RECENTLY ON TOL:
- A tumblr site dedicated to the people and places that make up Oregon and Southwest Washington.
The problem is that Ms. Starrett's appearance seemed to elevate her to the level of an expert on the topic. So far as I heard, she had two perspectives to present, neither representing any expertise:
1. Government really should not be in the business of building infrastructure.
2. Her personal experience with rural living is that she didn't need broadband.
Neither of these positions are nearly as relevant to the debate as those of the other guests. Her policy position does not appear to be at all related to rural broadband. It's a blanket position on government spending. Kind of like inviting a vegan to a discussion on how best to cook a steak.
Her personal experience is anecdotal. The question is not whether every individual must have broadband, but whether the option should exist in a community. The fact that Ms. Starrett does not personally feel she requires broadband does not mean that others in her community find themselves in the same circumstances. It is certainly reasonable for her to share her individual experience, but to have her political ideology represented alongside the non-partisan arguments of the other guests did strike me as a disservice to the listener.
It's a shame that Qwest did not appear on the program, as it would have been interesting for them to present their arguments for not building this capacity when it was incentivized in the late 90's, it also would have been interesting to hear how they feel about the current attempts to stimulate this development. I expect I would have found fault with many of their arguments, but at least they'd be arguing from a particular business perspective, rather than political ideology.
posted 4 years, 3 months ago
view in context