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.

A recent New York Times opinion editorial by Professor Susan Crawford has circulated around the Internet over the past few days.  The opinion article discusses broadband in the context of the digital divide and in the context of how Americans continue to connect to the Internet.  A large portion of the article is dead on – the digital divide is indeed a serious problem which must be addressed.  However, there are portions of the article which portray wireless Internet as second class or second tier to wired broadband.  While I must disagree with these conclusions, it does bring some new thoughts and ideas to the discussion of the digital divide.

A few more points from the Op-Ed: Continued…