Rural internet: The Tech Divide from a Different Perspective

Iowa journalist and Kansas City Star contributor Douglas Burns wrote a compelling piece in mid-February, 2022 taking a look at the tech divide that currently exists between urban and rural America. His piece takes the approach of eliminating said divide by coercing Big Tech to move beyond Silicon Valley and America’s big cities and take their operations to rural America.

Burns makes some valid points in terms of economics and political alliances. But he misses an even bigger point that should not be ignored in any attempts to address the tech divide: rural internet access. It is bad enough that the technology industry concentrates most of its efforts on urban centers. It is an entirely different matter that so much of rural America doesn’t even have access to the tech economy through broadband.

Rural Internet Access

The majority of Americans have access to broadband by way of cable companies, fiber-optic service providers, and DSL. But there are still rural areas not served by broadband providers. Residents in underserved regions must settle for slower technologies or more expensive satellite internet.

Thankfully, there is a new option now emerging: cellular internet. Thanks to the proliferation of 4G cellular service, companies like Blazing Hog can serve rural America with high-speed, 4G access. Their rural internet packages are connecting an entire class of Americans who have been, up to this point, left out of the tech economy.

Access to Information

In his piece, Burns laments that Silicon Valley’s focus on urban America has created a divide that leaves rural America out of the tech economy. As he sees it, the primary consequence of this divide is political. People in urban environments have access to information and are, therefore, enlightened. Consumers in rural areas are left to embrace conspiracy theories and other unenlightened ideas because they do not have the same access to information.

Burns misses the point and paints in very broad strokes that many consumers in rural America would take issue with. Yet his premise is correct: rural communities do not have access to the same information their urban and suburban counterparts do. Without access to broadband, their information is more limited.

Not a Level Playing Field

Information notwithstanding, the noticeable lack of rural internet leaves rural communities playing on a field that isn’t quite level. Being left out of the digital economy means being left out of all sorts of opportunities that are easy to come by in cities like Boston, New York, and Seattle.

Imagine trying to set up an internet-based business in Burns’ home state of Iowa. It is not a problem if you live in one of Iowa’s cities. But if you are out in the middle of nowhere and have no access to reliable broadband, your internet-based business is going nowhere. You will not be able to compete against similar companies that can traffic online at a whim.

Understanding the problem of rural internet leads to the question of how much a role the government plays in solving that problem. Therein lies the main reason the tech divide is unlikely to be bridged in the foreseeable future.

Companies like Blazing Hog want continued access to a free-market system that allows them to offer unlimited rural 4G internet. They do not want the tentacles of state and local government preventing them from offering the best possible product at the best possible price. As soon as we get government involved, as Burns proposes, that is the risk you take. But can free markets alone bridge the divide? No. So that leaves rural America in a less than favorable position.