There is an application now before the FCC from M2Z Networks that would allow them to provide wireless broadband internet access — free of charge — throughout the United States.
Free? Following the broadcast television model, users of the service would have to purchase a receiver (just as one purchases a TV or antenna to receive broadcast signals) and the service itself would be supported through advertising revenue. The speed they’re promising (384 kbps downlink) isn’t as fast as regular DSL or cable internet products, but is faster than the “DSL Lite” product used as a comparison in Comcast ads.
Unlike wired products (cable or DSL), the infrastructure cost of the wireless product would be more feasible to provide to rural areas that now have prohibitively expensive, if any, access.
The Coalition for Free Broadband Now site has more consumer-oriented information, but you’ll quickly notice that the site is a PR effort to generate consumer signatures on their petition for FCC approval.
I detest the thought of even more commercial interruption than already exists on the internet, but at the same time, recognize that there is much to be gained by improving electronic access for more Americans. I would not like for it to be the only option, but much like cable TV and premium cable channels, it seems like there would still be a market for faster, commercial-free (at least from the ISP) internet access. However, the free option might drive down costs for those services, particularly in areas where there is little or no competition.
A few of the immediate beneficiaries would be students who need internet access for homework, parents who would like to interact with the schools via K-12 Planet or similar services, and a general upgrading of Americans’ technological literacy. Distance learning options are growing rapidly, from online college courses to submitting assignments via e-mail in middle and high schools, and will continue to expand and improve. To bridge the digital divide, internet service must come to be seen as an essential utility, much as water, electric, and telephone.
It’s time.
Hi Net Mom,
I was just wondering if you had signed the petition? I don’t trust M2Z and am trying to figure out how much support they are really getting. I read a very illuminating blog about them here.
http://www.saschameinrath.com/2007feb10sascha_meinrath_on_m2z_application_for_nationwide_spectrum_rights
No, I haven’t signed the petition. I’m kind of standing back and watching to see if something better comes along.
hi,
read your note about M2Z a while ago…wanted to give you an update if you are interested…
seems the FCC finally decided to give our proposal an airing and a bunch of predictable, anti-consumer proposals and objections came in…just last week…its been frustrating waiting for FCC to just put our application to public comment…9 months—something moms appreciate but dads like me never can!
one major carrier AT&T an astounding thing along the lines of (I’m paraphrasing b/c its 6 am) if “M2Z is allowed to build into rural areas, we won’t have any reason to build there.” Does that make sense anyone outside of Washington? Shouldn’t there be competition? Also none of the carriers came with any family friendly or free service concept after nine months…
Anyway, I’d love to give you the details as well as what lots of folks in TN have said about our proposal—all positive!
Thanks for your interest and continued support.
All the best,
John Muleta
CEO