Exploring the impact of broadband and technology on our lives, our businesses, and our communities.
Hilda Gay Legg gave the morning keynote address at the RTC conference today. Until very recently, Legg was the Federal Co-Chair of the Appalachian Regional Commission. She has had extensive experience working with rural communities and as a sociologist, really understands rural America. She had a lot of interesting comments:
Legg has a good grasp of the issues, and she is one of a very few speakers on telecom who has identified correctly that cultural barriers in rural communities are a much bigger obstacle than lack of infrastructure. That has been my experience as well--rural communities that want to succeed do, but it requires a change of cultural and appropriate local leadership. Legg gave a great talk.
Pete Johnson, the Federal co-chair of the Delta Regional Authority (the Mississipi delta of several states and 10 million people) spoke at lunch abou the importance of infrastructure to the health and vitality of communities. He made several points in the early part of his talk:
Johnson gave a brief history of the Delta region starting with the War Between the States, and up to the present day. He has been heavily involved in dealing with the aftermath of hurricanes Katrina and Rita, which caused heavy damage to infrastructure in the Delta region as far as 200 miles inland.
Johnson enumerated four areas of technology and telecommunications infrastructure investment that he sees as critical for rural communities.
I am attending the 9th Annual Rural Telecommunications Congress Annual Conference, which is one of the oldest community technology meetings in the country. The group is meeting in Lexington, Kentucky this year, and has a record attendance of more than 400 people.
The opening keynote talk was delivered by Coach "Tubby" Smith, head basketball coach for the University of Kentucky. He talked about his work in introducing technology in underserved neighborhoods by providing after school technology programs that include technology, training, mentoring, and equipment in the home to help kids.
But the most interesting remark that he made was about his own basketball team. He said that he had to work very hard with his basketball players to encourage them to communicate with each other, and with him. He said the players had so many gadgets--PDAs, cellphones, iPods, etc. that they were constantly fiddling with them, and in the process these youth were tuning out not only the coach but other team members. He said it was a constant struggle to get the players to put the devices away and be present to what was going on around them.
It is ironic that the proliferation of inexpensive and capable communications devices are, in some ways, making us less communicative.
There are many other examples of how the technology is improving human to human communication, but we need to remain thoughtful about the effects of technology, especially on our youth.
Google's new partnership with Sun is creating a lot of speculation, in part because the details of the agreement are quite vague. Sun has agreed to download the Google Toolbar with every copy of Sun's Java software. The Google Toolbar is unpopular with a lot of net folks (including me) because it actually inserts links into a Web document where there were none. In other words, the Toolbar changes the meaning of a Web page without the author's permission. And the links, of course, point to Google content.
As an example, if you have Google Toolbar running, as a page is being downloaded, the Toolbar scans it for text chunkls that look like addresses, and if it finds one, it creates a link on the page that takes you to a Google map. As Dave Winer points out, this is quite insidious, because the reader can't tell that Google has modified the page.
It's another example of how Google's actions are quite contrary to the company slogan, "Don't be evil." Changing Web pages to point to your company's content and ads is evil. Imagine if you found that Google was inserting links on your company Web site that pointed to your competitor. Hard to imagine? That's exactly what Barnes and Noble discovered earlier this year, when it found that the Google Toolbar was putting links to Amazon.com on the B&N Web site.
I have taken much criticism over the past several years by arguing that forcing the telephone and cable companies to open their networks to competitors (called "open access") was the wrong thing to do. And I got more scorn when I said the FCC did the right thing earlier this year by formally putting an end to line sharing for DSL.
I will not rehash the entire discussion, but my feeling then and now is that a level playing field would create new opportunities. And the recent announcement that Earthlink will build a WiFi network for the City of Philadelphia FOR FREE is vindication.
Earthlink has had a modest DSL access service that relied on its ability to lease DSL lines from local phone companies at below market rates. Once the FCC stopped requiring phone companies to lease lines to firms like Earthlink, that business dried up rather quickly.
So Earthlink has proposed and achieved a public/private partnership with the City of Philadelphia to install and manage a citywide WiFi mesh network. Their goal, of course, is to get into a huge market for broadband and compete against the cable and phone companies.
This never would have happened if the FCC had not come out against forced open access.
Philadelphia will provide Earthlink with access to public facilities to install antennas, and will also likely help with installing the fiber in streets that will be needed to light up the network (even in a mesh network, you still have to get the wireless signals back onto the wired Internet).
I was initially opposed to the Philadelphia project because I thought it was risky for a local government to take on a massive effort like this in advance of understanding the market. I still think having the government take on the services side is still risky in some cases. But Earthlink brought a proposal to the city that shifts virtually all of the risk to a private company. It's beautiful. And it happened because the local government got involved, instead of standing on the sidelines with its hands in its pockets.
Bottom line: Local government has a valuable role to play by creating a vision for the community and encouraging private sector investment to help make it happen. Philadephia leaders have done a great service for the community, and businesses and residents will have more choice for broadband access and services, and both the city and its businesses will save millions on telecom services.
I was told recently that the MSAP (Multimedia Services Access Point) was outdated and no longer needed. The MSAP is a public peering point that we pioneered in Blacksburg in 1999. It is still in operation today, and vastly improves network performance within the community.
The MSAP is just a network data exchange point, which is old as the Internet. But what was new and different about what we did in Blacksburg was the concept that communities and regions needed to provide public peering points--for a whole variety of reasons, most related to lower costs for bandwidth and greatly improved quality of service for things like voice and video services.
But another reason is to make sure private interests don't have monopoly control over the network, as illustrated perfectly in this item.
Briefly put, two major backbone Internet providers (Cogent and Level 3) are squabbling and Level 3 has stopped allowing Cogent's traffic to cross its network. This means, in some cases, that you cannot send IP traffic from here to there. Sites lose traffic, businesses are affected, and performance is degraded. And businesses in affected communities can't do a thing about it.
Public peering points like MSAPs and RNAPs (Regional Network Access Points) won't stop the squabbles, but they can help mitigate the effects, and give communities and regions some control over their destiny.
Put another way, imagine if all roads out of your community were private toll roads that could be shut down at any time by a private company? Would that be good for business? Would it be good for the community? Would it help attract business and industry?
The answer, of course, is an emphatic no. But that is exactly the situation we have today with the Internet. As the Internet becomes more and more important to commerce, governance, and daily life, communities and regions cannot keep ignoring these issues.
Universal Studios has announced that it will put its movies online by the end of next year. The link has very little detail, but the fact that a major studio has committed to this is very significant.
What is not mentioned but important is that you will only be able to download movies if you have a broadband connection. Those that worry about investing in community broadband infrastructure on the theory that people won't use it should rest easy. Everybody (or at least a very high percentage) watches movies.
USA Today reports that IP TV is booming, just as I have been saying. IP TV shows have been attracting audiences of half a million people, which many cable TV channels would kill to have. And advertisers are pouring billions into the new medium--they love it because their ads can be much more narrowly focused for specific audiences, and someone interested can click right through to the advertiser's site. This means the advertisers get real time data while the show is actually being watched; that's something TV can't do.
What does this mean for communities? It means that entertainment and economic development are converging, in the sense that it may be difficult to justify broadband investments built on a narrow base of business users, but if everyone in the community wants broadband to watch TV, the dollars are there to support a community digital road system. When World Wresting Entertainment can put on WWEHeat and attract 500,000 viewers without any advertising, the debate about broadband is over. It's here, and the broad base of users is ready for it.
An FTC (Federal Trade Commission) commissioner spoke out against cable and telecom efforts to stifle community investment in broadband. Jon Leibowitz made a sensible analogy when he said that the current industry approach was like "Barnes and Noble and Borders saying libraries are killing their business and asking law makers to stop localities from building more libraries."
Leibowitz went on to say, "If cities do have these so-called advantages [such as freedom from taxation and various local regulations], and they want to pass them on to citizens, why shouldn't they be allowed to do so? That's exactly what a city does when it operates public schools, hires a police force, or builds libraries."
If an FTC commissioner can see and describe the situation so clearly, why can't our elected leaders and the FCC also see it? You may want to cut out the original article and mail to all your local leaders who can't make up their minds about broadband. Maybe it help them to see the light.
The Region 2000 Technology Council, which serves Lynchburg, Virginia and the surrounding area, is really beginning to make a difference. A year ago, they found that too many people in the area still did not understand the value of broadband, in part because they had never had a chance to try it.
So the Tech Council rolled up its sleeves and went to work. They set of goal of getting 50 WiFi hotspots in the region in the next year, and started with the airport. A little more than a year later, the group has met its goal, and free WiFi is available for business and personal use throughout the Lynchburg area.
The effort has been good for the business owners that have made the small investment needed to create individual hotsports. Hotels, B&Bs, coffee shops, and other businesses are seeing increased traffic, according to an article in the Blue Ridge Business Journal (paper edition).