This tool is used to search, analyze and map availability across the country, and according to its website, it is an ongoing and collaborative effort of data collection, review and revision involving local, state and federal governments, providers, contractors, academic institutions, and many community members nationwide. The majority of the data was provided by Broadband providers, which was subject to evaluation at both the state and federal levels in order to maintain acuracy.
The accuracy of this map has been called into question, specifically by the Mississippi Public Service Commission, which claims that the Map is "just plain wrong," according to Urgent Communications. Their Northern District Commissioner, Brandon Presley, notes that the map shows Mississippi as being almost completely covered, which is most definitely not the case. This discrepancy and others like it could be highly detrimental to agencies and the citizens they serve, as funding will be distributed based somewhat on the coverage that is already accessible.
Another critic of the Map, Penn State professor Rob Frieden, stated that the FCC and NTIA have overstated Broadband penetration and affordability due to the application of overly generous and unrealistic definitions of what qualifies as Broadband service. The Map uses zip codes as the primary geographic unit and fails to require measurements of actual bitrates as opposed to theorhetical or advertised speeds. He also states the Map misinterprets available statistics.
The benefit of overstating Broadband coverage on the Map lies in competition. If a provider shows that it has a foothold in an area that is actually underserved, this may discourage investment in that market by potential competing providers. Exaggeration of capabilities also helps to sell one carrier's services over another to consumers, however this is not the approach that will create a reliable and accurate map.
No comments:
Post a Comment