"Hey, we're #19!"

The United States may be a leader in many things, but broadband isn’t one of them. The country has now fallen two more positions — to 19th place, behind South Korea, Sweden, Denmark, the United Kingdom, and even Iceland, since the Berkman Center for Internet and Society released its last rankings in 2009.

In 2004, President George W. Bush complained about the U.S. falling to 10th place, which he declared was “ten spots too low.”

Now eastern Europe and former Soviet Republics in the Baltics threaten to overtake the United States, and countries in southeast Asia already have.  Innovation in the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand means deploying fiber to the home service to the vast majority of the population.  Innovation in North America means conjuring up new pricing schemes to raise prices on broadband service and engage in competition-busting mergers and acquisitions.

But a USA Today editorial this week also places much of the blame on corporate influence inside Washington, which has promulgated legislative policies that favor telecommunications companies and throw customers under the bus.

“The simple answer is that other countries have policies that promote competition and innovation,” the editors write. “In contrast, policies here have allowed a few dominant players that control the least interesting parts of the broadband landscape (the cables and the wireless spectrum) to dominate.”

Indeed, a series of telecommunications laws enacted by Congress, combined with short-sighted policies at the Federal Communications Commission, have allowed a handful of super-sized players to own and control broadband service in America, resulting in providers establishing non-competing fiefdoms that avoid head-on competition.

The worst policy of all allowed broadband providers to keep competitors from reaching customers over existing broadband networks.  During the days of dial-up, you could purchase Internet access from the phone company, a large provider like MSN or AOL, or thousands of smaller regional and local service providers.  Simply dial a local access number and you were connected to the provider of your choice.  Now, U.S. law gives broadband network operators the right to restrict these independents from selling service over their networks.  Comcast need not sell anything other than Comcast Internet.  Frontier Communications can make a killing selling its own DSL service, while protecting that revenue from other Internet Service Providers who might sell the service over Frontier’s network for half the price.  Time Warner Cable voluntarily allows Earthlink and a handful of other companies to sell cable broadband service over its infrastructure, but at prices equal to or higher than what Time Warner charges itself.

Broadband providers argue that allowing competitors to sell service on their network would discourage future investment and rob shareholders a return on investments already made.  Today, major cable operators and phone companies are falling all over themselves denying they are in anything but the broadband business.  It has become an enormously lucrative enterprise, more profitable than television or telephone service.

USA Today compares the broadband landscape back home with that in South Korea — perennially the world’s fastest, and considerably less expensive than what North Americans pay for service:

South Korea has made broadband a national priority, mandating deployment and in some cases giving private companies incentives to build out. It has also prevented major players from monopolizing their businesses, encouraging competition and innovation. In South Korea, consumers can get broadband service from a cable or telecom company. But they may also choose among myriad independent providers that are given access to the physical infrastructure. This competition keeps prices down and the quality of service high.

[…] But over time, cable and telecom companies worked the courts and Congress to make sure that this competitive world would never come to be [in the United States]. […] Wireless is a bit better. But the market has remained a near duopoly, with none of the smaller players emerging as a strong competitor to AT&T and Verizon.

The same open network concept has fought its way forward in Canada (where Bell has worked furiously to sabotage the business plans of independent providers) and in the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand where all three governments have decided the best solution would be to scrap the ancient landline network and start fresh with an open-to-all-comers fiber to the home service.

Back home in the States it is business as usual with increasing broadband prices and the looming prospect of usage-limiting schemes designed to cut capital costs, monetize broadband usage, and stop cord-cutting.

The opposing point of view comes courtesy of dollar-a-holler, corporate-backed think tank The Heartland Institute, who is stuck quoting notorious industry-funded studies and think tanks like the Discovery Institute and the Technology Policy Institute:

The idea that European and Asian countries are lapping America in the race for broadband speed and penetration is a fallacy created with statistics comparing “persons” instead of “households.” Once you make that correction, the USA is firmly planted among the top of industrialized nations, as economist Scott Wallsten pointed out when he was a staffer at the Federal Communications Commission in 2009.

And as tech researcher Bret Swanson of Entropy Economics points out, if you measure Internet usage by gigabytes used per month — a better measure of the speed and utility of networks — the USA has nearly lapped Western Europe once and Asia twice.

Heartland Institute: "By not disclosing our donors, we keep the focus on the issue."

If you measure how many mouse clicks customers in New York make on a Thursday afternoon, we could be number one as well!  Gigabytes used per month does not measure the speed or price of service on broadband networks, considerations that actually do impact broadband rankings.

Mr. Wallsten is a familiar favorite go-to-guy for The Heartland Institute.  He’s also the choice of Time Warner Cable, who paid him $20,000 for a 2010 essay: “The Future of Digital Communications Research and Policy.”

There is big money to be made writing corporate-funded research reports.  Bret Swanson knows that very well, having been involved with the Discovery Institute, a “research group” that delivers paid, “credentialed” reports to telecommunications company clients who waive them before Congress to support their positions.  Swanson is also a “Visiting Fellow” at Arts+Labs/Digital Society, which counted as its “partners” AT&T and Verizon.

The gentleman from Heartland also quotes from the misnamed “Progressive Policy Institute,” which counts among its funding partners, AT&T.

It would have been probably easier (but ineffectively transparent) to simply quote from AT&T and Comcast directly.

The Heartland Institute, unsurprisingly, believes letting existing broadband providers deliver service exactly the way they want is the best option:

The digital economy — one of the only vibrant economic sectors left — doesn’t need more government “investment” or regulation. It needs only for government to butt out and let the market work the magic that continues to bring us the marvels of the modern age.

That magic will cost you $50 a month and rising.  If some providers have their way, while the rest of the world abandons usage caps, American providers can’t wait to slap them on, reducing the value of your service even further.

Sometimes you can’t please some people no matter what you do.

Kit Carson Electric Cooperative’s $64 million fiber-to-the-home expansion project will finally bring 21st century broadband speeds to northern New Mexico. The electric co-op intends to deliver broadband speeds up to 100Mbps to 20,000 largely rural residents and businesses in Taos, Colfax, and Rio Arriba counties who have had limited access to cable broadband or live with speeds often less than 1Mbps from CenturyLink-delivered DSL.

“It’s a whole new ballgame for rural New Mexico,” shares Stop the Cap! reader Raul. “But the pinheads at the local weekly newspaper are ringing their hands over the project, suggesting only businesses deserve 100Mbps while the rest of us should be satisfied with speeds under a megabit per second.”

Indeed, editors at the Sangre de Christo Chronicle are wringing their hands over the project:

But many of us in the Kit Carson service area already have Internet service — and we’re completely happy with it. Kit Carson CEO Luis Reyes, Jr. said a large portion of the organization’s electric customers are currently under-served by other providers with Internet speeds of less than one megabit (1,000 kilobits) per second.

We have no reason to doubt that, but many of these customers probably don’t need the higher speeds. For the Internet customers who use the Internet for email, Facebook, news and other basic functions, Kit Carson’s prices will be most important. Most of us will not pay more for faster Internet speed we don’t need, but we will consider switching to a local provider if it offers identical or better service and prices.

“CenturyLink barely delivers DSL today, and has shown no interest in investing substantially in northern New Mexico, and outside of concentrated built-up areas there is no cable competition,” Raul says. “Kit Carson is the only local concern that has shown any real interest in making our community better, and the local newspaper is complaining about it.”

Proposed service area for Kit Carson Electric's new fiber to the home network serving northern New Mexico.

Kit Carson Electric’s project will provide a true fiber-to-the-home service bundling television, telephone, and broadband service — a substantial upgrade over what the telephone company has on offer.  With speeds far beyond what cable and phone providers in New Mexico are accustomed to providing, the region stands to benefit from entrepreneurs building digital economy businesses over a broadband network that can actually help, not hinder online development.

Currently, area residents pay CenturyLink up to $55 a month for 1.5/1Mbps DSL service.  Residents are so excited by the prospects of much faster speeds at significantly lower prices, Kit Carson Electric has developed an innovative stop-gap service for residents still waiting for direct fiber connections — fiber-to-wireless service.  New and existing customers can sign up for the service for a $100 installation fee and choose from three service tiers:

• 3Mbps — $29.95/month
• 7Mbps — $39.95/month
• 10Mbps — $49.95/month

A three year contract is required (early termination fee is $200).  But customers who eventually obtain Kit Carson Electric’s fiber service will automatically satisfy their contract requirement.

“Kit Carson’s wireless project already blows away CenturyLink’s speeds and pricing, and that is for inferior wireless,” Raul argues. “The Chronicle doesn’t have a clue.”

We can’t understand the newspaper’s concerns either.  Kit Carson Electric has already demonstrated their prices (and interest) in northern New Mexico is superior to that of CenturyLink, owner of former Baby Bell Qwest, which serves New Mexico.

Republican Sen. Jeff Bingaman is thrilled with Kit Carson’s broadband initiative.

“This major investment in broadband technology is exactly the kind of project I had envisioned when I voted for the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act,” U.S. Senator Jeff Bingaman said. “This grant is not only creating jobs now in northern New Mexico, it is laying the groundwork to attract new businesses, improve healthcare services and create new education opportunities in the future.”

The electric co-op has been successful operating non-profit businesses selling propane, telecommunications, and economic development space.  The fiber project will also allow the electric utility to deploy “smart grid” technology to increase the efficiency of their electric service.

A groundbreaking ceremony at the broadband project’s command center held this past summer also coincided with a public emergency communications network upgrade which will increase the efficiency and reliability of first responders and other emergency and public safety agencies.

Time Warner Cable’s progression towards all-digital cable continues to spread across Maine as customers in Albion, Augusta, Belgrade, Benton, China, Clinton, Farmingdale, Gardiner, Hallowell, Litchfield, Manchester, Monmouth, Mount Vernon, North Vassalboro, Readfield, Richmond, Rome, Sidney, Vassalboro, West Gardiner and Winthrop lost many of their analog channels last week.

But customers losing AMC, Animal Planet, Cartoon Network, CKSH, CHLT, CNBC, E!, EWTN, GAC, Hallmark Channel, HGTV, History, HSN, INSP, NECN, Ovation, QVC, SyFy, Shop NBC, TCM, TNT, and USA also provoked the loss of something else: patience.

“Cable TV is the only service I pay for that increases my bill and frustration at the same time,” says Augusta Stop the Cap! reader Jeff E. Smith.  “The digital adapter Time Warner sent me was defective right out of the box, and two of my neighbors were also sent defective units that never powered on,” Smith writes.

Time Warner Cable is dramatically reducing the analog cable lineup to make additional room for new digital HD channels and faster broadband speeds.  The company is supplying palm-sized digital adapters for subscribers who don’t have a digital set top box on every television.  Although free until 2014, the boxes will carry a monthly fee of $0.99 each after that.

“The upgrade gives them the chance to cram on more channels we don’t want and more expensive broadband, and yet we have to eventually pay for the equipment,” Smith says. “And it doesn’t even work right.”

Smith’s neighbors have discovered patience-testing lines at some Augusta-area cable stores as customers rushed to obtain the equipment they assumed they didn’t need.

“The neighbor’s mother-in-law doesn’t understand how to use OnStar in her car, so it was no surprise she found out she needed the equipment when most of her favorite channels disappeared,” he adds.  “Time Warner really overestimated the level of understanding customers would have about this after buying new digital-TV’s a few years ago.”

Jim has several suggestions for Time Warner to adopt before the digital upgrade begins its progression across the country:

1. The equipment should be free of charge and included with your regular monthly service.  You can’t realistically expect to buy Time Warner Cable service without a box for every set after the digital conversion is complete, so just include the equipment;
2. A better and less intrusive way to manage this would be to install a single digital converter on the outside of the home or in a closet which could provide analog service to every TV not already equipped with a set top box.  That would mean no annoying box on every set in the home and would probably cost less (in time, money, and aggravation);
3. People assume they are ready for digital cable because they bought digital-ready TV’s after analog television service ceased. Most customers will not read generic letters carefully.  It would be better to send people customized letters telling them they specifically will need the equipment because records indicate additional outlets were installed in the home without corresponding cable set top boxes attached to them.  What are the chances customers are using CableCARD units these days?  Chances are, they’ll need the DTA adapters, so make this clearer.
4. Don’t you dare put customers through this, increase broadband speeds, and then slap usage caps or usage billing on us!

FairPoint Communications is under fire for counting customers “broadband ready” when, in fact, they can’t buy DSL service from the northern New England phone company at any price.

One of the commitments FairPoint made to regulators who approved their buyout of Verizon landlines in Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont in 2007 was that the company would expand broadband availability to at least 87 percent of residents in states like Maine.  In October, FairPoint claimed it had met that target, but now the Office of the Public Advocate has found instances where the phone company counted customers who live too far away from the phone company’s facilities to buy the service as “served.”

FairPoint is apparently counting most customers within a DSL-equipped exchange as reachable by broadband, even if only some of them actually are.  The rest either live too far away to get proper broadband speeds, or are connected to inferior lines that will not sustain a serviceable connection.

Maine’s Public Utility Commission (PUC) is upset FairPoint seems to be padding the numbers in its favor.  Maine’s Public Broadcasting Network talked with commissioners:

“I just find it hard to reconcile that it’s in the public interest to include in the definition of addressable lines, a line on which no customer can be connected and to which Fairpoint has made no planning or economic commitment to serve in the future,” said Vendean Vafiades. She, along with fellow commissioner David Littell, voted in favor of a decision which is likely to require Fairpoint to re-calculate the 87 percent figure using a stricter methodology.

“And I do believe that Fairpoint has a commitment to be economically viable in this state and to provide good quality service. And at a minimum I think Fairpoint should be required to provide actual access to meet its merger condition and obligations,” said Vafiades.

The holdout vote was that of PUC Chairman Tom Welch, who sympathized with Fairpoint on this issue.

The vote in Maine is likely to force FairPoint, which had hoped it was “all done” fulfilling broadband obligations, to spend more to upgrade its network to sufficiently service customers it promised it would.

FairPoint defends their interpretation of the numbers, noting the company has spent more than $169 million across their northern New England territories on broadband, making good on their commitment.  The state’s consumer advocate and PUC disagree, so now all parties will be re-evaluating their numbers, and FairPoint customers still waiting for DSL might still have a chance to get it after all.

Maine’s Public Broadcasting Network reports on the controversy over FairPoint’s promise to serve at least 87% of Maine with broadband service. Maine’s public utility commissioners voted to ramp up the pressure on Fairpoint Communications with regard to their broadband rollout. The expansion of high-speed internet to most areas of Maine was one of the conditions of Fairpoint’s purchase of Verizon’s former landline operation in 2007. (3 minutes)
You must remain on this page to hear the clip, or you can download the clip and listen later.

Comcast Cable has been embarked on a gradual effort to convert many of their cable systems to digital platforms, which means more channel space, faster broadband speeds, and major headaches for some customers.

In Harrisonburg, Va., Comcast customers have been surprised and frustrated to find many of their favorite channels missing.  The cable company migrated most of the basic cable lineup to digital.  Customers who already use Comcast set top boxes never noticed the difference, but those who don’t certainly did.

The cable company spent weeks notifying customers they may need a “digital transport adapter” (DTA) — a fancy name for a small set top box — to continue to receive Comcast service on televisions that do not already have a box attached.  Many cable customers are confused by the transition, assuming if they own a “digital-ready” television, they don’t need extra equipment.  But most, in fact, do.

When customers discovered they needed the new box, minor chaos ensued at area Comcast retail outlets.  The Virginia State Police was reportedly pressed into service directing traffic in and out of some crowded cable store parking lots, and one customer even found a trooper guarding the cable company’s front door.

Some customers are telling local media they waited hours in long lines to obtain the equipment.  Several others are complaining even with the boxes, their favorite channels are still missing.

Most of the trouble seems to surround the authorization process required to enable the new equipment.

Comcast DTA (Courtesy: David Trebacz)

A reporter for an area television station discovered that on the air as she attempted, and failed, to get her box authorized for service, even after an hour waiting.  Customers report very long hold times when calling Comcast as well.

The cable company acknowledged some of the challenges.

“For the past few months, we’ve been communicating with our customers in the Shenandoah Valley about our ‘World of More’ digital enhancement,” the company said in a statement. “We’re moving analog channels to digital, and we do see an increase in the number of customers trying to get digital equipment. We’ve been offering extended hours and stepping up staffing to respond to increased demand.”

Comcast says the transition will increase the number of HD channels on offer in Virginia.  It also opens the door to faster broadband speeds through DOCSIS 3 upgrades.  In all, the company plans to add 50 new HD channels in the Staunton, Waynesboro and Augusta County areas after the upgrade is complete.

Area customers just wish the experience worked more seamlessly. Comcast customers in many communities have already dealt with digital upgrades.  Time Warner customers, starting in Maine, are just beginning the experience.

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WHSV Harrisonburg Comcast Problems in Va 11-16-11.flv[/flv]

This WHSV reporter in Harrisonburg, Va. tried to demonstrate how to install and activate Comcast’s new set top box equipment… and failed because the cable company authorization process didn’t work.  (2 minutes)