FYI.

This story is over 5 years old.

Tech

The FCC Just Required Broadband to Be Faster, and Big Telecom Isn't Happy

The FCC sent a clear message that the status quo is not acceptable, a view that is not shared by the cable and telecom industry.

The US baseline standard for "broadband" internet speed just increased dramatically—and so did the conflict between the federal government and the largest internet service providers over the future of the internet.

By voting on Thursday to change the definition of broadband upward sixfold to at least 25Mbps downstream and 3Mbps upstream, from 4Mbps down and 1Mbps up, the Federal Communications Commission sent a clear message that the status quo is not acceptable, a view that is not shared by the cable and telecom industry.

Advertisement

"Today's report offers a valuable assessment of US broadband and will hopefully serve as an impetus for meaningful improvements in the speed and availability of true high-speed networks for all Americans," FCC chairman Tom Wheeler said in a statement. "We know where we need to be. Now we need to do the hard work to get there."

The robust new broadband standard is just the latest evidence that the federal government is making internet policy issues a top priority, from net neutrality—the internet's open access principle—to community internet networks, which are proliferating around the country. President Obama has spoken out forcefully in favor of strong net neutrality protections, and has made clear that he supports local efforts to build super-fast networks.

The FCC's new broadband definition means that 55 million people now lack access to broadband connections

The new broadband definition, which was adopted by the FCC 3-2 along party lines, formalizes a rhetorical point that Wheeler made several months ago: 25Mbps is now "table stakes," or a minimum acceptable level, for advanced broadband networks in an era of exploding bandwidth usage due to the popularity of services like Netflix.

"By changing this definition, the FCC has set a new bar that will get America thinking about how to meet it," said Jim Baller, president of Baller Herbst Stokes & Lide, a law firm that represents communities across the country that are pushing for advanced communications networks. "This puts positive pressure on everyone to think about what we want our advanced communications future to look like."

Advertisement

The FCC's new definition of broadband means that 55 million people, or 17 percent of the US population, now lack access to advanced broadband connections. DSL connections, for example, do not meet the new standard. Moreover, 53 percent of rural Americans lack access to the new service standard, sharply highlighting the digital divide.

"There is a large, and unacceptable, disparity in broadband access between urban Americans and Americans in rural areas and tribal lands," said Wheeler. "Despite the billions in network investment, progress in deployment of faster networks to underserved areas is too slow."

The new definition of broadband service creates a fresh point of contention between the cable and telecom industry and the federal government.

Next month, the FCC is expected to follow Obama's cue and reclassify internet service providers under the "common carrier" provisions of Title II of the Communications Act of 1934. Many net neutrality advocates argue that such a move would allow the FCC to ensure that the internet remains an open platform for free expression and economic growth.

The FCC will also soon decide whether to help two cities—Wilson, North Carolina and Chattanooga, Tennessee—that have asked the feds to preempt state laws that pose barriers to super-fast community networks.

Most industry giants oppose the government's apparent move toward strong net neutrality rules, arguing that a tough new regulatory regime could stifle private investment.

Advertisement

The industry giants also oppose most community internet projects, arguing that they pose an unfair competitive threat to private industry. In a filing with the FCC last fall, AT&T opposed government supported community networks, claiming they would create a "non-level playing field."

The National Cable and Telecommunications Association, which represents the largest cable and telecom companies, has made clear that it opposes the new broadband definition.

In a filing with the FCC earlier this month, Matthew Brill, counsel for the NCTA, called the 25Mbps/3Mbps standard "arbitrary and capricious," and said that the "hypotheticals" that form the basis for the new standard "dramatically exaggerate the amount of bandwidth needed by the typical broadband user."

The new federal broadband standard could affect the government's review of Comcast's proposed $45 billion merger with Time Warner Cable, if the feds decide to evaluate the deal in terms of the national broadband market, which just became less competitive.

For its part, Comcast argues that consumers choose broadband providers at the local, not national, level, and points out that it doesn't compete with Time Warner Cable in any local markets. And in a recent company blog post, Comcast said that even with the new 25Mbps standard "the combined company's broadband share would increase by only one percent."

Public internet groups hailed the new broadband standard as long overdue.

"For too long, the FCC has gotten by with an outdated standard for broadband, and as a result its analysis of the marketplace grew increasingly antiquated," Edyael Casaperalta, Internet Rights Fellow at DC-based advocacy group Public Knowledge, said in a statement. "Because broadband is so essential to free expression, health, jobs, education, and many other things, it is important to take a clear-eyed view of the state of broadband deployment and competition."

Meanwhile, one FCC commissioner said the new broadband standard doesn't go far enough. "I think our new threshold should be 100 megabits," said FCC commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel, who voted with her two Democratic colleagues to approve the new standard. "I think anything short of that shortchanges our children, our future, and our digital economy."