Several years ago, I came across a very interesting Washington Post editorial by Michael J. Copps, one of the commissioners of the Federal Communications Commission. The article was entitled “America’s Internet Disconnect” and was a scathing criticism of America’s Internet infrastructure. Copps points out that America lags far behind other developed countries in terms of Internet accessibility, speed and cost. America’s deficit in this area is so deep that “we pay almost twice as much for connections that are one-twentieth the speed” when compared to many Asian and European nations. The question then becomes, what is the importance of America’s “Disconnect?”

The answer is that much of America’s economy these days is dependent on the Internet, and by having slower and more expensive Internet, America is at a competitive disadvantage to many of its competitors in the global economy. This brings me to the main point of my article: Just as America is at a competitive disadvantage due to the state of its Internet infrastructure, Washington University students are put at a competitive disadvantage due to the sorry state of Internet access on campus.

Right now, as I sit in my room writing this article, my University-provided wireless Internet has a download speed of 243 kilobytes per second (according to a speed test run by dslreports.com). This is simply atrocious. I can barely watch YouTube videos, and multimedia-heavy Web sites like ESPN.com take ages to load. In fact, according to the FCC, 243 kilobytes per second is less than a third of the speed that qualifies as broadband Internet. I could, of course, plug in my Ethernet cable and get faster Internet, but that defeats the point of having a laptop.

In addition to slow connection speed, I have also experienced difficulties connecting and staying connected to the multitude of wireless networks that Wash. U. provides. My (correct) password has been rejected numerous times, and I have been inexplicably kicked off of the WUFI-S network more times than I can count. Having talked to my friends and classmates about my struggles, I have learned that this is not an uncommon experience.

In addition to being fun and allowing social networking, the Internet is now an essential part of the educational experience. Syllabi, old exams, assignments and even video lectures are all put online by professors with the assumption that all their students will be able to access them. The fact of the matter is, with my current Internet speed, I would probably not be able to watch an online lecture. I know for some language classes, online multimedia is an essential part of the course. I have seen a friend trying to listen to his Spanish homework online only to encounter halting and poor-quality audio, making it impossible to do his homework. There is no question in my mind that the poor Internet access on campus is a barrier to learning for many students.

If America as a whole is lagging in its Internet infrastructure, Wash. U. is lagging behind America. This problem needs to be addressed. There is simply no excuse for a school that costs more than $40,000 to have such a problem. Few would argue that it is a bad thing that the Internet has become an integral part of a university education. Given this, students should be provided with access to the resources they need to succeed. I hope the school is aware of this problem and will take the proper steps to address it.

6 Comments

• 

  On October 5, 2009 at 3:36 pm Michael said

  Andrew,

  There are lots of resources at WashU to help students troubleshoot connections. Improperly set-up connections to WUFI-S often create the kind of problems you are describing. There is a help desk run by STS in the Gregg storefronts open until midnight most nights. If you call in, create a trouble ticket, or stop on by I’m sure you’d get any help you need in getting a better connection. Technology is never perfect, but that’s why there are people trained to help in that area. Writing this article before tapping into those resources gives an unfair representation about the quality of the network on this campus.

• 

  On October 5, 2009 at 5:16 pm Other Michael said

  I’ve cooled down since I first read this article, but it is necessary to note that some of the force of Mr. Gottlieb’s argument rests on a factual error. One byte (abbreviated B) contains eight bits (abbreviated b).

  Mr. Gottlieb’s speed test reported a download speed of 243 kB/s. This is equal to a speed of 1944 kb/s. The FCC defines “basic broadband” as 768kb/s (also, here). Therefore, the claim that he measured a rate “less than a third of the speed that qualifies as broadband Internet” is baldly incorrect. In fact, he enjoyed a speed about 2.5 times faster than the minimum definition of broadband.

  In general, I agree with many of this article’s sentiments, especially about the sorry state of Internet access in the U.S. in general. But to confuse bits and bytes is a fundamental factual error that is unacceptable in a piece that intends to deal with issues of Internet policy.

• 

  On October 5, 2009 at 5:19 pm Other Michael said

  I must add, as I had forgotten: Mr. Gottlieb saw and complained about 1944 kb/s download speed on campus. If he lived off campus, he could pay $25 a month to AT&T for DSL service with a maximum speed of 1500 kb/s. (And that’s only if he also paid for landline phone service from AT&T. He would be charged $35 per month for that level of DSL service if he did not have AT&T landline phone service.)

• 

  On October 22, 2009 at 3:22 pm Disappointed said

  This is incredibly disappointing to see something like this published as factual when there is a clear error that makes this entire article worthless. This is really journalism at its worst. Studlife should really bother to release something noting the factual error of this piece, though I doubt they will. You guys are a poorly run, incredibly unprofessional paper. Do some fact checking next time, or maybe hire a writer that will check his own facts.

• 

  On October 27, 2009 at 12:28 am Anonymous said

  http://www.speedtest.net/result/603809159.png

  There is no doubting that at least in the Shepley dorm, with the Ethernet cable plugged in, I’m getting below satisfactory internet speed at 11PM-2 AM every night.

  I’ve raised this issue to STS with no success.

• 

  On October 27, 2009 at 12:30 am Anonymous said

  I didn’t realize this, but on the speedtest.net test, if you actually do the test, it shows the ISP average vs. your result.

  My result is far below ISP average…something along the lines of 1/8 to 1/10

 Print This Post

Tags: competitive disadvantage, FCC, internet, Michael Copps

This entry was posted on Monday, October 5th, 2009 at 1:17 am and is filed under Forum, Staff Columnists. You can follow any responses to this entry through this feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.