Do we really want to create a worse digital divide?

This week, Thomas Friedman authored a column in the New Your Times Opinion Pages that seems to call for institutionalizing a digital divide:

• Ultra high speed Internet for the 5% who live in "university towns"
• Stop worrying about the 5% of the country in rural areas
• Implies "average" Internet for everyone else.

A friend--Ann Treacy--just took him on the the Twin Cities Daily Planet.  It's a great read.

My comments to a Net Neutrality hearing for the FCC

Late last summer I presented testimony below at a meeting on the Future of the Internet. It is still relevant. The meeting included two FCC Commissioners, US Senator Al Franken and Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Richie and Free Press CEO Josh Silver. You can find details of the meeting, including video from The UpTake in the Twin Cities Daily Planet here. Another good article, "Communities of color may have most to lose if net neutrality goes" was also in the Daily Planet.

Testimony of Sheldon Mains, August 19, 2010, South High School, Minneapolis, MN:

Commissioners, welcome to Minneapolis. My name is Sheldon Mains. Although I am the president of my neighborhood association in Minneapolis and chair of the board of the Twin Cities Media Alliance. I am here representing myself. I live in the Seward Neighborhood of Minneapolis.

My work with the Internet started in 1992 when I started working to establish an Internet service to meet the needs of nonprofit organizations in Minnesota. That service started operations in 1994 and provided email, web, FTP and gopher services to nonprofits and provided classes to help nonprofits and artists learn to use the Internet. The service had to shut down a few years latter because of pressure from local cable TV provider.

I’d like to tell a short story:

In January 2009 my neighborhood was the site of a triple murder at a store owned by Somali immigrants.

The next morning the “neighborhood leaders” (including myself) met to decide on a response. We had no good ideas. Then someone sent an email to our neighborhood discussion forum suggesting that we hold a vigil that night. The leaders’ response was: “Wow, what a great idea.” We got the word out through email, local blogs, Facebook, Twitter, local websites and face-to-face organizing. We ended up with over 800 people outside in 20 degree below zero weather. That vigil was one reason that the Somali community cooperated with the police. With that cooperation this crime was solved in less than a week.

The vigil would not have happened with an open Internet.

• First, Our small community could not afford to pay for the “premium delivery service” some providers now want to charge.
• Second, without home access, that one great idea would not have reached the people who could make it happen.

This raises a number of important issues:

1. The FCC needs to reestablish its authority to regulate the corporations that sell Internet service at a healthy profit. Remember, the Internet was invented and developed using our tax dollars. The Internet is not the property of the large telecommunications firms; it is ours.
   
2. We need to insure real competition: Most residential consumers have at most two choices for Internet service. This is not real competition. Even three or four competitors is not real competition. In economics terms its an "oligopoly"—not really any more meaningful competition than a monopoly. This so-called competition will not solve any problems that could be caused by not having strong net neutrality regulation.
3. We need strong Net Neutrality regulations that apply to all of the Internet: Net Neutrality has to apply to the whole Internet, including networks that the industry may call by other names but serve the same function. Anything less than that will result in telecommunications companies under-investing in the Internet.

Finally, we do need to improve access. If more people had access in their homes—especially many of our immigrant neighbors who have to rely on a computer lab for access—that vigil would have been even more successful.

I urge the FCC to do its job—Protect the public interest.

Thank you

Why you should care about broadband and Net Neutrality

NTEN asked me to write an article on why nonprofit techies and leaders should be interested in the pending decisions and debates at the local, state and federal levels regarding Internet access. The thousand word article is on NTEN's blog. (Note, they came up with the title--"Save the Internet, Save the World."

10 Disruptive Technologies You Need to Think About

From Gartner via Holly Ross at NTEN "10 Disruptive Technologies You Need to Think About." No comment is necessary. It says it all.

More Broadband Stimulus Info

This is about a month old but still looks useful. Stimulus money for broadband development. From Internetnews.com:

How to Get Broadband Stimulus Cash
The government is handing out billions of dollars, but obtaining a piece of it won't be easy.

Stimulus Package, Broadband and Nonprofits. Some Resources

Tomorrow morning I'm hosting a session at the Nonprofit Technology Conference on the Stimulus Package, broadband and nonprofits. It is going to be a group sourcing session--I don't know much about it. No one seems to have all the answers--but if we share our knowledge, we may be able to figure it out.

So here are some resources:

American Library Association
Top ten things you can do now…To get broadband stimulus funding for your libray
http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/wo/woissues/washfunding/fedfund/Broadband%20Top%20Ten.pdf

7.2 Billion for Broadband
http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/wo/woissues/washfunding/fedfund/arra101pgs/broadband.cfm

Baller Herbst Law Group
Basic links
http://baller.com/economic_stimulus.html

Opportunities for Federal Grants, Loans and Other Support for Broadband
http://baller.com/pdfs/Baller_Herbst_Stimulus_2-19-09.pdf

Additional Broadband Funding Opportunities
http://baller.com/pdfs/BHLG_More_ARRA_03-30-09.pdf

Knight Center of Digital Excellence
Center of Digital Excellence Stimulus Center
http://www.knightcenter.org/stimuluscenter.html

US Government Recovery Act Sites (added 4/28 -- suggested at NTC)
Central Recovery.gov site
http://www.recovery.gov/

Agency Recovery Act Sites
http://www.recovery.gov/?q=content/agencies

NTIA (National Telecommunications and Informatino Administration--Department of Commerce)
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/recovery/index.html

Department of Agriculture (RUS-Rural Utilities Service)
http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/!ut/p/_s.7_0_A/7_0_1OB?navid=ARRA_PLANS&parentnav=USDA_ARRA&navtype=RT

National Public Lightpath
News on Broadband Stimulus (see right side bar)
http://www.publiclightpath.org/

Minnesota Broadband Coalition
http://www.mnbroadbandcoalition.com

Internet for Everyone
http://www.internetforeveryone.org/

Fieldstone Alliance (General—non broadband—stimulus information)
Want Stimulus Money? Act Fast!
http://www.fieldstonealliance.org/client/tools_you_can_use/04-08-09_access_stimulus_money.cfm?disccode=TOOL040809&repvendid=335

Blandin Foundation, Minnesota
Live at the speed of light: a broadband vision for Minnesota
http://broadband.blandinfoundation.org/_uls/resources/Vision_Statement_FINAL_0228.pdf

Broadband Initiative
http://broadband.blandinfoundation.org/

Blandin on Broadband Blog
http://blandinonbroadband.org/

Blandin calls for stimulus funding partners
http://blandinonbroadband.org/2009/04/22/blandin-calls-for-stimulus-funding-partners/

Minneapolis Wi-Fi Community Benefits Agreement--Quick Summary

While traditionally Community Benefits Agreements have been used for real estate developments where developers have promised specific benefits to a community in exchange for support of specific zoning changes, Minneapolis used a CBA to specify the specific community benefits a private contractor would provide in exchange for a contract that made the City of Minneapolis the anchor tenant for a privately build, owned and maintained city-wide wi-fi system.

Brief History
The community benefits agreement was first proposed by Minneapolis Digital Inclusion Coalition--a loose group formed by the Alliance for Metropolitan Stability (using funding from the Minneapolis Foundation. In response to this group, the City of Minneapolis formed a Digital Inclusion Task Force that recommended specific items for the Community Benefits Agreements. To many people's surprise, the Mayor and City Council agreed to a Community Beneifts Agreement and made it a part of the contract.

Major Provisions
From the City of Minneapolis website, the major provision of the CBA are:

• USI Wireless will provide $500,000 to create a “digital inclusion fund” that will be used to promote affordable Internet access, low-cost hardware, local content and training. In addition, US Internet will direct a minimum of five percent of the network’s net profits to a digital inclusion fund for ongoing digital inclusion efforts. In total, it is expected that about $11 million will go into the digital inclusion fund over the 10-year term of the contract.
• Free limited-time service will be available in some public locations, such as parks and plazas in Minneapolis.
• A free “walled garden” level of wireless service – Minneapolis Civic Garden – is now available to people throughout the city for important neighborhood, government, and community services information.
• Designated community technology centers will receive free wireless access.

By far the most important benefit is the provisoin of five precent of the network's net profits to a digital inclusion fund. That fund is aministered by the Minneapolis Foundation (an independent community foundation) with the help of a Digitial Inclusion Advisor Board. That board is primarily citizens from the community (one member is a City Council member and one member is a representative of the system owner). This money goes directly from the contractor/owner to the Minneapolis Foundation. It does not go through the city or city council. The almost $400,000 in grants the fund has made are listed here.

The Obama Stimulus Package, Broadband, Minnesota and Leadership

The Blandin Foundation just hosted a gathering of people interested in making sure Minnesota gets it share of the Obama Stimulus Package money devoted to getting people broadband Internet service.(More detail on the broadband portion of the package here)

Six major take-aways from the meeting:

1. No one knows the exact process the federal governement will use to distribute the money but much of it (around $4 billion to $5 billion) will be by competitive grants.
2. These grant applications will be complex and will likely reward collaborations and partnerships.
3. To write an effective applications, organizations need to get started now--especially get started forming the colaborations and partnerships
4. Collaborations and partnerships take up-front resources. Because of the economy and state of Minnesota cuts in funding to cities, schools and health care, no one has the up-front money to devote to creating the partnerships.
5. Ideally, Minnesota state government should step up and be a leader in creating the partnerships.
6. With the current Minnesota Governor, don't expect any leadership. Minnesota's current governor really believes government can not do anything well and should do nothing. He has been actively making this true for the last six years.

More detail about the meeting on Blandin's Blandin on Broadband blog.

Internet Access in Egypt

Interent access for tourists in Egypt can be summarized as expensive. The only exception was our first hotel in Cairo where I found an unsecured wifi that I could access from the hotel room.

The ship we cruised the Nile on for 4 days had access for about $11.00 for each 30 minutes. If the ship was moving the access was intermittent and rather slow. If the ship was docked, the access was rather slow but stable.

The Cairo hotel we stayed in when we were at the pyramids (it was less than a mile from the pyramids had wired Internet in the rooms. It cost about $ .90 per minute. It was a deal if you used a lot--only about $35 maximum for any one 24 hour period.

So, I'm getting my blog done at home.

Found out that only about 5% of Egyptians have Internet access of any kind (To help put this in persective, about 50% of the population live in rural areas.) I did see a couple Internet Cafes while we were driving.

Rural Broadband Hearing

On December 29, 2008, US Senator for Minnesota Amy Klobuchar held a hearing on the need for better better rural access to broadband. This blog entry is going to be my (somewhat random) thoughts that were sparked by the hearing. If you want details about the hearing itself, go to the great summary by Ann Treacy on the Blandin on Broadband blog.

The audience was a round up of all the usual suspects:

• Telcom industry lobbyists, consultants and association folks;
• People working for Blandin Foundation's broadband project;
• Members of the MN Ultra High-Speed Broadband Taskforce;
• Reporters;
• An employee of the FCC who happened to be in town on vacation (but she usually works on Digitial TV issues);
• At least one librarian.
  

There were a few members of the public in attendance.

Senator Klobuchar's opening comments included her desire that the Obama economic stimulous package include incentives/funding for expanding rural broadband. She noted how the US had dropped behind other developed counties in broadband access and that Minnesota had dropped to 44th out of the 50 states in Internet access speed. She compared the need for funding to the Rural Electrification Administration in the depression of the 1930s.

The panel presenting testimony (organized by Klobuchar staff) had the type of people you'd expect considering the goal of pointing out the need for rural access to broadband:

• A rural state senator;
• A school technology director (for a largely rural district);
• a manager of a rural telephone cooperative;
• A manager for a (primarily rural) health provider;
• A small town/rural economic development director;
• A person who works with Blandin Foundation.

The one surprise was the president of the Communications Workers of America (CWA) (the union that mainly respresents Qwest workers).

All the rural panelsits talked about the need for broadband access. They had the typical examples and the typical horror stories. It seemed like everyone thought just getting access to broadband would solve the problem. There was little or no discussion about the need for access to hardware and software for the low income residents. There was no talk about the need to help people learn that there are reasons they want to be on broadband. There was no talk about the need to have content that was meaningful for all their residents (most seemed to be only considering the middle class in their analaysis).

The presentation by the rural telephone coop manager (West Central Telephone) was interesting. He talked about providing fiber to the home in his rural area--that they were able to do it because:

• Federal loans for rural telecomunications provided relatively low cost finance;
  
• They were a monopoly--that no one else wants to serve the low density area they serve;
• They are owned by their clients;
• Because they only grow if the economy of their service area grows.

They are using units that combine small solar and wind generation equipment to power the electronics needed to run a fiber system across such a large area.

The president of the CWA seemed to mainly parrot the basic line of Qwest: That competion in telecommunications is bad. He was even going back to ancient (in telecom terms) history of the 1954 decision by the FCC that ATT could not provide cable service. I wasn't surprised this, to me, CWA has always seemed to be a captive of the telephone companies (ATT, Northwestern Bell, US West, and Qwest in our area).

No one brought up the issue that the economic self interest of telecommunicaitons companies depends on their size and total service areas.

• West Central Telephone for example is willing to invest in their area because they will only grow if the economy of their service area grows.
  
• A municipal owned telecom provider (privately or cooperatively owned) will similarly invest in providing broadband service to their community because that is the only way they will grow.
  
• Qwest will not invest in broadband in rural areas or small towns because they view their growth comming from the metropolitan areas they serve (and even in those areas, they seem more interested in milking the investments made 30 to 50 years ago than in making new investments.

The one interesting idea that was presented (besides the rural telephone cooperative example) was the idea of one highspeed broadband connection to the home, regulated as a common carrier with different companies providing different (and competing) applications over the same wire.

At the beginning of the public comment period, Rick King, the chair of the MN Ultra High-Speed Broadband Taskforce made some good but generic comments about the need for broadband service across the state. He mentioned that the final report of the taskforce will be available in the fall of 2009.

Why is it taking the taskforce until fall 2009 to come out with their recommendations. They started meeting on August 15, 2008. Even for a government task force, that seems to be like a long time! Especially considering that it would be great to have a report for this legislative session and for the new Obama administration. MN state government--always a step behind.

I didn't stay for the rest of the public comment period (my parking meter was expiring) but based on Ann's blog post, nothing exciting happened.