Nicol Turner-Lee

A photo essay that is part of a 10-city tour to surface America's persistent digital divide. 

The expansion of TV White Spaces as a potential solution to close the digital divide in rural areas will require more unlicensed and available mid-band spectrum, which has become quite scarce among providers. More access to fiber will be necessary to make these networks effective. Further, how we serve the “edge of the edges,” and especially those rural areas and local broadband companies that do not qualify for streamlined funding will need to be creatively addressed.

This photo essay confirms that rural areas like Staunton (VA) are in critical need of high-speed broadband networks for economic and talent development, especially as access to technology has become the lever to avert the expected outcomes of poverty and social isolation, at least for vulnerable populations. Digital exclusion comes with costs. Rural residents are at risk of being marginalized in an information-rich economy where digital transactions and commercial sharing services are becoming more relevant.

Our 5G deployment process is slowed by outdated regulatory processes, spectrum scarcity, and local bureaucracy related to building local towers and other infrastructure. The US faces unique challenges associated with the deployment of small cells, which are antennae the size of a pizza box that enable 5G’s signal strength and resiliency. Deployment delays also result from approval times on small cell applications, permitting, and zoning processes at the local level.

What will happen after Zuckerberg’s testimony?

Nicol Turner-Lee: One year into his presidency, President Donald Trump is planning to release the details of his $1.7 trillion infrastructure plan during the State of the Union. While the plan will fund the nation’s public works projects, the jury is still out on whether or not broadband infrastructure will be sufficiently covered, especially as it has become the nation’s next critical asset.

[Commentary] As the House GOP released the first draft of the tax plan the week of Oct 30, rural broadband deployment, an issue that continues to receive bipartisan congressional attention, may find some helpful incentives. For telecommunications companies that are highly capital-intensive, the draft that the Senate eventually adopts could impact investments in new rural broadband facilities or the upkeep of existing network infrastructure in rural and urban areas.

[Commentary] Net neutrality advocates and opponents alike have demonstrated their steady investment in a specific outcome that juxtaposes regulation over no regulation. These deep seated divisions are played out among members of Congress, industry leaders, activists, and even academics. Given the tumultuous history of net neutrality at the Federal Communications Commission, the future of internet regulations will remain uncertain in the US. Today’s decisions will be vulnerable to challenges from a possible Democratic administration and potentially overturned if argued before the Supreme Court. Congress may be the only entity that can offer a more permanent solution to what is driving the debate – adherence to the principles of an open internet and the application of the appropriate legal authority. As the FCC works on its repeal, Congress should exercise leadership to identify a legislative solution that marries – rather than polarizes – these two perspectives to reach bipartisan agreement. Clearly, a congressional solution cloaked in partisanship will not be the starting place for such negotiations. Congress cannot remain gridlocked on this issue given their constituents’ reliance on the digital economy. Citizens are increasingly leveraging the internet and other new technologies for employment, entrepreneurship, health care, education, civic engagement, and other critical functions. Elected officials must start the negotiations in radical agreement on internet openness, given that the digital economy will continue to face broadband capacity challenges (i.e., spectrum and infrastructure concerns) as demand for services rises.

As such, Congress should delve into the question of legal authority conditioned not on emotion or political party, but on the most appropriate and sustainable framework for its application. Under this scenario, a bipartisan agreement could abandon Title II based on its outdated and perfunctory application to the online economy and focus on codifying the bright line rules through statute. A compromise might also include an additional bright line rule that offers consumers a formal means for complaint and adjudication at the Commission. Or FCC authority can perhaps be shared with the FTC: making one agency the cop on the beat over behavioral and commercial practices (FTC) and the other over technical misgivings and other consumer concerns (FCC).

While President-elect Donald Trump’s appointee as the next Federal Communications Commission Chairman remains to be announced, one real challenge ahead is how to change course after the widely- publicized track record of polarized decision making and disjointed collaboration under the Wheeler-led Commission. Moving forward, President-elect Trump’s FCC will have the opportunity to designate an agency leader who can achieve bipartisan consensus on critical issues, while still realizing the incoming administration’s policy agenda.

While differences may emerge around network neutrality, media ownership, mergers and acquisitions and other items, the new FCC chairman might consider confronting matters at the outset that are ripe for collaboration and necessary for the next phase of progress. These issues include spectrum policy, infrastructure, digital inclusion, agency process reform, and the inevitable update of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.

Come Jan 20, President-elect Donald Trump will have the opportunity to continue or suspend many of the technology-focused initiatives begun by President Barack Obama. These programs included expanding broadband access, training workers for jobs in STEM fields, and building supercomputers, among others. Brookings experts Stuart N. Brotman, Robin Lewis, Nicol Turner-Lee, and Niam Yaraghi weigh in on what direction technology policy will take in the Trump administration, and how it might react to future technology change.

Expanding Broadband Access: The incoming administration has expressed its intent to lead its policy priorities with an aggressive infrastructure plan. Referring to the infrastructure goals as a “golden opportunity for accelerated economic growth,” the new leadership plans to rejuvenate the domestic economy by spurring more targeted private investments and creating and recovering jobs. Under what will seemingly be a pro-business, nonregulated market, the threat of broadband “overbuild” looms, bringing new meaning to the cliche “if you build it, will they come.” Whereas technology overbuilds have often led to increased competition in certain markets and lowered consumer prices, an oversaturated broadband market can also create network redundancies, faster depreciation of assets, and decreased consumer demand. Managing supply and demand of broadband services should be at the core of the new administration’s efforts. With unbridled supply, the marketplace will be ripe for competitive offerings and differentiated services, including free or unlimited data plans. Smart digital inclusion plans and programs with clear goals and outcomes should be prioritized to narrow the gap among those who haven’t adopted broadband into their daily lives. Increased investments in digital literacy training, especially within community anchor institutions (e.g., libraries and schools) can cultivate more interest and use. In sum, the new administration’s efforts to expand and maximize infrastructure must equally address the demand for these and other emerging services so that when it’s built, they will indeed come.

The online economy has not resolved the issue of race-based ad targeting. In Oct, in response to public outcry over a new feature enabling advertisers to deliberately exclude members of its “ethnic affinities” category from particular campaigns, Facebook stopped ethnicity-based, target marketing for certain ads, specifically housing, employment, and the extension of credit. Despite Facebook’s initial justification of its ability to “serve highly relevant content to affinity-based audiences,” an initial letter from four members of the Congressional Black Caucus, followed by a class-action lawsuit, found the practice to be in violation of federal nondiscrimination laws and symptomatic of Silicon Valley’s lack of workforce diversity.

The social media giant joins a host of other high tech companies that find themselves wedged between the values of permissionless innovation, which seeks to remove barriers to entry for technology experimentation, and the social responsibility to protected classes, particularly in sheltering racial and ethnic groups from either explicit discrimination, unconscious bias, or both.