Competition/Antitrust

President Joe Biden's promise to cut the price of Americans' internet bills has provoked a fierce lobbying campaign by cable and telecom companies to prove that the cost of broadband has already dropped. Internet providers are desperate to fend off any move to regulate the prices they charge, while the government is increasingly viewing connectivity as an essential service.

Mediacom Communications subsidiary MCC Iowa LLC filed a petition with the Federal Communications Commission seeking review of the rights-of-way management practices of the city of West Des Moines and what the company calls the city’s exclusive relationship with Google Fiber. It focuses on what MCC Iowa says is a $50 million taxpayer financed conduit network that the city is building for the exclusive use of Google Fiber.

As policymakers consider the best way to expand broadband availability, a key question is where to set speed targets which, in turn, will impact the technology used – fiber-to-the-home (FTTH), fiber-fed copper, fixed wireless or satellite. While some people argue that any government broadband support programs should be technology-neutral, we shouldn’t be “expectations-neutral” or “outcomes-neutral,” argued Ernesto Falcon, senior legislative counsel for the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Cox Communications announced that the increased internet download speed introduced at the onset of COVID-19 for its low-cost internet package Connect2Compete is now permanent. The speed was temporarily increased from 25 to 50 Mbps in March 2020 to support families in greatest need.  In addition, Cox is working to ensure eligible households can receive discounted service through the Emergency Broadband Benefit (EBB) Program.

The House Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Communications and Technology held a hearing on the disparities that exist in accessing affordable, reliable high-speed internet in the US. The panel heard from the National Urban League's Joi Chaney, Public Knowledge President Chris Lewis, Francella Ochillo of Next Century Cities, and George Ford, the chief economist at the Phoenix Center.

The facts on pricing and profits for the US broadband industry, the varying ways to measure prices, the important differences between these methods, and how certain methods can be used to obfuscate the reality of what is happening in the market and at the kitchen table. Government and industry data note the strength and weaknesses in each form and highlight how the ISP industry and its apologists use this kind of data to mislead. Some of our findings include:

The World Telecommunication Development Conference (WTDC–2021) will set the priorities and activities for the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) Telecommunication Development Sector in areas such as connectivity and digital inclusion.

Without a massive investment to build out the country’s open fiber infrastructure and a new set of rules to govern its use, the United States risks being left behind. Recommendations:

President Joe Biden’s $2 trillion infrastructure plan is smart to look beyond ports and potholes. But I worry about the part of the plan aimed at expanding broadband. It’s both too ambitious and not ambitious enough. The Biden plan doesn’t ask for enough money. It proposes a $100 billion budget over eight years to close America’s digital divide, similar to a parallel bill in Congress. My research team estimates the budget needs to be at least $240 billion — more than double the current target.

Recently, Deb Socia posted a brilliant suggestion online: “[Internet service providers] need to identify the floor instead of the potential ceiling. Instead of ‘up to’ speeds, how about we say ‘at least’”. ISPs must report the slowest speed they are likely to deliver. I want to be fair to ISPs and I suggest they report both the minimum “at least” speed and the maximum “up to” speed. Those two numbers will tell the right story to the public because together they provide the range of speeds being delivered in a given Census.