." NATOA has issues with notifications that can't be easily printed out and saved, it said.

I worked on the Federal Communications Commission’s 2016 Broadband Privacy Rules, upon which L.D. 946, An Act to Protect Privacy of Online Customer Personal Information, is based. I urge the Joint Committee and the legislature to pass L.D. 946 without delay. It is common sense legislation that would require broadband Internet access providers operating in the state to protect the privacy of their customers. L.D. 946 would ensure that broadband customers have meaningful choice, greater transparency and strong security protections for their personal information collected by ISPs. And while the bill gives consumers control over how their data is used, it doesn’t prohibit broadband providers from using or sharing customer information, allowing them flexibility to innovate. Maine has been a national leader in protecting the privacy of its residents.  It has passed laws protecting prescription data, health data, library records and data on victims of domestic violence. This legislature passed one of the most comprehensive statutes requiring law enforcement to get warrants for cellphone information, including the content of messages and location tracking data.