Telcos Fighting Release of Broadband Penetration Data

First -- why would anyone even trust FCC data?

Second, it would be far more reliable to work with the National Assoc. of Mayors to ask their local franchise authorities to report on the broadband providers.

Third -- we should assume we're talking only about infrastructure owners right? I mean that's really the bottom line about who gets broadband -- or not.

of the Center For Public Integrity. Please release how much your salary is, your homes value, your wife weight, your childrens report card, the contents of your fridge....

Wow. Not even in the same ballpark comparison there.

I dont see one negative in showing the public this research data. How is not knowing where service is provided or not provided bad? Sounds more like certain entities maybe have something they want to hide.

What are you talking about?

exactly; what do they have to hide? Oh wait, maybe the USF will be shown for what it truly is. hmmm.....

Yeah, it might give some power to lawsuits overturning the welfare laws that prohibit communities from building and running their own systems?

Maybe in the next Census they should put a little check mark saying if the customer has or does not have high speed internet of at least 1.5mbps or higher.

Surely, they mean "Monopolative harm".

Now that is a good idea.

de Centro para la integridad pública. Lanzar por favor cuánto es tu sueldo, tu valor de la casa, tu peso de la esposa, tu tarjeta del informe de los childrens, el contenido de tu refrigerador.

It's been used by all sides of the political spectrum to bring some sunshine into the inner workings of Federal Gov't agencies.

Of course the FCC will fight this tooth and nail. If this information reveals that broadband deployment is in fact not going well in the USA, the 1996 Telecomm Act requires them to take "drastic act". And that's something Martin and the other laissez faire ideologues running the Commission are not wont to do.

I saw Martin speak at CES. I thought, "Man, he's awful young for someone so powerful". I thought of the criticism often directed at the current administration that they often choose people based more on ideological purity (a la the old Soviet Union) rather than managerial ability and experience (can anyone say, "Brownie, you're doin' a heck of a job"?). And the scuttlebutt in D.C. is that Martin is extremely politically ambitious. This also means he is loathe to do anything to piss off companies he'll be dependent on for commercial time, favorable reporting, and $$$ come campaign time.

The other thing I noticed, of course, was his fervent philosophy that 100% laissez faire policies will automatically solve all telecomm issues; those instances of market failure we all heard so much about in economics class was just something the professors made up.

I've got municipal water, sewer and Aquila natural gas available at my address yet the mighty AT&T still can't deliver DSL, not that I'd want to downgrade from Comcast HSI.

So where are all those USF dollars going?

I love that idea...except most people would check the "I don't know" box if available.

Okay, now you're making no sense in TWO lanugages! Wanna try for three?

Unfortunately I speak Spanish.

Come back when you are a little more mature.

Only if 1.5M isn't available- there are still quite a few people out there who can get 1.5M or more, but opt for a lower priced, slower speed option.

Into the execs pockets (and in-turn some falls into the politicians' they pay off to keep it that way)... where else?

No matter how many times they will say it, I don't see competion. I don't see competion coming. In fact, I see less of it coming. I also don't see more people being served. Just a sad attempt at bringing a few more profitable areas with next generation (can you call AT&Ts deployment that?) internet without increasing to any (or at least many) other areas than who they currently serve, specifically since the FCC seems to be a stamp for the telcos.

Perhaps. Or maybe, it will put the lie to the figures the FCC and the incumbents have been using. They wouldn't be fighting this if their skirts were clean.

Good observation but I am pretty sure if such a thing would be included in the Census that more information would be required such as pricing, there current package, and current line speeds.

Since a government agent will appear to your home he will tell you how to run the test online and you simply hand him over the numbers and writes it on the form.

I seriously doubt it will be just this one little checkbox as I seen the Census 2000 forms myself and usually take about a 45 minutes to a hour to fill.

But, but, but!!! You simply don't understand! They are our betters, divinely endowed with wisdom, intelligence and judgement far beyond that of us one-fodder units. They are making money in great gouts, which is the natural order of things. No matter they have not delivered services or levels of service as they promised they would when they testified before congress in the run-up to the Telecom Dereg Act of '96. No matter that they tariff the hell out of their services and collect government-ordered fees that are supposed to be applied to the expansion of services into the areas where said services still don't exist. No matter rollout of said services into said areas has been at a realtive state of stasis for many years. Competition? That is for the rabble.

No matter. They are our betters and it is beneath them to even have to think about justifying themselves. We are simply fortunate to breathe the same air they do, and hope for a better life in the hereafter.

Please excuse me: I am off to read another chapter of the Cliff's Notes of "Atlas Shrugged".

No comprende hombre.

I think the data is fair game if the goal is to allow state governments to plan for UNIVERSAL or 100% access//affordable rates..

Otherwise, what's the point?

Loads of holes in AT&T's territories , can tell you that.. without a search feature..

Regardless of their political leanings on this issue I think every American should be interested in know how their tax dollars are being spent. This data was collected by a government agency on the tax payer's dime and the resultant data should be freely available to the public.

-phil

If some group wanted my business info i would sure as hell tell them to suck it.

You also paid for the police force. You should ask for each of the officers home address.

The bank where they keep your money is partly paid by you. You should ask them how many cameras they have, how many guards they have, the amount of cash on hand each day..

You paid for the school down the road. You should walk in and ask how many kids attend. How many forth graders they are, how many of them are boys. Lets see how far you get.

Yeah, yeah I know, "don't feed the trolls" but it's Friday night and I'm bored.

ninjatutle,

I don't know what you're smokin' but I'd like to get some of it too. You obviously have a problem with understand logical relationships. It probably makes your life a lot happier.

Although I do pay the police salaries and for their training I have no vested interest in their home address and therefore no legal (or logical) reason to ask for it. I can however ask how they are using their publicly funded cars and how many times a week they have to go to the gentlemen's clubs while on duty to protect my life and liberty.

Banks are private enterprises paid for by their investors. To the best of my knowledge I don't own any stock or mutual funds which invest in banks so therefore I have no legal (or logical) reason to ask for it.

Schools are publicly funded (at least the public ones are) and I do have a legal right to ask the questions you pose. In fact that information is all available on my local school district's web page as well as many realtor's. However I don't care to know that information as my kids go to private school and I really don't need to care about the local elementary school's class conditions.

I'm sure you're enjoying your non-sensical spouting in this thread but please take it elsewhere so that those of us who no longer live at home can have a mature discussion.

Thank you,

-phil

Dagda1175,

The FCC already has that information. In fact they were given the legal authority and duty to collect that information by the federal legislature. If a company told the FCC to suck it I'm sure that the FCC would be able to tell them to suck it with a hefty fine.

The question at hand is not about getting some sort of corporate proprietary information, the question at hand is why won't the FCC turn over the information to the public that it was chartered by the congress (and by extension the public which the congress represents) to collect and why do the corporations want to hide that information so sorely?

-phil

"Competitive Harm"

They don't want the public to know the true roll out rate of broadband. Just think what would happen if the true roll out rate is different than what is being stated? That the Telco's and cable companies would be under scrutiny. That the USF is a big waste of money and should be abolished.

Maybe now a 60% roll out rate won't be a acceptable number.

And why would you want this info? Only terrorist would need this sort of info.

I doubt if the 'figures' are a lie. Just remember, you have 'lies, damn lies, and STATISTICS'. Just because the way they present it builds a case for one thing does not mean they lied, just that they did not show the other side of the numbers that you want to see. And they are not lying, just not telling you the story YOU want to hear (and the rest of us slaves to the corporations, not counting certain stock holders).

I believe that the FCC is telling the truth, the number of zip codes served is as they say. *BUT*, what they are not telling us is the PERCENTAGE of possible served units that actually can get service and what levels of service they receive for a given zip code. And that is what WE as users want to see.

While the FCC is not lying, it could be said that they are not playing with the truth either. Statistics, I have seen that field of math used to prove what ever the big boss wants, just manipulate the way you display your data.