Broadband Cherry-Picking

[Commentary] Since 2008, the New America Foundation’s Open Technology Institute has published papers arguing that American broadband service is inferior to services in the rest of the world. They blame this alleged state of affairs on our reliance on facilities-based competition (cable vs. DSL and FTTH vs. wireless) instead of mandated wholesale access to our various networks at prices set by regulatory fiat.

They also want more facilities-based competition as long as it’s from government-owned or funded networks, using TV White Spaces, fiber-to-the-home, and various other technologies. Their position stems in part from a particularly quirky reading of a provision of the 1996 Telecom Act that was meant to create a market for competitive telephone services over the lines owned by the phone companies that were created by the break-up of Ma Bell. They also have tremendous confidence in the ability of small towns to operate their own broadband networks. The latest installment of NAF’s ongoing broadband critique, ”The Cost of Connectivity”, adds some new wrinkles to the story that are particularly misleading. It seeks to compare the costs of triple-play bundles of TV, phone, and Internet service around the world which go considerably beyond simple connectivity. It also purports to compare worldwide broadband services at the $35/month level, an especially intriguing price point. Finally, it tries to identify the fastest Internet services available in selected cities worldwide.