Broadband News

When commenting on Government initiatives, the mainstream media can almost invariably summon something called the "Taxpayers Alliance" into being to provide a negative comment and tell the public exactly why they should be angry their hard-earned tax monies are being so unjustly squandered. In broadband news, it increasingly looks like we've got our very own version to call on for critical comments: the Countryside Land and Business Association (CLA).

Now, it's not strictly accurate to say that CLA is waging a "war on everything" - that's just a punchy headline, adapted from a satirical Australian TV show called The Chaser's War on Everything - but it sometimes does pick some interesting fights in the interests of those it represents. One recent target has been Cisco, following the research it sponsored into broadband quality in various countries being published (as we covered here). "The important thing is whether the broadband quality of a country is good enough for today's needs," Cisco's Joanne Hughes had said, "and the UK falls well within this category." Big mistake, that.

An outraged Henry Aubrey-Fletcher, the President of the CLA, managed to get his response out there before the end of the week:-

While it is true that UK broadband is absolutely not fit for the future we do not agree with Cisco's comments that the UK has broadband that is currently meeting the country's needs.

This is simply not true. Rural areas all over the UK suffer from poor broadband connections, something that is hitting rural businesses particularly hard. The Digital Divide is growing as stated in the report and the Government must invest – with private partners – in closing the gap for the UK's rural economy to have any chance in developing to its full potential.

By Monday, Angus Collingwood-Cameron - the organisation's Director in the North East - had taken up the charge. Here's an excerpt from a press release he even had sent out to local radio stations:-

To claim that the UK’s broadband network is good enough for today’s needs is beyond comprehension. It may well be in central London, but it is certainly not in many rural areas. The same survey does actually highlight the gap between urban and rural areas, and our own research shows the real misery caused by lack of access to affordable broadband.

The digital divide is not a PR concept, it is literally dividing communities.  Many areas of rural Britain cannot access ADSL, which means homes can not sell, offices can not be let, and children can not do homework or interact socially at the same level as their friends. Worryingly, the signs are that the gap will widen as investment is put into superfast networks while many cannot even get the slowest broadband.

Increasingly, those who have been able to access an adequate broadband service are now complaining that it can be unusable due to the level of use now occurring. As technology advances, so the volume of internet services increases. There are many rural businesses whose working day effectively ends at 3.30, when the local children return from school and the internet becomes effectively unusable.

It makes perfect sense that the CLA is standing up for the little guy in isolated rural communities - some of whom wouldn't have access to the Internet connections fast enough to email such comments to media outlets across the UK. But at least, while it's always been vague who exactly the Taxpayer's Alliance actually represents - besides, by inference, all taxpayers - it is very clear who the CLA stands for, isn't it? And that is, of course, football fans. Here's the latest comment from the Director of CLA North, Douglas Chalmers - on the upcoming match between England and the Ukraine, no less (coverage here):-

Even if they are willing to pay, many fans in rural areas simply cannot access the fast connection required to be able to watch streaming television over the internet. This match must not set a precedent. Internet-only broadcasts of important events are simply not acceptable.

This is another example of either an ignorant assumption that everyone who wants to can watch in this way, or an arrogant disregard for those who can't, including the many supporters in rural areas.

While it can be persuasively argued that broadband access itself borders on being a vital utility everyone should be entitled to, it's unlikely many would believe universal access to international football was as pressing. And he's taking about a commercial decision - not an "arrogant assumption" - made by a media firm that is after all licensing the rights to screen to match from the Ukrainian Football Association. (After the collapse of sports broadcaster Setanta, nobody has been willing to pay enough to buy them from the English FA for what isn't exactly an "important event.") You have to draw the line somewhere - and surely that's not in white paint on a football pitch.