A report released May 1 by the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation shows the U.S. is trailing most other advanced nations in providing high-speed Internet to its people. We’ve known for a while that the U.S. is falling behind, but the report makes the claim that bad policy is only a quarter to blame for this failing.

The report mentions South Korea, where a high population density makes broadband roll out more practical, compared to the U.S. where people live in single-family homes spread out in suburbs.

The report makes 11 policy recommendations based on their findings. Aside from the typical tax incentives to companies and consumers making it cheaper to deploy and adopt broadband, the report recommends extending government programs to help pay for wider deployment.

Some of the more interesting recommendations echo ideas that were discussed in my Digital New Deal post. Directly from the report:

• Promote the widespread use of a national, user-generated, Internet-based broadband mapping system that would track location, speed, and price of broadband.
• Fund a revitalized Technology Opportunities Program, with a particular focus on the development of nationally scalable Web-based projects that address particular social needs, including law enforcement, health care, education, and access for persons with disabilities.
• Support new applications, including putting more public content online, improving e-government, and supporting telework, telemedicine, and online learning programs.

It’s an interesting way to try to drive broadband adoption: force important government and social services online and use it as a reason to push the issue.

Verizon and Comcast are rolling out the next generation of high-speed technology to limited markets. The new connections are going to deliver about 25 times the rate of the average broadband connections that are most widely available today. Verizon’s FiOS has been available to folks in a number of states for over a year now, and Comcast just showed up to the party; offering its new service in Minneapolis/St. Paul in the past few months.

Not in Chicago though – Boo.

While I’ve mentioned Comcast’s plans before, this Wired article has a good break-down of what the new lines will be capable of and where this is all headed.

The United States is still behind in the broadband game. Many other advanced nations have higher adoption, availability and speeds. Its great that the telecom companies are pushing things forward, but this was supposed to happen a while ago.

The Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2008, introduced in the House by Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Rep. Chip Pickering (R-Miss.) in the beginning of February might be in trouble. The goal of the legislation is to address Net Neutrality issues and broadband issues.

The law, if passed, would require the FCC to keep closer tabs on Internet service providers to insure that they are fair in the way they manage and charge for their services.

Predictably the telecom and wireless companies have lobbied against the bill, saying it’s unnecessary and would hurt them.

An article at IP Buisness magazine has a great look at where the bill is at and why its probably not going to happen this year despite broad support.

A recent paper and survey from researchers at Cornell and the University of Toronto puts some interesting data on the digital divide issue. Through a survey of more than 18,000 Americans, the researchers found that people on the lower end of the income spectrum spend more time on the Internet. Graphing the data reveals and interesting correlation.

The researchers give a few possible explanations for the findings. That for people in lower income groups the use of the Internet was more valuable than other activities, the Internet has more value for these groups, these groups had more time to spend on the Internet, or these groups see more value in using the Internet.

This compelling data should support the argument for those pushing governments to provide more funding to connect low income people, and in fact the authors of the paper suggest this:

The results show that predicted usage among low-income individuals would be high, even higher than their [higher income] counterparts … In particular, these findings suggest that a subsidy for internet use would not be wasted. Individuals who have not yet adopted (and who are primarily low-income) would use the internet intensely if given access.

The data collected by the study is a few years old, from 2001, but the researchers affirm that their inferences from the data are still valid, saying the same pricing structures exist, keeping the same lower income groups out.

found via PhysOrg

A few years ago, former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair proclaimed that there would be “universal internet access for all who want it.” This goal was set for 2005. According to this recent article on Silicon.com, around 35 percent of homes in the UK do not have access to Internet, and the majority of homes are in the lowest income bracket.

U.S. President George Bush made a similar statement in 2004. Bush set the bar a little higher, promising universal broadband (high-speed) Internet access by 2007. But that hasn’t happened yet either.