Figures Don’t Lie, But….
I’ve long taken the position that making policy recommendations based solely on studies or statistics is chancy at best, because the numbers derived to make the policy recommendations are, themselves, subject to lots of question. In the “net neutrality” debate things have gotten even worse; the entire premise, at times, seems to be that we are somehow “behind” someone else and therefore we have to “do something”… in this case adopt an entirely restrictive regulatory regime, to “fix” the problem/crisis.
As many have pointed out, there is no crisis. But leaving that aside, the fear that we are somehow “losing” some race energizes the debate. An editorial in the October issue of Scientific American has regrettably fallen into this same construct. American broadband speeds are too slow, and cost too much. But what does that mean, how reliable are the numbers and studies “supporting” that contention, and what’s the significance of “slow” or “fast” speed in the first place? What do consumers actually want, or need, based on their own choices, rather than those of the professional “advocates?’
You had to know that a response to all these questions was on the way. It has arrived. As the press release says:
“A recent editorial on U.S. broadband is based on a flawed understanding of broadband data, addresses the wrong issues, and distracts from real policy concerns, states Scott Wallsten in “Scientific American’s Flawed Broadband Analysis,” published today by the Technology Policy Institute.”
Read it. Wallsten, TPI’s Vice President for Research and Senior Fellow does an excellent job of questioning both the validity and the significance of the numbers and conclusions. As the old saying goes; figures don’t lie, but liars can figure!
Interesting report. I have to admit I’m suspicious of a couple of the claims and as you noted am concerned that these figures have been rigged to make them look appealing to a certain agenda. In particular I would have liked to have seen the charts which showed pricing plans all have similar binning. Look at France’s binning(50?) If you applied that to the US ALL of the consumers would be in the <50 tier.
I also worry about the anti-unbundling argument. It is simple to see the effects of unbundling on telephone loops, a vast competitive market, and while they state that Japan's unbundled fiber lines are so expensive, Japan also has some of the best broadband in the world! I wonder how they can say that unbundling doesn't work when using Japan as an example of failure…
Overall a good report to read and consider. Thanks for the post!
[...] to the conservative grassroots and the TEA party. Our side has been resistant to any action (Because as Digital Society points out, we don’t support action for its own sake), but the Obama FCC just might not give us any [...]
Leave your response!
Twitter Feed
About Us
Digital Society is a digital think tank that believes culture and commerce are inseparable, that the digital economy flourishes when people are free and rights are secure, and that free markets free people.
Digital Society is an independent 501(c)3 non-profit organization, funded by donations from Jon Henke and from Arts+Labs. We advocate for a pro-culture, pro-commerce digital society through research, analysis and debate on emerging technology issues.
Reply Comments
Transparency and interactivity are trademarks of the Internet era, and we aim to foster them here at Digital Society. It is inevitable that some people will disagree with the technology policy positions we take. We want to have that constructive debate.
The Reply Comments feature gives our critics a chance to respond to our viewpoints and the Digital Society audience convenient access to competing arguments. Any time we directly challenge the views of an individual or a group on this site, the party in question may substantively respond in a guest post.
Please contact executive director Jon Henke by e-mail.
Subscribe
Daily Digest Email
Recent Posts