- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
How the biggest internet providers are keeping a racist legacy alive
Posted on 10/28/22 at 8:40 am
Posted on 10/28/22 at 8:40 am
How the biggest internet providers are keeping a racist legacy alive
An explosive report from nonprofit journalism outlet The Markup analyzed data on internet speeds and pricing in 38 U.S. cities and found that AT&T, Verizon, EarthLink and CenturyLink all disproportionately offered lower-income and less-white neighborhoods slower internet for the same price that nearby whiter, wealthier neighborhoods paid for faster speeds. Discriminating against those communities by charging them more for the internet is digital redlining, and it’s yet another example of the technology and telecommunications industry’s ability to entrench and amplify social inequities.
The Markup found that AT&T, Verizon, EarthLink and CenturyLink all disproportionately offered lower-income and less-white neighborhoods slower internet for the same price that nearby whiter, wealthier neighborhoods paid for faster speeds.
The pandemic has shown us how absolutely critical internet access is, especially for already vulnerable communities, and the government needs to step up and do more to eliminate the digital divide and to prevent and solve for the harms of digital discrimination. The Federal Communications Commission is the agency best poised to create and enforce rules on this matter, and the agency promised to look into this exact issue earlier this year.
Historically, redlining refers to a now-illegal practice in which banks would refuse mortgages to poor areas or areas with more Black or brown people. Digital redlining is a newer, technologically driven form of discrimination that results in companies providing better services to people with more wealth or who live in whiter areas. The Markup’s report found that the telecom companies were engaging in discriminatory practices that actually mapped pretty closely to historical redlining.
LINK
An explosive report from nonprofit journalism outlet The Markup analyzed data on internet speeds and pricing in 38 U.S. cities and found that AT&T, Verizon, EarthLink and CenturyLink all disproportionately offered lower-income and less-white neighborhoods slower internet for the same price that nearby whiter, wealthier neighborhoods paid for faster speeds. Discriminating against those communities by charging them more for the internet is digital redlining, and it’s yet another example of the technology and telecommunications industry’s ability to entrench and amplify social inequities.
The Markup found that AT&T, Verizon, EarthLink and CenturyLink all disproportionately offered lower-income and less-white neighborhoods slower internet for the same price that nearby whiter, wealthier neighborhoods paid for faster speeds.
The pandemic has shown us how absolutely critical internet access is, especially for already vulnerable communities, and the government needs to step up and do more to eliminate the digital divide and to prevent and solve for the harms of digital discrimination. The Federal Communications Commission is the agency best poised to create and enforce rules on this matter, and the agency promised to look into this exact issue earlier this year.
Historically, redlining refers to a now-illegal practice in which banks would refuse mortgages to poor areas or areas with more Black or brown people. Digital redlining is a newer, technologically driven form of discrimination that results in companies providing better services to people with more wealth or who live in whiter areas. The Markup’s report found that the telecom companies were engaging in discriminatory practices that actually mapped pretty closely to historical redlining.
LINK
8
Posted on 10/28/22 at 8:43 am to djmed
Were the white neighborhoods buying more (as a % of total houses) so it made more economic sense to provide better service?
We're fiberoptics available in all areas?
Not saying it isn't true, but there are more things to look at
We're fiberoptics available in all areas?
Not saying it isn't true, but there are more things to look at
This post was edited on 10/28/22 at 8:44 am
Posted on 10/28/22 at 8:45 am to djmed
Hmmmmm...whenever I've looked to switch internet/cable providers, I just get online and all the prices are published for everyone to see. Everyone gets the same price/bonuses.
As most of these bonus plans are for two years, most of us just switch up every two years.
I've never seen a "Black Price" and a "White Price". Any difference between geographic areas has to do with the local government limiting access or only letting select providers in a particular area. Of course, these local politicians usually get something in return -- like sitting in the cable companies suite at a local sporting event. BUT, I've never seen anyone getting a special "White Price" even in these situations.
As most of these bonus plans are for two years, most of us just switch up every two years.
I've never seen a "Black Price" and a "White Price". Any difference between geographic areas has to do with the local government limiting access or only letting select providers in a particular area. Of course, these local politicians usually get something in return -- like sitting in the cable companies suite at a local sporting event. BUT, I've never seen anyone getting a special "White Price" even in these situations.
Posted on 10/28/22 at 9:39 am to MMauler
It's not the price it's the speed. Prices are the same in both neighborhoods but according to this study the cable companies are slowing down the speed
Posted on 10/28/22 at 10:02 am to djmed
Were the less-white neighborhood residents paying those higher prices or were they being paid by taxpayers through government programs to provide connectivity to those folks? We’re the providers inflating prices because the government doesn’t normally look at the price tag too closely?
The real outrage should be from the residents of the whiter neighborhoods who have to pay for their own access and then also pay artificially inflated prices for access in other neighborhoods.
The real outrage should be from the residents of the whiter neighborhoods who have to pay for their own access and then also pay artificially inflated prices for access in other neighborhoods.
Posted on 10/28/22 at 10:04 am to ksayetiger
quote:
Not saying it isn't true, but there are more things to look at
There is always more to look at. These lazy, garbage “journalists” just never do it. They put out this divisive trash and then enjoy what they complain about.
It’s why I have shut national media completely off. Done.
This post was edited on 10/28/22 at 10:05 am
Posted on 10/28/22 at 10:10 am to CleverUserName
"reporters" troll geographic information databases looking for disparities of all types to try and divide Americans.
Posted on 10/28/22 at 10:18 am to djmed
Speculating. But assume it is more costly to upgrade line in older and more urbanized neighborhoods. Compared to newer housing developments.
Posted on 10/28/22 at 10:37 am to jpatrick
They are not slowing down the speed, the infrastructure is slow. They haven't had high speed line ran to those neighborhoods.
Posted on 10/28/22 at 12:06 pm to THog
quote:
But assume it is more costly to upgrade line in older and more urbanized neighborhoods.
It is because you don't want to accidentally cut a line and have 911 service knocked out.
Also you have to constantly buy more line because some of it gets stolen by the future college professors paying for their tuition.
Posted on 10/28/22 at 12:21 pm to djmed
quote:Not good if true. I'm not willing to take Julia Angwin's word for this though, any more than I was willing to take Kara Swisher's word for Fetterman's unaffected ability to communicate. The latter was a demonstrable baldfaced lie.
AT&T, Verizon, EarthLink and CenturyLink all disproportionately offered lower-income and less-white neighborhoods slower internet for the same price that nearby whiter, wealthier neighborhoods paid for faster speeds.
This post was edited on 10/28/22 at 12:22 pm
Posted on 10/28/22 at 12:22 pm to djmed
It's absolutely uncanny how the blue check MSM has managed to find "raaaaaaaaacism" everywhere they seek it out.
Posted on 10/28/22 at 12:22 pm to djmed
I pay more for internet because I live in the sticks.
Posted on 10/28/22 at 12:25 pm to BobABooey
quote:
The real outrage should be from the residents of the whiter neighborhoods who have to pay for their own access and then also pay artificially inflated prices for access in other neighborhoods.
this is the most rational analysis
Posted on 10/28/22 at 12:26 pm to BobABooey
quote:
The real outrage should be from the residents of the whiter neighborhoods who have to pay for their own access and then also pay artificially inflated prices for access in other neighborhoods.
These Universal Access fees are garbage.
Posted on 10/28/22 at 12:28 pm to djmed
quote:
AT&T, Verizon
Cancel them!
(Make the enemy live up to his own rules.)
Posted on 10/28/22 at 12:28 pm to VoxDawg
quote:
managed to find "raaaaaaaaacism" everywhere they seek it out.
surprised they have never stumbled across the correlation between welfare, unwed mothers, and skin color on crime statistics
Page 1 of 1
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News