EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- How the US Turned Three Pacifists into Violent Terrorists
- Corporate Win: Supreme Court Says Monsanto Has 'Control Over Product of Life'
- Cornel West: Obama 'Is a War Criminal'
- Revealed: How US State Department 'Twists Arms' on Monsanto's Behalf
- Victory in Seattle as Teachers Win Battle in Standardized Test Boycott
Popular content
Today's Top News
Broad Coalition Backs Universal Broadband
WASHINGTON - A broad coalition of Internet business leaders, online gurus, community organizers and advocates across the political spectrum launched a campaign Tuesday with the lofty goal of universal high-speed Internet service.
Better broadband access and quality can be a boring and technical issue, fraught with bureaucratic complications, admitted the organizers for InternetforEveryone.org. But they also see it as crucial to the future of the U.S. economy, education and even the health of democracy.
At a news conference in New York, the group warned that the United States is falling behind European and Asian nations with Internet access that is more limited, more expensive and slower. U.S. users pay an average of $53 a month for high-speed service, compared with $32 in Germany and $33 in Britain, according to one international survey.
The campaign includes Vint Cerf, Internet "evangelist" for Google; Stanford University Professor Lawrence Lessig; Zipcar founder Robin Chase; venture capital leader Brad Burnham; and Van Jones, community organizer and president of the green-economy group Green for All, based in Oakland.
Groups backing the coalition range from the ACLU and the Progressive States Network to techRepublican.com. David All, a conservative online activist, said many rural voters who lean to the GOP don't have broadband, "so it's common sense to me why Republicans want to support the internet."
Organizers concede that while the presidential candidates have spoken in favor of greater high-speed access, the issue doesn't lend itself to stump speeches. Dozens of bills in Congress have languished that would provide subsidies and other investments to get Internet service providers to extend and improve coverage.
The coalition will hold forums around the country and try to build support for plans that improve access, choice and innovation.
'Basic as hot water'Lessig and Chase said that better service will depend on public involvement and a recognition that high-speed Internet is as necessary as a utility.
"Maybe it's not as basic as water, but it's as basic as hot water," Chase said, adding that her innovative car-use business would not exist without the Internet.
Jonathan Adelstein, a Federal Communications Commission member, said the campaign must emphasize the benefits of broadband, such as health care data in rural areas or distance learning. The key, he said, is a national broadband policy that fosters more competition.
"We're falling behind in access, speed and price, Adelstein said, noting that large phone and cable companies dominate the market. He sees potential in wireless networks and a need for government subsidies for areas not served. A study by the California State Broadband Task Force in December found that about 1.4 million state residents, mainly in rural areas, did not have broadband service, and only about half of Californians have broadband at home. The group called for state bonds and tax breaks for providers to extend service.
A "digital divide" among Internet users could also leave lower-income and minorities behind, the coalition warned. According to the Census Bureau, 35 percent of households with annual incomes below $50,000 have broadband, while 76 percent of those with higher incomes are connected.
It's 'life and death'High-speed Internet is becoming crucial to democracy, said Van Jones, and people are left out "when they don't have access to the discussion in the blogosphere" or have access to specific information in an emergency.
"In the California wildfires, those who had access to information at the drop of a hat could figure out if they were in danger and get out," Jones said. "It's a matter of life and death."
For more information on the broadband campaign: www.internetforeveryone.org.
© 2008 San Jose Mercury News
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

23 Comments so far
Show AllA double edged sword. Information, yes.
Also facilitates government surveillance and domestic spying, kidnapping-renditions, planting mis-information, government knowledge of our physical whereabouts and thoughts/messages/contacts.......
I say American Politicians will Welcome it Enthusiastically!
Oops, previous post belongs to another article. Maybe editors can delete it, as I can't.
I wish it was a more democratic group with ordinary people and membership not based on wealth, prestige and status. Civil Liberties groups are making allies with those who do not have the citizens priorities at the top of their agenda. Whatever happened to the universality of one person one vote? The Post Office and Public Libraries are a much better model for the internet if real democracy can't be hacked.
Good point, Lisa. You are indeed a Sister in Christ!
Through government surveillance, domestic spying, kidnapping-renditions, and planting mis-information, the Christian Militias will succeed in routing out the heathens and their treacherous theories on Bipartisanship, Scientific Method, and Well-Rounded Education for our chickenpluckin' youngens.
The FELLOWSHIP of the Oil Chiefs, Media Moguls, and Telecom Providers will ensure that we may continue plundering the Islamo-Fascists in JESUS' Name! We will take our Rightful Spoils of War and distribute them among BELIEVERS Everywhere!
I like to watch stuff online.
I'm sure our internet connections will be fast enough to watch the best quality streams.
I'm also sure it will get easier to watch online stuff on our living room screens.
The best part is that we can watch what we want, when we want to.
I shouldn't have to be somewhere at exactly 7pm on Sunday to watch my favorite program.
My dreams are starting to come true.
Some of the big studios are starting to put their shows online.
I'm also watching movies online through Netflix.
I'm watching what I want to watch when I want to watch it.
These services are all getting better.
It will be nice to no longer have a cable company limit what I can watch.
I can now watch movies, shows, news programs, and clips from around the world.
I also can create my own videos and share them online.
Cable television never allowed me to do that.
Overall, I like where things are headed.
We just need to make sure all content is available.
The cable companies want to charge us for what we can access online.
That is just wrong.
We already paid for access by ordering internet service.
They shouldn't be in the business of deciding what we have acces to as they do now on cable television.
Then we will be back to only have four news sites, two music sites, one history site, etc... as we have now on cable television.
Goodbye cable television.
The internet is here to save us from your monopoly by returning us to media democracy.
"U.S. users pay an average of $53 a month for high-speed service, compared with $32 in Germany and $33 in Britain"
That extra $20 pays for the Government to monitor your online activity.
peace coup,
"I like to watch stuff online." Willie
Well good for you. Whoopie do.
"The internet is here to save us from your monopoly by returning us to media democracy."
If Only. Have you been following what is happening in the Great House and Senate of this wonderful Democracy called the United States of America?
http://www.democraticmedia.org/jcblog
The capitalists are all going to jump on me for saying this but...
Surprise surprise! Those prices in Britain and Germany are the result of government subsidies! British Telecom and Deutsche Telekom have the names they do for a reason...
Why *don't* we have American Telecom?
jove4015, I pay less than $40 in Canada. And I don't think it's subsidized. And no, there is no Canada Telecom.
canuckchuck June 26th, 2008 12:16 pm:
- "That extra $20 pays for the Government to monitor your online activity"
Very funny, good one!! (Sadly it may also turn out to be literally true)
In the U.S. we pay for number one. We just don't get it.
High speed internet is NOT crucial to Democracy. It is crucial for INFORMATION CONTROL. As the Tv stations all convert to digital, as the internet is commercialized, our ability to access uncontrolled information becomes more and more restricted.
Soon all we will know is whatever they decide we will know.
Most Americans only know part of what they want them to know because the education received was so poor that people can't even absorb mind rotting propaganda repeated ad nauseum.
what good is broadband to some poor african who doesn't even have access to clean drinking water? a case of misplaced priorities here i think........
Amazing how some people pooh pooh the idea of a democratic internet by saying "as if" even though this site is a great example of democracy in action where we can read things not normally published in the monopoly media and comment on things.
P.S. I met someone in Africa through an online community and we now share information (and pictures of our family). This is a huge development compared to watching images on cable television that make us think Africa is all lions and poor people.
That is "one of many" reasons why internet access is important.
Unrestrained market, "free market," the crap that those is power sell - its all just about screw anyone you can for every penny you can get and f*** 'em, long as I get mine. We're no. one (smelling suspiciously like number two).
"We the People" are all at the back of the Bus in the Good ol' US of A. But you're either on the bus or off the bus, so its about time CorpCo shared a whole lot more. Personally, I think they can walk on their own, under our terms.
People have grown acustomed to unfettered access as well as small businesses' that need the internet to survive. I don't think they will tolerate the telecom fat cats deliberate slowdowns, extra charges and greedy controls.
I also think people are tired of the corruption and greed coming out of the DC swamp.
Revolution, anyone?
Communication is one of the fields where the social democratic model is at its best.. Norway will by the end of this year have 99.8% broadband access
http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/fad/pressesenter/pressemeldinger/2008/998-per-cent-will-get-broadband-access-i.html?id=508724
compared to US average of 50%.
I honestly didn't know things were that bad in your country. I'm starting to suspect that if you can't make profit from it, it's not worth doing. There are aspect of life we need to solve together as a unit. Like health , pension , security and communication.
These kind of internet users make me sick:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
peace coup June 26th, 2008 12:07 pm
I like to watch stuff online.
I'm sure our internet connections will be fast enough to watch the best quality streams.
I'm also sure it will get easier to watch online stuff on our living room screens.
The best part is that we can watch what we want, when we want to.
I shouldn't have to be somewhere at exactly 7pm on Sunday to watch my favorite program.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Etc, ad naseum
The internet is a GREAT resource, but what is this video that is so necessary? All important information is conveyed using TEXT, not images. There are some instances where an image is important to communicate a message but it is very rare. Is a MOVING image EVER necessary for anything but entertainment. I HATE seeing the internet moving from an informational resource to an entertainment resource, but that is exactly what is happening. Just like TV was initially thought to be a GREAT way to educate the masses but look at it now. Its a JOKE. A means of keeping the masses sedated. The exact OPPOSITE of what it was envisioned to do in the beginning. This is the direction the internet is going in. IT IS GOING TO HAPPEN AGAIN. IT ALWAYS HAPPENS IN THIS OUR MONETARY-CONTROLLED SOCIETY! I admit there could be some really cool uses for having high-speed internet. But so far I have not seen very many. I even worked on a few web sites. Its so amazing how when they want to convey some information, well, this is the world wide web so they grab a few generic photos from some huge repository of images to fill in to convey this or that impression. I admit its a lot more interesting to watch an actual moving image of someone talking, for example, but what information does this convey? Almost nothing! Its just a BIG waste of bandwidth. It just makes it easier to manipulate the audience, that's all. I say we give everyone access to internet, but forget about broadband. That way leads to hell (remember what the road to hell is paved with).
heres what i think. leading up to and thru into 2012 great changes in human evolution will become full swing. the wwweb and information we receive on it is "training" us to communicate with other common humans with out the control. all hell breaks loose on the planet *insert catastrophy HERE*. wwweb and or internet becomes capitalized entertainment....soon not good enough for us humans. once we had a taste of REAL community. so.......the death of the internet.....is the birth of global (pre-universal) consiosness. if you belive in that happy hippy horse shit. i do.
Thanks ELLYDOZER !
ATELIOS
states above on June 28th, 2008 12:13 am, that:
"There are some instances where an image is important to communicate a message but it is very rare."
I believe this to be the reversed case, and your expression is erroneously based essentially an idea that ideas and concepts are simple -- when in fact the inter-dependence of data is growing exponentially, and our ability to make appropriate life & planet saving decisions depends on
__ use of visual representations of
__ summaries of data interrelationships,
as described in part here:
Representations and Complex Problem Solving
( see http://www.nrl.navy.mil/aic/iss/pubs/schunnet-lovettshah-chap.pdf )
A core thesis of cognitive science is that representations, be they structures inside the head of the problem solver (internal representations) or structures in the environment of the problem solver (external representations), are fundamental to understanding problem solving behavior (Markman, 1999). There may be some debate about the underlying nature of these representations (e.g., the relative weight that problem solvers place on internal versus external representations, whether the representations are symbolic or not), but all cognitive scientists endorse some form of underlying representation driving behavior (Dietrich & Markman, 2000). The value of talking about representation is that computation (the definitional core of cognition in cognitive science) can only be meaningfully defined over some type of representation. Computation at its root consists of a data structure (for input, output, and perhaps something being stored in between) and some process. One cannot talk about the process without describing the data structure. More importantly, different data structures enable certain computations to be done easily, whereas other data structures support other computations. Thus, the choice of data structure (representation) helps explain why a problem solver does or does not successfully engage in a given process (cognition/behavior) or perhaps why a process takes as long or as short as it does.
The goal of this chapter is to argue that representation can and should be studied directly rather than be ignored or left as an explanatory variable. We begin with a discussion of how representations can be measured. We then examine several of the main theoretical paradigms of
cognitive science to see what predictions they make for representation choice. Finally, we present data from two studies designed to test these predictions.
…
Namaste « Presence »
« We must be the change we wish to see in the world » — Gandhi
« There is a sufficiency in the world for man's need but not for man's greed » — Gandhi
« We adopt the means of nonviolence because our end is a community at peace with itself » — ML King