new america

Content tagged with "new america"

Displaying 21 - 30 of 240

Following Through on Transparency: A Broadband Nutrition Label Status Report

Nearly one year ago on November 15, 2021, Congress passed the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), which contained significant legislation around broadband. One piece, which the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR) has studied closely over the past year and a half, is the implementation of a broadband nutrition label which would require the transparent disclosure of broadband pricing and service information.

While this issue gets very little news coverage, it is an important undertaking as the big providers have a long-established habit of hiding pricing and speed information from subscribers, which prevents them from making informed choices and can leave them vulnerable to exploitation. Our advocacy for the label, and the original research behind our position, can be found here. The FCC is now under deadline to release an order to “promulgate regulations to require the display of” the label by November 15 of this year. We’ve taken a moment here to re-access the issue, offer a few updates, and highlight the ingredients of a strong broadband nutrition label. 

Pushing for Clarity, Easy Accessibility, and Enforcement

ILSR, along with 30 other digital equity organizations, recently filed a letter to the FCC supporting the creation of the broadband consumer label and advocating that it be published in a way that makes it clear and easily accessible for customers. While ILSR believes the label is a key decision-making tool and should be published at the point of sale, we reject proposals to limit the label’s display to the point-of-sale only. We emphasize in this letter that the label should also be published on the monthly bill to provide an additional provider accountability mechanism that allows customers to understand what they're paying for.  

Following Through on Transparency: A Broadband Nutrition Label Status Report

Nearly one year ago on November 15, 2021, Congress passed the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), which contained significant legislation around broadband. One piece, which the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR) has studied closely over the past year and a half, is the implementation of a broadband nutrition label which would require the transparent disclosure of broadband pricing and service information.

While this issue gets very little news coverage, it is an important undertaking as the big providers have a long-established habit of hiding pricing and speed information from subscribers, which prevents them from making informed choices and can leave them vulnerable to exploitation. Our advocacy for the label, and the original research behind our position, can be found here. The FCC is now under deadline to release an order to “promulgate regulations to require the display of” the label by November 15 of this year. We’ve taken a moment here to re-access the issue, offer a few updates, and highlight the ingredients of a strong broadband nutrition label. 

Pushing for Clarity, Easy Accessibility, and Enforcement

ILSR, along with 30 other digital equity organizations, recently filed a letter to the FCC supporting the creation of the broadband consumer label and advocating that it be published in a way that makes it clear and easily accessible for customers. While ILSR believes the label is a key decision-making tool and should be published at the point of sale, we reject proposals to limit the label’s display to the point-of-sale only. We emphasize in this letter that the label should also be published on the monthly bill to provide an additional provider accountability mechanism that allows customers to understand what they're paying for.  

Open Technology Institute Report Details the Cost of Connectivity in the Navajo Nation

This past August, the Open Technology Institute (OTI) (a program of New America) released its 2020 Cost of Connectivity Report, which showed that a combination of regulatory and oversight choices combined with market forces results in Internet access that for most Americans is slower, less reliable, and more expensive than elsewhere in the world. 

In October, the OTI followed up that report with one focused on the Navajo Nation. It argues that “altogether, the federal government’s failure to connect people on tribal lands deprives entire tribes of opportunities for employment, healthcare, education, and economic growth in both the short and long-term.”

The Navajo Nation is divided into 109 political subdivisions (called chapters) by geography across Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah. The OTI report finds that just four of those chapters have access speeds which meet the FCC’s standard for basic broadband (25/3Mbps (Megabits per second)), and that many in the community remain stuck on the wrong side of the digital divide. 

More Findings

Claire Park, author of the study, pulled data from the Navajo Nation Woven Integrated Data Project and combined it with FCC data and state broadband maps from March to July 2020, cross checking a sample of addresses with existing residential Internet Service Providers (ISPs) in those areas. It uses a total of 450 offered plans in its data set.

The report succinctly argues that broadband remains just one among the litany of struggles that those living on tribal lands face:

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic exposes the deeply unjust policies behind stark inequities in certain communities. In the case of tribal nations, the federal government’s lack of support during the pandemic is another chapter in a brutal history of injustice that leaves tribes particularly vulnerable to this disease. Generations of federal policies undermining Indigenous wealth, power, and sovereignty have left many Native people without access to basic infrastructure, including food, running water, safe and adequate housing, telecommunications service, and healthcare.

Open Technology Institute Report Details the Cost of Connectivity in the Navajo Nation

This past August, the Open Technology Institute (OTI) (a program of New America) released its 2020 Cost of Connectivity Report, which showed that a combination of regulatory and oversight choices combined with market forces results in Internet access that for most Americans is slower, less reliable, and more expensive than elsewhere in the world. 

In October, the OTI followed up that report with one focused on the Navajo Nation. It argues that “altogether, the federal government’s failure to connect people on tribal lands deprives entire tribes of opportunities for employment, healthcare, education, and economic growth in both the short and long-term.”

The Navajo Nation is divided into 109 political subdivisions (called chapters) by geography across Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah. The OTI report finds that just four of those chapters have access speeds which meet the FCC’s standard for basic broadband (25/3Mbps (Megabits per second)), and that many in the community remain stuck on the wrong side of the digital divide. 

More Findings

Claire Park, author of the study, pulled data from the Navajo Nation Woven Integrated Data Project and combined it with FCC data and state broadband maps from March to July 2020, cross checking a sample of addresses with existing residential Internet Service Providers (ISPs) in those areas. It uses a total of 450 offered plans in its data set.

The report succinctly argues that broadband remains just one among the litany of struggles that those living on tribal lands face:

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic exposes the deeply unjust policies behind stark inequities in certain communities. In the case of tribal nations, the federal government’s lack of support during the pandemic is another chapter in a brutal history of injustice that leaves tribes particularly vulnerable to this disease. Generations of federal policies undermining Indigenous wealth, power, and sovereignty have left many Native people without access to basic infrastructure, including food, running water, safe and adequate housing, telecommunications service, and healthcare.

Open Technology Institute Report Details the Cost of Connectivity in the Navajo Nation

This past August, the Open Technology Institute (OTI) (a program of New America) released its 2020 Cost of Connectivity Report, which showed that a combination of regulatory and oversight choices combined with market forces results in Internet access that for most Americans is slower, less reliable, and more expensive than elsewhere in the world. 

In October, the OTI followed up that report with one focused on the Navajo Nation. It argues that “altogether, the federal government’s failure to connect people on tribal lands deprives entire tribes of opportunities for employment, healthcare, education, and economic growth in both the short and long-term.”

The Navajo Nation is divided into 109 political subdivisions (called chapters) by geography across Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah. The OTI report finds that just four of those chapters have access speeds which meet the FCC’s standard for basic broadband (25/3Mbps (Megabits per second)), and that many in the community remain stuck on the wrong side of the digital divide. 

More Findings

Claire Park, author of the study, pulled data from the Navajo Nation Woven Integrated Data Project and combined it with FCC data and state broadband maps from March to July 2020, cross checking a sample of addresses with existing residential Internet Service Providers (ISPs) in those areas. It uses a total of 450 offered plans in its data set.

The report succinctly argues that broadband remains just one among the litany of struggles that those living on tribal lands face:

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic exposes the deeply unjust policies behind stark inequities in certain communities. In the case of tribal nations, the federal government’s lack of support during the pandemic is another chapter in a brutal history of injustice that leaves tribes particularly vulnerable to this disease. Generations of federal policies undermining Indigenous wealth, power, and sovereignty have left many Native people without access to basic infrastructure, including food, running water, safe and adequate housing, telecommunications service, and healthcare.

Open Technology Institute Report Details the Cost of Connectivity in the Navajo Nation

This past August, the Open Technology Institute (OTI) (a program of New America) released its 2020 Cost of Connectivity Report, which showed that a combination of regulatory and oversight choices combined with market forces results in Internet access that for most Americans is slower, less reliable, and more expensive than elsewhere in the world. 

In October, the OTI followed up that report with one focused on the Navajo Nation. It argues that “altogether, the federal government’s failure to connect people on tribal lands deprives entire tribes of opportunities for employment, healthcare, education, and economic growth in both the short and long-term.”

The Navajo Nation is divided into 109 political subdivisions (called chapters) by geography across Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah. The OTI report finds that just four of those chapters have access speeds which meet the FCC’s standard for basic broadband (25/3Mbps (Megabits per second)), and that many in the community remain stuck on the wrong side of the digital divide. 

More Findings

Claire Park, author of the study, pulled data from the Navajo Nation Woven Integrated Data Project and combined it with FCC data and state broadband maps from March to July 2020, cross checking a sample of addresses with existing residential Internet Service Providers (ISPs) in those areas. It uses a total of 450 offered plans in its data set.

The report succinctly argues that broadband remains just one among the litany of struggles that those living on tribal lands face:

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic exposes the deeply unjust policies behind stark inequities in certain communities. In the case of tribal nations, the federal government’s lack of support during the pandemic is another chapter in a brutal history of injustice that leaves tribes particularly vulnerable to this disease. Generations of federal policies undermining Indigenous wealth, power, and sovereignty have left many Native people without access to basic infrastructure, including food, running water, safe and adequate housing, telecommunications service, and healthcare.

Open Technology Institute Report Details the Cost of Connectivity in the Navajo Nation

This past August, the Open Technology Institute (OTI) (a program of New America) released its 2020 Cost of Connectivity Report, which showed that a combination of regulatory and oversight choices combined with market forces results in Internet access that for most Americans is slower, less reliable, and more expensive than elsewhere in the world. 

In October, the OTI followed up that report with one focused on the Navajo Nation. It argues that “altogether, the federal government’s failure to connect people on tribal lands deprives entire tribes of opportunities for employment, healthcare, education, and economic growth in both the short and long-term.”

The Navajo Nation is divided into 109 political subdivisions (called chapters) by geography across Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah. The OTI report finds that just four of those chapters have access speeds which meet the FCC’s standard for basic broadband (25/3Mbps (Megabits per second)), and that many in the community remain stuck on the wrong side of the digital divide. 

More Findings

Claire Park, author of the study, pulled data from the Navajo Nation Woven Integrated Data Project and combined it with FCC data and state broadband maps from March to July 2020, cross checking a sample of addresses with existing residential Internet Service Providers (ISPs) in those areas. It uses a total of 450 offered plans in its data set.

The report succinctly argues that broadband remains just one among the litany of struggles that those living on tribal lands face:

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic exposes the deeply unjust policies behind stark inequities in certain communities. In the case of tribal nations, the federal government’s lack of support during the pandemic is another chapter in a brutal history of injustice that leaves tribes particularly vulnerable to this disease. Generations of federal policies undermining Indigenous wealth, power, and sovereignty have left many Native people without access to basic infrastructure, including food, running water, safe and adequate housing, telecommunications service, and healthcare.

The Cost of Connectivity 2020

Image
Cost of Connectivity Report

The Cost of Connectivity 2020, a recent report from the Open Technology Institute (OTI) at New America, explores how much Americans pay for Internet access compared to those in other parts of the world.

After examining 760 broadband plans in 28 countries in North America, Europe, and Asia, the report's authors conclude that Americans pay higher fees for slower speeds, with communities of color and low-income households most affected. The report points to a lack of Internet service provider transparency and competition as reasons why costs are higher in the United States compared to other places. OTI found that municipal broadband networks, like the one in Ammon, Idaho, provide much better value to subscribers and offer some of the most affordable Internet plans in the country.

Some takeaways from The Cost of Connectivity 2020:

  • "[I]nternet service in the United States remains unaffordable for, and therefore inaccessible to, many low-income households . . . In April 2020, 43 percent of lower-income parents reported that their children will likely have to do homework on their cellphones, and 40 percent said that their children would likely have to use public Wi-Fi to finish schoolwork because they lack a reliable internet connection at home. The 'homework gap' also disproportionately affects students who belong to BIPOC communities."
  • "Just three U.S. cities rank in the top half of cities when sorted by average monthly costs. The most affordable U.S. city—Ammon, Idaho — ranks seventh."

  • "Data caps further increase the cost of internet service while limiting users’ data consumption . . . Furthermore, data caps can have anticompetitive effects on the wider ecosystem, especially if an Internet Service Provider (ISP) selectively applies data caps to preference its own content while deprioritizing competitors . . . Notably, most of the plans with data caps are in the United States. In Europe, all plans advertised no caps or did not specify. In Asia, only one city specified a cap."

The Cost of Connectivity 2020

Image
Cost of Connectivity Report

The Cost of Connectivity 2020, a recent report from the Open Technology Institute (OTI) at New America, explores how much Americans pay for Internet access compared to those in other parts of the world.

After examining 760 broadband plans in 28 countries in North America, Europe, and Asia, the report's authors conclude that Americans pay higher fees for slower speeds, with communities of color and low-income households most affected. The report points to a lack of Internet service provider transparency and competition as reasons why costs are higher in the United States compared to other places. OTI found that municipal broadband networks, like the one in Ammon, Idaho, provide much better value to subscribers and offer some of the most affordable Internet plans in the country.

Some takeaways from The Cost of Connectivity 2020:

  • "[I]nternet service in the United States remains unaffordable for, and therefore inaccessible to, many low-income households . . . In April 2020, 43 percent of lower-income parents reported that their children will likely have to do homework on their cellphones, and 40 percent said that their children would likely have to use public Wi-Fi to finish schoolwork because they lack a reliable internet connection at home. The 'homework gap' also disproportionately affects students who belong to BIPOC communities."
  • "Just three U.S. cities rank in the top half of cities when sorted by average monthly costs. The most affordable U.S. city—Ammon, Idaho — ranks seventh."

  • "Data caps further increase the cost of internet service while limiting users’ data consumption . . . Furthermore, data caps can have anticompetitive effects on the wider ecosystem, especially if an Internet Service Provider (ISP) selectively applies data caps to preference its own content while deprioritizing competitors . . . Notably, most of the plans with data caps are in the United States. In Europe, all plans advertised no caps or did not specify. In Asia, only one city specified a cap."

The Cost of Connectivity 2020

Image
Cost of Connectivity Report

The Cost of Connectivity 2020, a recent report from the Open Technology Institute (OTI) at New America, explores how much Americans pay for Internet access compared to those in other parts of the world.

After examining 760 broadband plans in 28 countries in North America, Europe, and Asia, the report's authors conclude that Americans pay higher fees for slower speeds, with communities of color and low-income households most affected. The report points to a lack of Internet service provider transparency and competition as reasons why costs are higher in the United States compared to other places. OTI found that municipal broadband networks, like the one in Ammon, Idaho, provide much better value to subscribers and offer some of the most affordable Internet plans in the country.

Some takeaways from The Cost of Connectivity 2020:

  • "[I]nternet service in the United States remains unaffordable for, and therefore inaccessible to, many low-income households . . . In April 2020, 43 percent of lower-income parents reported that their children will likely have to do homework on their cellphones, and 40 percent said that their children would likely have to use public Wi-Fi to finish schoolwork because they lack a reliable internet connection at home. The 'homework gap' also disproportionately affects students who belong to BIPOC communities."
  • "Just three U.S. cities rank in the top half of cities when sorted by average monthly costs. The most affordable U.S. city—Ammon, Idaho — ranks seventh."

  • "Data caps further increase the cost of internet service while limiting users’ data consumption . . . Furthermore, data caps can have anticompetitive effects on the wider ecosystem, especially if an Internet Service Provider (ISP) selectively applies data caps to preference its own content while deprioritizing competitors . . . Notably, most of the plans with data caps are in the United States. In Europe, all plans advertised no caps or did not specify. In Asia, only one city specified a cap."