Research

An extraordinary, first-ever, nationwide effort in digital equity and opportunity is currently underway. Thanks to funding provided under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), all 50 states and six territories are in the final stages of developing first-of-their-kind statewide digital equity and digital opportunity plans (Plans). Only a year ago, not a single state or territory had developed a comprehensive statewide Plan of this scale focused on the full spectrum of internet adoption issues.

The Biden Administration has big plans to tackle one of the AI boom's sharpest controversies—whether op

While there are varying definitions of AI, they generally refer to computing systems that “learn” how to improve their performance. AI has the potential to rapidly change the world and holds substantial promise for improving government operations. However, AI poses risks that can negatively impact individuals, groups, organizations, communities, and society.

In the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Congress directed the Federal Communications Commission to reduce regulation. While the FCC initially made several bipartisan steps in that direction, over the last three presidential administrations the agency has switched between aggressive and relaxed regulation of broadband services on an explicitly partisan basis, including the imposition of legacy common carrier regulation on broadband services in the name of Net Neutrality.

Conversations about rural broadband access tend to focus on connections to homes and businesses, but precision agriculture increasingly requires reliable connectivity to the farm office and the field. In the field, farmers rely on wireless connectivity—such as fixed wireless and mobile cellular—to make real-time strategic and logistical decisions about their land, crops, animals, equipment, and farm facilities. Connected sensors in the field collect the accurate, timely data that farmers can use to optimize their practices and conserve resources.

Despite negative headlines and growing concerns about social media’s impact on youth, teens continue to use these platforms at high rates—with some describing their social media use as “almost constant." Here’s a look at the key findings related to online platforms:

• YouTube continues to dominate. Roughly nine-in-ten teens say they use YouTube, making it the most widely used platform measured in our survey.

The telecommunications industry continues to watch SpaceX Starlink’s expansion and performance closely, as the number of subscribers to its broadband service grows and other satellite providers enter the fray. While median download performance remains a key benchmark, we see strong demand to understand how Starlink is balancing net new additions with its network capacity as the service scales, and how LEO Non-Terrestrial Network (NTN) performance stacks up against the competition, particularly in rural locations. Key takeaways include:

Ninety-two percent of US households get an Internet service at home, compared to 83 percent in 2018 and 76 percent in 2008. Broadband accounts for 98 percent of households with an Internet service at home, and 90 percent of all households get a broadband Internet service- an increase from 81 percent in 2018 and 57 percent in 2008. Other related findings include:

Under the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program, providers are required to offer a low-cost option to subscribers who are eligible for the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP). However, the exact definition of what will qualify as “low-cost” is up to state and territory broadband offices to decide.

Arizona and Missouri are going to use a cost model as part of their Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program grant review process. Consultants have built complex models that are supposed to predict the cost of building broadband anywhere in the country. The models have to be loaded with specific inputs for any given location, and the models are then supposed to calculate what it will cost to build a broadband network. These two states are using the cost models in the worst possible way because they are using the costs suggested by the cost models to help pick grant winners.