Researcher Claims His Study Is Being Misused To Pitch Broadband Stimulus
from the won't-create-jobs dept
We’re certainly on the record as being quite skeptical of the proposed broadband stimulus, which seems like it’s mistargeted and a bit of a gift to incumbents, rather than stimulating much needed competition in the space. Of course, the Obama administration has made it clear that the short-term focus of the plan is less about dealing with the big broadband issues, and more about creating jobs.
Turns out there’s a problem there too: the guy whose research the administration is using to claim that the broadband stimulus will create 300,000 jobs is now claiming that his research has been taken out of context. Shocking. It turns out that the study in question was talking about adding broadband to non-rural areas in 2005, helping to create a ton of new jobs. However, since then, plenty of broadband services have been deployed, meaning that the job creation impact is greatly diminished. And, even worse, much of the focus of the stimulus plan is on those rural communities that were excluded from the report, and which would have a much lower impact on job creation.
Filed Under: broadband, broadband policy, jobs, stimulus
Comments on “Researcher Claims His Study Is Being Misused To Pitch Broadband Stimulus”
Not creating jobs...
The stimulus isn’t creating jobs, it’s creating work. It’s the governmental equivalent of the busy work you get when you’ve got a substitute teacher in high school.
Re: Not creating jobs...
*clap* *clap* *clap*
Typo / question
Mike, what’s the correct way to contact you about typos like “who’s” in this article?
Re: Typo / question
Commenting here works. Or you can use the feedback link found in the header and footer of every page to let us know. Thanks!
Typo?
I’m not an English major and I’ve been wrong before… but the “whose” in the article indicates the “research the administration is using ” is possessed by “the guy”. The phrase “who is” or “who’s” is not correct in this case.
Re: Typo?
That’s because he fixed it. It used to say “who’s” in the article.
War on Drugs
This happens all the time, for example, research done on drugs to justify the War on Drugs.
Do any of you live in rural areas?
Stop nit-picking and try living in a rural area where your choices are dial-up or satellite. You won’t like it. You’ll spend less time on-line, less money at retailer sites, and your business will likely not rely overly on the internet. Spare a thought for your country cousins and don’t be so quick to criticise a plan that could give rural people a service that you have enjoyed for a long time.
Re: Do any of you live in rural areas?
Yeah, I’ll spare just as much thought as my country cousins spare for me when I complain about the traffic, noise, pollution of where I live and they in return say, “Tough shit city boy, you choose to live there.”
Re: Do any of you live in rural areas?
Stop nit-picking and try living in a rural area where your choices are dial-up or satellite. You won’t like it. You’ll spend less time on-line, less money at retailer sites, and your business will likely not rely overly on the internet. Spare a thought for your country cousins and don’t be so quick to criticise a plan that could give rural people a service that you have enjoyed for a long time.
Living in a rural area is a choice. Because people choose to live there they have certain benefits (cleaner air, more privacy, more land, quiet) and some downsides (fewer conveniences, farther away from things, fewer services… and less broadband).
If you choose to live in rural areas why do you think the gov’t needs to fix one of those things?
Universal Service Fund
Universal Service Fund?!?!!?