SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
It's no secret that ISPs can make more money from network upgrades in wealthy neighborhoods than low-income ones, and a new analysis of Cleveland, Ohio, by broadband advocacy groups appears to show that AT&T is following that strategy. The National Digital Inclusion Alliance (NDIA) and a Cleveland-based group called Connect Your Community alleged in their report today that "AT&T has systematically discriminated against lower-income Cleveland neighborhoods in its deployment of home Internet and video technologies over the past decade."
Last year, the NDIA brought attention to AT&T's refusal to provide $5-per-month Internet service to poor people in areas where the company hasn't upgraded its network. When the Federal Communications Commission approved AT&T's purchase of DirecTV in 2015, the FCC required AT&T to provide discount broadband to poor people as condition of the merger. But the condition apparently allowed AT&T to charge full price in areas where maximum download speeds were less than 3Mbps. After the NDIA spoke out, AT&T announced it would stop exploiting the loophole and instead provide discount Internet to poor people in all parts of its network.
Today's followup report from the NDIA and Connect Your Community analyzes FCC data on AT&T Internet deployments in Cleveland, where many residents were initially declared ineligible for the discount broadband service.
"Specifically, AT&T has chosen not to extend its 'fiber-to-the-node' VDSL infrastructure—which is now the standard for most Cuyahoga County suburbs and other urban AT&T markets throughout the US—to the majority of Cleveland Census blocks, including the overwhelming majority of blocks with individual poverty rates above 35 percent," the report said.
In the Ohio suburbs, AT&T customers routinely get speeds of at least 18Mbps and sometimes up to 1Gbps, while high-poverty neighborhoods in Cleveland are stuck on speeds of 768kbps to 6mbps, the report said. The FCC defines broadband speeds as 25Mbps downstream and 3Mbps upstream.
"When lending institutions have engaged in similar policies and practices, our communities haven't hesitated to call it 'redlining,'" the advocacy groups wrote. "We see no reason to hesitate to call it 'digital redlining' in this case."
Source: ArsTechnica
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday March 14 2017, @02:38AM (9 children)
Basically the same thing happened when congress appropriated billions of dollars for the telcos to expand out to that "last mile". They spent some part of those billions expanding their networks in densely populated areas. This study shows the discrimination between densely populated wealthy areas, and densely populated poor areas. It's always the "bottom line". Congress gave us billions, how can we exploit those billions to turn the maximum profit? It matters not to the telcos that it was YOUR money, and MY money that they were using. We get nothing out of that money, unless we are fortunate enough to live in those select areas that promised the most ROI. Never mind that it wasn't the telco's investments, but OURS!
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday March 14 2017, @03:22AM (4 children)
But....butbutbut letting businesses do their own thing with money and not loading them down with burdensome regulation ALWAYS leads to growth and consumer choice and lower prices!!!111eleventy-one
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14 2017, @03:59AM (3 children)
Are you never not a horrible cunt? Just because you're a tranny doesn't mean you need to act like you constantly have PMS.
(Score: 1) by anubi on Tuesday March 14 2017, @05:36AM (2 children)
If what Azuma posted is indicative of PMS, then I have it as well.
Regulation is required in exchange for the governmental enforcement of an artificial monopoly.
These telecoms are more like a prostitute, with Uncle Sam pimping for them, using physical force if necessary to keep competition off the street. Its the New American Way.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday March 14 2017, @02:14PM (1 child)
Your analogy lacks something. A prostitute promises his/her services for a fixed price. The prostitute delivers the services, then gets out of your life. The telcos seldom deliver on their best promises, they never get out of your life, and they continue to ask for more and more money, forever, endlessly. If the telcos were as honest as most prostitutes, we would all be much better off.
Note that if AC posts some horrible account, maybe the traveling prostitute who killed a couple dozen truck drivers, then the telcos might be compared to THAT prostitute.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Tuesday March 14 2017, @06:58PM
US ISPs are like the ugly diseased-looking prostitute left standing after the pimp wars.
If you want that service without having to move, it's gonna cost you more than it should be worth (and is elsewhere), not allow choice or control, have obvious flaws you need to actively ignore all along, and will likely leave you with long-term consequences and a dirty feeling.
(Score: 2) by Whoever on Tuesday March 14 2017, @03:34AM (3 children)
Following on from your line of thinking, we should take the profit motive out of the equation and have the government install and own the last mile.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Tuesday March 14 2017, @03:41AM (2 children)
Every time a municipality tries that, they seem to get sued...
(Score: 3, Interesting) by ben_white on Tuesday March 14 2017, @03:48PM (1 child)
Because it might work.
--
cheers, ben
(Score: 3, Informative) by Nobuddy on Tuesday March 14 2017, @09:44PM
Because it DOES work.
Ogden, UT got tired of Clearwire fucking them over and refusing to cover that last mile. So they built a community fiber network and invited any ISP that wants to use to do so. Clearwire refused, 4 other ISP's decided to play.
It worked, very well. The ISP's compete with each other to provide the best service at the best rates.
other towns got involved, and now the network extends the entire length of the Salt Lake metroplex. Clearwire- who had the monopoly in the north, and Comcast - who had it in the south, both refuse to play on the network. The network has a dozen ISPs- most revived old dialup providers that DSL and cable put out of business. true gigabit 1Gbup/1Gbdown no caps, no limits, no throttling costs $60. If you call customer service they bend over backwards to accommodate you because changing ISP is just a phone call away- no interruption of service at all.
Real competition- this is what the ISPs want to prevent, because they can't play their nickel and dime fuck-fuck games without a regional monopoly.
They hate it so much they spend millions every year in fake news, ads, billboards, etc trying to convince everyone it will rape your cat and run over your children if it expands. Every year the communities laugh at them and expand it further.