Last year, many industry analysts and advocacy groups warned of the looming spectrum crisis.  Mobile broadband has taken off exponentially, and American consumers are adopting mobile devices and using them more frequently.  A recent article in The Hill comments on the spectrum situation and illustrates that actions must be undertaken by policymakers to ensure that mobile broadband can continue to succeed.

A few points from the article: Continued…

In the concluding months and weeks of 2011, we have seen quite a few Opinion Editorials and commentaries on topics such as broadband, wireless, and the digital divide.  Unfortunately, some have not correctly characterized the facts and realities of the market.  In the last days before 2012, Neiman Watchdog released an Op-Ed which was highly critical of the FCC and the Obama Administration.  While they make several good points, they miss key portions of the overall picture of the broadband and digital telecomm industry.

A few points from the article: Continued…

As reported in Des Moines Register:

Forbes take on Lightsquared vs Iowa farmers

By: Dan Piller

Forbes Magazine checks in today with a New York perspective on the battle between investor Phil Falcone and his proposal for an expanded wireless broadband through Lightsquared, which has aroused Midwest farmers, Deere & Co. and Iowa U.S. Senator Charles Grassley who worry about what they say the the harm a more crowded broadband would do the global positioning satellite systems and precision farming.

In an article entitled “Lightscrewed: How Washington Whipped Phil Falcone” Forbes makes it sound like Falcone has lost and Grassley and the farmers have won in the battle for the expanded broadband.

Last month Grassley put a hold on two nominees for the Federal Communications Commission and at the same time made known his displeasure at Lightsquared and the FCC over what Grassley said was the lack of information from both. Continued…

For the last several years, we have heard about the potential for broadband to be delivered through white space spectrum.  While the broadcasting industry has been skeptical about the ability to deliver broadband without interruption, engineers and tech firms have believed in the potential of white space broadband delivery.  After several years, engineers have built a device which has now been approved by the FCC to send and receive signals over unused broadcast spectrum known as white space.

A few points from this article from Ars Technica: Continued…

As reported in Gigaom.com

The next broadband battle: AT&T/Dish and Verizon/Cable

By Tim Farrar, Telecom, Media, and Finance Associates, Inc

The business model for standalone wholesale wireless network operators, such as LightSquared or what Clearwire hoped to be, is broken. But in the coming year, a new and ultimately more successful model is poised to emerge, one that will transform the entire communications landscape as we know it, and pit Verizon and cable TV on one side against AT&T and satellite TV on the other.

Back in September, I wrote an article for GigaOM pointing out that it was “increasingly difficult to see a sustainable place in the market for dedicated wholesale players like Clearwire and LightSquared.” Since then, Clearwire has threatened to default on its interest payments in order to secure further commitments from Sprint, and LightSquared is reportedly close to running out of cash. These guys don’t look like winners.

The new model Continued…

Politic365 ran an article this week which responds to a previous article which focused on wireless broadband creating a new digital divide.  The original article, Colorlines, contends that smartphones and mobile broadband service from wireless companies are creating two Internets.  In addition, the article argues that wireless Internet is the “Cyber Ghetto” because minorities are more likely to rely on the service for digital access and that it is inheritably inferior to wired service.  Not only is this view incorrect, it negatively affects the pursuit of reducing the real digital divide – which is between those who have regular access to the Internet and those who don’t.

It has been well covered that Latinos, other minorities, low income households, the elderly, and rural residents are the most likely groups of people to fall into the digital divide.  The Pew Internet and American Life Project has collected and chronicled statistics regarding Internet usage and there are several dynamics which can be concluded from their research.  For instance, Latinos are still among the most likely groups to not have regular Internet access, and they are also among the most likely groups to own smartphones and subscribe to wireless service.  Therefore, it clearly shows that wireless continues to have a profound impact in bringing Latinos into the digital age.

This is where the Colorlines piece gets it wrong.  We all know the limitations of smartphones versus laptops and desktops connected to wired broadband.  Speed is not as fast with wireless, and phones do not have the computing power and ability to do as many things as PCs.  However, smartphones are very affordable, provide traditional telecommunications service, are extremely mobile, and are increasing in functionality.  The Politic365 article points out that with today’s smartphones, users can perform online banking, e-ecommerce,   social networking, and web browsing quite proficiently.  And, at such an affordable price it is a stepping stone towards computers and wired broadband. Continued…

There have been a few widely read Opinion Editorials and columns discussing broadband which have been featured in prominent newspapers and magazines .  Most recently, USA Today ran an editorial which focused on the overall strength of the domestic broadband market regarding competition and choice.  In the article, the author discusses and lays out the argument that the US market is competitive, provides adequate choice, and that government should not be actively involved either in the investment or regulatory phase.

A few more points from the article:

• If you measure broadband by the number of gigabytes used per month, the US is far ahead of Western Europe and Asia.  Using this method is considered appropriate as it measures the utility of broadband networks.
• Telecommunication firms are investing heavily into broadband infrastructure, to the tune of billions of dollars annually.  In wireless, total investment by the top firms alone is several billion annually as they roll out nationwide 4G LTE plans.
• 90% of Americans have 5 or more choices in the market when picking a service provider in the wireless market.
• The digital economy would benefit if government removed themselves or lessened their footprint in the wireless market.

The editorial is correct in noting that the US does have one of the most efficient and advanced broadband networks in the world.  We are leading the way in wireless Internet usage, and our firms are major players in the digital economy.  However, the digital divide still exists and it cannot be solved simply by ignoring the policy implications in the market.  The Federal government has made a wise decision to continue towards the goal of universal access to broadband.  A significant number of households, especially in minority, low income, and rural areas, do not have a sufficient enough wired infrastructure to provide service.

And, wireless is at a major crossroads in the policy/legislative/regulatory arena.  Wireless companies desperately need additional spectrum to meet increased demand for mobile Internet service.  While the US has been a leader in the wireless marketplace, we need to ensure that the spectrum resources are available; otherwise, a real crunch for spectrum will hurt innovation and the ability of the digital economy.

What is needed is a well-thought out and coordinated effort between the public and private sector to ensure there is adequate investment and resources available for the digital economy to flourish and to fight the digital divide.  The author is right that too much government involvement in the industry will stifle the potential of the digital economy, but too little government involvement can be damaging to the effort of closing the digital divide, providing universal access to high speed Internet, and the growth of the digital economy.