I’m wondering if this reluctance to invest in new broadband infrastructure particularly in a large market like Boston is the result of Obama administration policy on treating Internet Service Providers (ISPs) as public utilities.
Here’s the Boston Herald story:
Verizon earlier this year said it would not expand FiOS to new parts of the country.
“The calculation that Verizon has made is they can focus on their wireless business and on monetizing their existing FiOS buildout and be more profitable than expanding their FiOS footprint, which leaves cities like Boston in a lurch,” said David Talbot, a fellow at Harvard University’s Berkman Center for Internet and Society. “There’s a lot of evidence that when you have competition, you end up with better prices and having faster services. It benefits everybody.”
Administration officials and city councilors told Verizon representatives they would reduce regulations, help with permits and make the city an extraordinarily welcoming place to build a network.
“The city is willing to do whatever we need to do to facilitate private broadband investment in a way that is beneficial to all of Boston,” said Jascha Franklin-Hodge, chief information officer for the city.
Policies have consequences which some advocates fail to recognize. For years the netroots have been plying their narrative for net neutrality. Verizon’s latest move may be a rational response to a regulation that doesn’t make sense.