May 2015

When it comes to providing free broadband access, most communities are far more likely to consider their local coffee shop over their school district, but in reality such institutions can serve as the vital link between high-speed internet capabilities and those families and students who may not have such access at home. And while many Americans do have high-speed broadband at home, such capabilities are not ubiquitous. The typical K-12 district isn’t in the position to start installing Wi-Fi hotspots all over town, so the question is: How can it provide Wi-Fi everywhere in a way that reaches those students who need it?

“You can’t just start throwing equipment on every utility pole,” says Michael Flood, vice president of startegy at Bethesda (MD)-based wireless provider kajeet, who sees mobile broadband networks as a more viable choice. A portable Wi-Fi hotspot, for example, allows multiple users to get online via a private network that can be managed and overseen by an instructor. Flood sees this option as particularly applicable for schools that are investing in thousands of Chromebooks that, for budgetary reasons, lack embedded LTE (a 4G mobile communications standard) capabilities. To districts that want to “fill the gap” by expanding broadband to their communities, Flood says partnering up with other entities is a good move that could help take some of the pressure (financial, resource, and time-wise) off the district itself. “We’ve seen a number of library systems providing broadband access, and we’ve also heard about possible new federal programs that would potentially use lifeline funds (a program that provides discounts on monthly telephone service for eligible subscribers) for broadband access,” says Flood. “Those are potentially big programs that could help in terms of offsetting the cost to the school.”

[Commentary] The Lifeline program allows our nation’s most vulnerable communities to maintain telephone service that would otherwise be unaffordable – service that is essential for connecting with loved ones, searching for employment, pursuing further education goals, engaging fully as citizens, and calling 911. But a recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, commissioned by Sen. John Thune (R-SD) to evaluate the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) reforms to the Lifeline program, quickly drew fire from some Republican leaders. They allege that the FCC should not work on expanding the program to broadband until it addresses points raised in the GAO report. But to call to a halt the FCC’s planned reform efforts based on this report would be to ignore its findings.

The FCC is about to begin the next phase of reform to expand Lifeline into supporting broadband, which will give it ample opportunity to implement GAO recommendations where they make most sense. The need for expansion is urgent. Increases in broadband adoption rate are slowing and, in fact, posted a decline for the lowest income households in 2013. In March, The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights urged the FCC to protect and modernize the Lifeline program by implementing this type of expansion. “As broadband rapidly replaces voice service as the basic communications tool for our era, the FCC should rapidly update Lifeline to match the times,” the letter states. “Increasing broadband adoption will improve the economic well-being of those populations as well as the economic competitiveness of our country as a whole.”

[Cheryl Leanza is policy advisor for the United Church of Christ's media justice ministry]

Bing will follow Google's lead and begin giving mobile-friendly websites a boost in search results delivered to smartphones and other mobile devices. It's an important change that could have a dramatic impact on certain websites' traffic; it could mean losing visitors if a website isn't easy to use while mobile. But it also means that people visiting Bing -- something that increasingly, and likely in some cases predominantly, occurs on mobile -- will ultimately have a better experience. If they keep ending up at websites that they can't use, they're going to find another way to get what they're looking for. With this change, Bing's results should be more useful.

The new Verizon FiOS Custom TV package sounds like a great way to pay only for channels you really want to watch, which should cut your cable bill, right? It does, to some extent, but you might wind up paying more than you expect and getting less than you want. Here’s what I discovered when I pieced together a package, an experience that should give you an idea of what to expect if you’re considering FiOS Custom TV service and whether you can save any money. Including equipment rental (for two HD set-top boxes, multiroom DVR service, and a wireless router) and one extra channel pack, plus taxes, fees, and other charges, the grand total for this $80 triple play comes to $140. Just for kicks, I checked out a standard FiOS triple-play package with Preferred TV, which has 290-plus channels, according to Verizon. It also has 50Mbps Internet, twice as fast as the Custom TV package. This plan was more expensive, $171 a month, but it would provide faster Internet service, which is increasingly important to our home, and a ton more channels, many of which I like. The $30 a month I’d save with FiOS Custom TV is nothing to sneeze at, but I’m not sure I’d be willing to give up so much in exchange.

So is FiOS Custom TV a good deal for you? It depends on what you watch, what you’re willing to give up, and how much you’re willing to pay for a month of entertainment. But this is clearly a case of buyer beware: All those extra charges do add up. That's not unique to Verizon by any means. No matter what TV provider's bundle you're considering, be sure to check the bottom line before you sign on the dotted line.