Analysis

Internet usage has continued to grow, and at the end of 2022, there were 5.54 billion Internet users, meaning that 69% of people worldwide have Internet access. Here are some facts:

The Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) joined the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) and Ranking Digital Rights (RDR) in calling for the Federal Communications Commission to provide broadband consumers with easy-to-understand, accessible notices of broadband providers’ data practices.

In his State of the State Address to the 65th Wyoming Legislature on January 9, 2019—just two days after he was sworn in as Wyoming’s 33rd governor—Mark Gordon (R-WY) outlined his top priorities: fiscal discipline, economic development, and improving Wyoming people’s quality of life. “I support the ongoing effort to improve access to broadband internet coverage throughout the state," he said.

I am often asked by cities about the option of building a municipal fixed wireless broadband network. My response has been that it’s possible but that the resulting network is probably not going to satisfy the performance goals most cities have in mind. There are several limitations of fixed wireless technology in an urban that must be considered:

Data from industry analyst Cowen that shows that some of the largest fiber builders in the country have already trimmed back their construction plans for 2023. Do these cuts mean that fiber competition won’t materialize as planned? There have been big external changes affecting the entire industry. Fiber material costs are up, as evidenced by the recent price hike announced by Corning. Prices of fiber components are up across the board for everything from conduit, handholes, drop wires, etc.

Educational excellence. A 21st century economy. Protecting communities. Fiscal responsibility. Happy and healthy citizens.

Rarely does Congress speak as definitively and clearly as it did with Section 1754: ordering the Federal Communications Commission, within 2 years to enact regulations to “eliminate” existing digital discrimination on the basis of “income level, race, ethnicity, color, religion, or national origin” and to prevent it from recurring in the future. The FCC should interpret this instruction for what it is: a rebuke of the last 25 years of failed policies and “light touch” regulation under the apparent delusion that for the first time in 90 years “the market” would bring universal service to all

Since its launch several years ago, we expected 5G to be the next, big bang in wireless. Like with 3G and 4G, we expected it to sweep across the industry, changing our lives. Instead, it has disappointed users, so far at least. What is the problem with this new technology, and will it get any better before 6G comes knocking at the door? While 5G is incredibly important, it is simply not showing the immediate growth we expected. Some of the leaders in the wireless revolution are starting to make some changes in their marketing messages.

When Congress created the $42.5 billion Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment Program (BEAD) and $14.25 billion Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), it also enacted Section 60506 of that law, which directs the Federal Communications Commission to “prevent[ ] digital discrimination of access based on income level, race, ethnicity, color, religion, or national origin.” Congress enacted this non-discrimination statute based on mounting evidence that low-income people and people of color are more likely to live in monopoly broadband area

There is a persistent and well-known gap between rural and urban populations in terms of their internet usage.