Rural areas also deserve broadband investment | News, Sports, Jobs


Rather than reinvesting in places that already have broadband (internet) to improve it, pandemic relief money should go to places that have no broadband at all. “

It’s a quote-paraphrase that appeared in an Associated Press article in The Express last Monday by a top internet industry executive.

And we agree with a new policy from the US Treasury Administration and Biden saying so.

Rural areas have been overlooked for too long when it comes to significant investments in broadband.

Of course, cities and urban areas need broadband – reliable broadband.

But people living in rural areas continue to suffer without it.

Take our region, for example.

Drive maybe 10 minutes in some directions out of town and homes and businesses have minimal internet service – if at all – and even struggle to get reliable cell service.

Yes, maybe some don’t care.

But the way things are – like it or not – more and more of the services and amenities in life are coming from the internet.

The industry has and continues to slowly convince us (some would say brainwashing) that we cannot live without Internet service.


Security systems and doors.

Phone (s.

Medical equipement.


Baby monitors.




Should we continue?

Again, like it or not, this is where things are and go.

Why do people who “live in the woods” don’t have access to it, or at least have to queue while cities and urban areas see their internet infrastructure improve?

Give everyone a choice.

If the US Treasury goes ahead with its rule as originally drafted, sparsely populated areas currently lacking broadband could overtake some urban areas in their internet speeds.

Investment in cities and urban areas will certainly not stop.

But rural areas deserve more attention – more investment – than they receive.

The latest news today and more in your inbox

Source link


About Author

Leave A Reply