Marginalized populations are those excluded from mainstream social, economic, educational, and/or cultural life. Examples of marginalized populations include, but are not limited to, groups excluded due to race, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, physical ability, language, and/or immigration status.
(August 19, 2022)
Funding for the Affordable Connectivity Program, which has helped nearly 23 million households across the nation connect to the internet, is expected to end soon. However, Verizon’s commitment to keeping families connected will continue. In 2020, the company launched Verizon Forward to help customers access affordable and reliable broadband, and the company will continue to offer the program to customers who qualify. Verizon Forward offers Verizon Home Internet (Fios, 5G Home and LTE Home) for as low as $20 per month, and is available to new and existing Verizon customers.
To receive Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program funding, broadband providers will have to sign a contract with a state broadband office. The grant contract is the most important document in the grant process because it specifically defines what a grant winner must do to fulfill the grant and how they will be reimbursed. The grant contract is going to define a lot of important things:
The Mississippi broadband office is responding to allegations raised by a legal organization that claims the state is failing to conduct equitable local coordination and outreach with underrepresented communities in preparation of allocating $1.2 billion to expand broadband infrastructure.
The Federal Communications Commission's Wireline Competition Bureau announced that RiverStreet Communications of North Carolina has notified the FCC that it will not fulfill its commitment to offer voice and broadband service to certain census block groups (CBGs) within its Connect America Fund (CAF) Phase II auction supported service area in North Carolina. In addition, Cebridge Telecom LA and Cable One VoIP LLC d/b/a Sparklight have notified the FCC of their decisions to withdraw from the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF) support program in all the CBGs covered by their authorized win
When Dorothy Burrell’s lupus flares, she has days she can’t walk or get out of bed.
Up until last year, Nancy Navarro didn’t know how to check her kids’ grades or schedule online appointments. She had Wi-Fi at home so her 15 and 11-year-old kids could do their homework on their school-issued laptops, but she wasn’t online herself very often. But then she noticed that her kids’ school was offering free digital training classes through the local nonprofit EveryoneOn, which aims to connect as many underserved people as possible on the internet.
According to the 2022 federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, "digital discrimination" involves determining who gets broadband access “based on income level, race, ethnicity, religion or national origin.” As an example, some neighborhoods in cities get faster broadband speeds than those in poorer neighborhoods, creating a two-tiered effect. Nationally, the Federal Communications Commission has been empowered by Congress to handle digital discrimination complaints, which provides some remedy for those who find themselves on this new wrong side of the digital divide.
On April 15, a coalition of 271 civil-society groups and local, state and Tribal governments sent a letter to the House of Representatives that urges all members to sign a discharge petition filed by Rep Yvette Clarke (D-NY) in support of the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) Extension Act. By filing a discharge petition, a member of Congress can bring a bill out of committee to be voted on by the entire chamber.
The Department of Commerce’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) has now accepted digital equity plans from all 50 States, DC, and Puerto Rico.
AT&T, Charter, Comcast and Verizon are quietly trying to weaken a $42.5 billion federal program to improve internet access across the nation, aiming to block strict new rules that would require them to lower their poorest customers’ monthly bills in exchange for a share of the federal aid. In state after state, the firms have blasted the proposed price cuts as illegal—forcing regulators in California, New York, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia and elsewhere to rethink, scale back, or abandon their plans to condition the federal funds on financial relief for consumers. The lobbying ca
© 1994-2024 Benton Institute for Broadband & Society. All Rights Reserved.
