2/3 of Americans Without Broadband Don't Want It 538
Ant writes in with news that won't be welcomed by the incoming US administration as it tries to expand the availability of broadband Internet service. A recent report from the Pew Internet & American Life Project indicates, as noted by Ars Technica, that two-thirds of Americans without broadband don't want it. "...when we look at the overall reasons why Americans don't have broadband, availability isn't the biggest barrier. Neither is price. Those two, combined, only account for one-third of Americans without broadband. Two-thirds simply don't want it. The bigger issue is a lack of perceived value."
I find it hard to believe (Score:2, Interesting)
I know I wanted broadband when I didn't have it. Now I live across town where I have it.
Those who don't want it probably have no clue what the difference is, or don't have internet anyway and simply don't care about it.
My father... (Score:5, Interesting)
...was in the "Two-thirds simply don't want it. The bigger issue is a lack of perceived value" camp until he started receiving many rather large pictures and short home movies (usually taken from a digital camera) of his grand kids. He was also attempting to upload pictures he'd taken to the family Gallery (it runs Gallery [menalto.com]), but it took so long to do (he has a 7+ MP camera, so the pictures were rather large). After finally biting the bullet and getting *the cheapest* "broadband" he could find (I think it was 128k down / 64k up), within a couple weeks he had upgraded to a mid-level broadband package (somewhere around 1.5mb down/256(or more) up) and was finding himself doing so much more with it. I personally believe the final straw that made him actually upgrade his package was the ability to see/talk to his middle son (one of my two younger brothers) while he was/is deployed in Iraq (on his third tour now, I believe).
There are some people that just aren't going to want it, no matter what you show them can be done with it, but I think a large percentage of those 2/3 that "don't perceive the value" simply haven't had anyone explain/show them what value they could be getting.
and they would be 100% correct (Score:1, Interesting)
if you are grandma and all you are doing is checking your email and looing at cnn.com, you don't need anything above 56kbps
the problem is, grandma is missing out on future services, the march of progress
youtube straddles this issue: its not exactly impossible over 56kbps, but obviously video services are changing and evolving, and you need a larger pipe for that. and youtube is already a service grandma wants and needs, and grandma appreciates
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:3, Interesting)
ust because some of us use the internet on a regular basis, that doesn't mean that everyone would be better off for it.
Some of us?
Have you tried to apply for a job without the internet lately?
Even my home repair contractor carries around an iPhone.
Of course if you are retired or have guaranteed income, you probably won't need to worry so much though. Just saying...
I've cancelled broadband (Score:2, Interesting)
I now just make do with my iPhone and a fat connection at work. I first canceled Comcast because their prices are simply too high. They were charging me $180/mo for HD television and Internet. To cut out the television would have still been almost $70/mo.
RCN, a competitor in my town, offered Internet service only for $35/mo, so I tried them. They simply made up stuff to charge me with. No television? Well, you have television service now! Pay up. Call them and have it turned off? Sure ... only to have it turned back on again, with yet more bills for service I never ordered. I finally canceled, only to be forced to call the MA Department of Public Utilities to force the company to stop sending me bills for a service that was now canceled. Getting service through the phone tree was impossible. I really had to go to my state regulator.
Verizon: DSL service. Great. Except that it would regularly die for days on end. And Verizon could not be bothered to actually FIX the service they were charging me for. After over a week of downtime, I canceled. They're still sending me bills for service I canceled months ago. I'm currently dealing with the state regulator over their bullshit too.
I'm done with giving these assholes my money.
Let's hope the new administration sets a new regulator tone. Because the last administration let those guys fuck their customers over good and hard.
Don't want the bundle (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm not opposed to paying but the problem I have is the bundle.
I get comcast interent but I don't get comcast cable tv. So they CHARGE Me $19 extra. I Could almost get cable tv for close to "free" (just $10 more for both).
Likewise for my mom whose on a fixed income but needs the comforts of phone, TV and the uncomplicated reliability of non-dailup internet, I can't find a scheme that lets me use skype.
for example, if I want to use sky I still need to have a DSL connection which means paying for basic phone service from Qwest (even though with skype we don't need that).
I want her to have a basic pay-as-you go cell phone for safety in her car, but there's no point in paying for that when, give that I'm paying Qwest for a land line, I might was well get their bundled Wireless.
And so it goes.
How come I can't just get ala carte DSL. How come I can't just get cable internet.
that is without the extra fees for not buying the bundle.
anyone know how to just buy DSL without a phone?
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:5, Interesting)
However, 1/3 do want it (Score:5, Interesting)
and what percentage of the other 2/3 simply don't know what they are missing? It's like asking the population of 1930s America if they wanted highways - many probably wouldn't have seen the need for it. Many didn't have one in their area (PA turnpike and a few others around). Eisenhower, as a young officer, took part of a cross country convoy, to assess national roads, around the early 1920s IIRC, and it took them nearly 50 days to get coast to coast, that with seeing the German Autobahn in action up close is what lead him to spearhead the interstate system as President.
Infrastructure is almost always good and pays off, like the Hoover Dam + others Depression era projects are still serving us well today. But it's really tough for people with little experience with it to imagine the uses for it. They've been confined to stuff like dial-up for so long, that the concept of the internet as a medium for only text emails, sprinkled with a few static pictures and the like is hard to break for good reason.
I'm thinking of getting rid of mine. (Score:2, Interesting)
It can be a great communications tool - when you filter out the trillions of shit messages.
It a great source for news without having to listen to the overpaid talking heads - after you filter out the millions of lies, half-truths, agendas, and propaganda.
And the internet a is a great way to suck away valuable time on shit. For example, online message boards. This thread will offer me absolutely nothing to enrich my life, but here I am. I should do something a little more productive with my time.
Broadband can be addicting. With it, you can more bandwidth hogging content which, for the most part, is crap. Again, here I am.
I think the people who don't want it are wise enough to know that it is not right for them or for their families.
Re:However, 1/3 do want it (Score:2, Interesting)
I always find it amazing that whenever anyone is asked to give an example of a "great" government project they always mention the interstate highways... while 99.9999% of those same people usually bemoan SUV's, "evil" suburban communities, CO2 emissions from cars, the decay of inner cities, and the lack of railroads. Then they launch into a tirade about how all the bad things come entirely from the free market and how we need the government to intervene to fix all those problems that the free market created.... and so the circle goes.
Perceived value is a proxy for price (Score:4, Interesting)
I have broadband (of sorts). My city provides free WiFi. Its good enough for my uses (downloading/uploading large documents and VoIP for long distance). I have a POTS line with the lowest price possible. No long distance (that's what VoIP and/or my cell phone are for). The phone line is for emergencies and as a back-up to the WiFi. I have rabbit ears for my TV sets The digital reception is great and the quality much better than what cable or satellite offers. Besides, I don't need more than a dozen channels.
Both my cable company (Comcast) and my phone company (Verizon FiOS) offer '3 in one' packages of TV/phone/broadband. But the added value just doesn't compute. The additional broadband speeds would be nice, but I don't need TV with 500 channels and phone with big feature packages. So, I figure the broadband would be economical at a price point of about $25/month. But that's not available from either provider. Worse yet, you can't get FiOS broadband only and keep your basic phone service. Verizon insists on moving its FiOS customers to the unregulated system.
So, I'm one of those 'statistics'. Its a lack of value, but if there was a suitable price, I'd buy it.
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:2, Interesting)
WELL SAID. A lot of older folks don't need anything better than a web browser. They don't need broadband. And I want to add:
>>>Of course they want it. They just don't want to pay scary fees
Wrong. There are LOTS of us who don't see the point of embracing new technology just because it's there. My 50k dialup connection works just fine. Here are a few other things that "they" have told me I "need" to get, but do not have:
- HDTV - nothing wrong with my standard definition set
- HD Radio - ditto
- LCD for the computer - nope. My CRT is just fine thank ye.
- Laptop? Don't need it.
- Digital cable. No. /month Virgin phone is just fine thanks.
- Cellphone with instant messaging and web browsing? Uh huh. My $5
- A new car. What for? My old 87 Plymouth and 97 Avenger still work.
- PDA. Pass; the old pen and paper works just fine and it's a lot cheaper (free).
- Broadband
Even if I did upgrade, I'd get the slowest speed - 750k at $15. But I already bittorent tv shows at 50k. I see the latest stuff. Why upgrade? There are some Americans who are never satisfied unless they are constantly buying the next new thing. BUT there are also a lot of us who ARE satisfied and don't need TOYS to make us happy. It's like the Sheryl Crow* song, "I don't have digital. I don't have diddly-squat. It's not getting what you want. It's Wanting what you've got."
*
*(Before you say Sheryl Crow is ____, I encourage you to embrace IDIC.)
Well, infrastructure does screw some people. (Score:5, Interesting)
While a lot of people did well with national infrastructure projects of the past, lets remember that some people did get screwed. There is always someone screwed when the government builds something, and that's why some people hate the government. This grievances are not illegitimate and you need to take the effects of them into account.
For example, let's look at how highways and hoover dam screwed some people.
First off, highways screwed cities. If you can drive anywhere, you don't need the concentration of goods that a city offers, and more so, you allow people to get to work without having to live near it. Essentially this has turned American cities into corporate islands surrounded by ghettos because nobody wants to live in cities but everyone will take the high paying jobs.
Secondly, highways screwed local stores. No national brand could exist without highways to truck goods all over the place. Everyone that bitches about the likes of Walmart, McDonalds and every other chain and laments the death of the local foods in the local store need only look at the highway to see why this took place.
Third, the highways really screwed blacks in America, because usually, in cities, all the overpasses and bridges and what not were all built in black neighborhoods, pretty much destroying the asset base of an already fragile population. New York City is a perfect example of this, and there are many black leaders that curse the name of Moses to this day - and no, not the biblical Moses.
Hoover dam screwed everyone that had local water, or needed the flow from the river downstream of the dam. You go to all this expense to get a good spot downstream and the government shuts you off. Or you go to all this expense to get your own water supply, and the government goes and doles it out to everyone else on the cheap, making your investment worthless.
I can relate (Score:4, Interesting)
I only got a cell phone 3 years ago and use it less than 30 min a month, it doesn't have a camera, and the only text messages I've sent is "Wrong number" replies. I'm not signed up with myspace/facebook/twitter/whateverelseisthefadthisyear, and abandoned my blog after a few months since I had nothing interesting to say. I don't have satellite/digital cable or and do not own a single HDTV set. I still use a VCR - no TIVO/DVR. I'm satisfied with a $15/month 768kb DSL connection since anything faster would cost at least twice as much in my area. I'm a software engineer, yet by today's standards I would be considered a Luddite.
In New York City in 1882... (Score:5, Interesting)
"It (the first central commercial incandescent electric generating station) provided electricity to one square mile in New York City in 1882. The first day it operated only 52 customers wanted electricity."
ref: http://library.thinkquest.org/6064/history.html [thinkquest.org]
convincing vast majority about useful utility for higher quality of life is not alway about supply and demand or availability of technology.
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:3, Interesting)
I've always thought it was a shame that so many of the older generation aren't computer literate. My grandparents were/are in assisted living facilities with attached nursing homes, so I have plenty of opportunity to see what it's like.
These kind of people have *tons* of time on their hands, but they usually can't get out and interact with people other than the people living there with them. If they were able to communicate via computer, it would remove a lot of those limitations. (I always thought this would be an ideal target audience for MMORPGs!)
Not sure about that... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:3, Interesting)
When I was a kid my maternal grandparents' house had no indoor plumbing. My mom grew up without electricity as well, but the house was wired before I was born.
I remember my grandfather fought my uncle's installing a bathroom in his house tooth and nail, and a few years after they had a bath he'd use the bathtub, but he still went out and used the outhouse, even in cold weather.
Now my dad reminds me if his late former father in law when it comes to cell phones and computers. "I lived 77 years without one and I don't need one now".
My mom (who just turned 81 today) otoh has both a cell and a PC, although she uses dialup for internet.
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:3, Interesting)
More likely, increased transparency will make businesses more likely to only hire those with spotless records, given that there are so many people out there, and you likely don't need to hire someone who has an imperfect record when there are already so many applicants.
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:4, Interesting)
If I had mod points, I'd mod you -1, Insulting.
Older people are generally smarter about what they need and don't need, and able to decide for themselves. They've lived a lot longer than youngsters, seen a lot more, and figured out what's important and what isn't. They don't need flash animations or bittorrent feeds of last night's TV program to entertain themselves, and can actually read the newspaper when it is printed on paper.
I can fully believe that 2/3 of the people who don't have broadband don't want it. I can also believe that Obama thinks he knows better about what they want than they do, and will act on that belief using taxpayer dollars.
2/3 of voluntary nonsubscribers? Or involuntary? (Score:2, Interesting)
What fraction of this 2/3 already has access to broadband but has rejected it? If the fraction is high, then the 2/3 statistic is obvious pretty much a tautology. The 2/3 includes everyone who *could* subscribe to broadband but rejected it. Meaningless.
The real question is, what fraction of people who CANNOT sign up for broadband also do not want it. I doubt most rural folks don't want better communications technology. I lived in central Illinois for a while and the dial-up Internet community was thriving. It gets pretty damned lonely out on the prairie.
Trust the press to pass along an ambiguity as if it were news...
Randy
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:3, Interesting)
Ironically more people seem to get kicked off Facebook for posting breastfeeding photos [facebook.com] of themselves than for posting lewd sexual photos.
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:3, Interesting)
>>>The older generation doesn't know they want it.
You (and some others) sound like the TV preacher I recently heard. "Many people don't know they need GAWD in their lives. They don't know it, but they DO need him, because he will make their lives better!" (crowd cheers). "We must give them gawd as soon as possible even if they claim they don't want it. It's for their own good!"
You're failing to see the difference between "make available" and "required to have." In the US, religion is definitely available to everyone who wants it, and our Constitution explicitly protects that availability. Broadband is not available to everyone who wants it, and in part due to that lack of availability, some people who would want it if they had the opportunity believe they do not want it.
In Communist China, there may be people who *would* want religion if it was available to them, but believe they don't because it's not. Even though I'm an atheist, I think that they should have the ability to explore those ideas and worship as their conscience dictates. I also think that broadband internet should be available to everyone in the US, just as other communications services (phone, mail) have been made available by previous generations.
Give 'em a free trial. (Score:3, Interesting)
Seriously. My grandpa was perfectly content with his dialup for years. He knew "broadband" was faster but it cost a lot more money and he could deal with dialup. He had a pattern. He'd start the computer and fire up the email client then go make breakfast or lunch depending on the time of day. By the time he was done, his email attachments were usually downloaded. He'd read his messages, set a few pictures to forward, reply with some new ones of his own, then hit the send/receive button and go do something for a while. Come back in an hour or so and it was done. Then he'd check his weather reports. Each map could take 5+ minutes to download but he could wait.
Then his neighbor got a cablemodem. He and the neighbor got to talking about it and my grandpa went over to check it out. His weather sites loaded in seconds instead of minutes. News sites. Investment sites. Everything was so fast! He called me up. "So I imagine my email will be faster, too? No more waiting half an hour for a few pictures to download? And those updates you install when you visit?"
So, the next time I was there, we took a trip to the cable company's office and picked up a cablemodem. And, maybe a week after that, he had me order him a new computer 'cause the Celery/333 had become the bottleneck. And it's totally worth the extra money to him. He would probably pay a hundred bucks a month now that he knows that going from dialup to cable is like going from peeking through the keyhole of a library to having the doors thrown open.
I just wish cable companies would offer something like 512/128 for $10-15/month. That's all that many people need. Heck, I had 384/128 at a cheap rate for years and it was fine for me.
Re:Something to consider... (Score:3, Interesting)
I've got to add this: When mom-in-law first called to report problems, I was at work and fourteen-year-old daughter took the call. She took less than 30 seconds to assess the situation. "He fell for a trojan, Grandma. Your computer is infected. Sorry." (Nephew is 19!)