A basic human right — the ability to fully participate in modern life via affordable, reliable, high-speed internet service — remains out of reach for many. The Biden administration recently announced it had reached agreements with 20 leading internet providers, covering more than 80 percent of Americans, to provide households eligible for the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) high-speed internet plans for no more than $30 a month. But are those that can receive the benefit getting what they need to enroll? This is an especially urgent matter for the Latino community, which is disproportionately affected by the digital divide. A 2021 Pew Research study found that only 67 percent of Hispanic adults reported owning a computer and only 65 percent said they have internet service at home, compared to 80 percent of white adults who reported both. To make an important government program like ACP successful, trusted community partners must work together with state and local governments to raise awareness, guide local leaders and drive engagement. We hope other community leaders and nonprofit organizations will join us in collaborating to grow the success of the ACP program and that more providers decide to participate — so we can make progress toward closing the digital divide in the heartland and across the country.

[Sindy Benavides is the CEO of the League of United Latin American Citizens. Angie Cooper is the chief program officer of Heartland Forward.]

The Federal Communications Commission is still considering using broadband labels that are supposed to explain broadband to customers. This sounds like a really good idea, but I wonder if it’s really going to be effective. Some of the items included on the FCC sample label are great. The most important fact is the price. It has become virtually impossible to find broadband prices for many internet service providers (ISPs). Many ISPs, including the largest ones, only show special pricing online that applies to new customers. These ISPs show the public the sale prices, but it’s often impossible to know the list prices. It’s often the same if somebody calls an ISP – they’ll be offered different promotional packages, but it’s like pulling teeth to get the truth about the everyday price that kicks in at the end of a promotion. I want to be clear that I am not against the broadband labels. Forcing ISPs to be public with prices is long overdue, as long as they disclose the truth. But I’m skeptical about many other things on the labels, and I fear big ISPs will use the labels as another marketing and propaganda tool instead of disclosing what people really need to know.

[Doug Dawson is president of CCG Consulting.]

The Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program's Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) includes workforce development as a critical component of state plans and applications for funding—and appropriately so, as creating good jobs and developing the broadband workforce necessary to deliver on this historic investment is a critical first step for any state or territory seeking to expand broadband to its unserved and underserved residents. Most states have not yet prioritized a workforce development strategy to support broadband implementation, and the Department of Commerce is absolutely right to require a workforce plan as part of larger broadband plans needed to secure federal funding. Without a job-ready workforce on needed timelines, projects may be delayed over the long term or, worse, impossible to realize. A deep dive into the research—and interviews with several dozen key stakeholders in the field—makes several points clear. First, we as a nation likely do not have a large or diverse enough workforce to make good on this investment—without taking significant steps, including engaging unemployed and underemployed workers from this sector and adjacent sectors. This is especially true in the communities and regions that need it the most. Moreover, the country will need to grow and diversify the current broadband workforce, including by re-engaging workers who have left the field, to meet the steep and sudden increase in broadband funding. Finally, workforce development, if not appropriately addressed now, will be a bottleneck issue for expanding broadband to the millions of people who need it.

This report recommends six categories of important steps BEAD applicants should consider taking, beginning immediately.

1. Appoint a Broadband Workforce Director and Staff and Develop a Broadband Workforce Strategic Plan;
2. Convene Employers and Other Key Stakeholders To Advance Meaningful Collaboration and Mutual Commitments;
3. Collect, Analyze, and Use Current and Needed Broadband Workforce Data;
4. Identify Additional Funding Sources to Support Broadband Workforce Development;
5. Working with Employers, Build and Scale Evidence-Based Programs and Practices with Measurable Job Outcomes to Train New and Existing Broadband Workers; and
6. Recruit And Grow A Skilled, Diverse Broadband Workforce

Sens Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Cory Booker (D-NJ), and Ron Wyden (D-OR) sent letters to BetterHelp and Talkspace, two leading mental health apps, expressing deep concerns about the companies’ use of patients’ personal health data and requesting more information about their data sharing and privacy practices. Their letter follows reports that mental health apps are collecting, mining, and disseminating private client information to third parties, including data brokers and Big Tech companies like Google and Facebook. Mental health apps, including BetterHelp and Talkspace, exploded in popularity during the COVID-19 pandemic, marketing themselves as a “cost-effective alternative to traditional therapy.” However, they appear to be taking advantage of the “regulatory gray area” in the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) to exploit their patients’ data for profit. The senators are calling on BetterHelp and Talkspace to answer a set of questions about the type and breadth of data they share with third parties, including Big Tech companies like Google and Facebook; the methods they use to protect clients’ information; and their processes to inform potential clients and current users about their privacy policies and the risks of data sharing by July 6, 2022.

One of the most sweeping surveillance states in the world, China has all but closed its borders since the start of the pandemic, accelerating a political turn inward as nationalism is on the rise and foreign ties are treated with suspicion. A harsh zero-COVID policy has contributed to the attrition of foreign residents, particularly after a long and bitter lockdown this spring in Shanghai, China’s largest and most international city. At the same time, academics and researchers have complained that the digital window into China seems to be constricting too. That compounds a growing concern for China experts locked out of the country amid deteriorating relations with the West. A tightening of internet access means observers will struggle to decipher what internal pressures China’s leader Xi Jinping may be facing and how to keep track of Beijing’s diplomatic, technological and military ambitions. Comprehensive analysis on whom China’s Great Firewall keeps out is scarce; much of the focus on the country’s internet freedom remains on domestic censorship. But many researchers who have experienced such challenges suspect that their limited access is part of China’s attempt to ward off what it sees as international meddling, and present its own tightly controlled narrative to the outside world.