WHAT OTHERS ARE SAYING

Here is the lead to a Wall Street Journal story that ran on Christmas Eve:

Americans in low-income neighborhoods and rural areas get slower broadband speeds even though they generally pay similar monthly prices as their counterparts in wealthy and urban areas. The country’s biggest broadband provider charges more in markets without competition. Most people don’t have a choice.

The story, based on an examination of 3,300 bills for broadband service in 50 states, detailed how customers in low-income neighborhoods wind up paying the same monthly rates as those in wealthier areas, but for service that is 40 percent slower (it’s slower still for folks in rural areas). Plus, lower-income and rural customers are routinely hit with extra fees that others aren’t. To make matters even worse, 2 of 3 Americans live in areas where there is only one provider of high-speed internet service — in other words, under a monopoly. …

High-speed broadband is to the 21st century what electricity became in the 20th, a service so essential that lacking it means not fully participating in modern life. … Imagine trying to run a web-reliant business in a small town and having to go up against firms in larger cities that have a built-in advantage on internet speed and cost.

As you slowly find yourself unable to compete, you might get a little, you know, resentful. You might come to the conclusion that the rules are rigged against you by those urban people. And you might decide to vote for someone who promises to give those people hell.

Paul Glastris, Washington Monthly