4 ms·

Local governments are the ones that granted these companies the monopolies.

• bogomipz 8y ago
  This comment is disingenuous at best. It also displays an ignorance of the history of Telecom in the US. Cable companies were originally granted charters or franchise agreements in the 1970s and 1980s in the US. At that time cable companies were very much local and regional[1]. Also at that time television was delivered over the air and the monopoly was Ma Bell. Twenty years of consolidation happened at the national level. The victims of this hyper-consolidation were local. Furthermore these municipal franchise agreements given to cable companies/ISPs are generally non-exclusive which is why there are some areas that actually have a duopoly instead of just a monopoly. Municipalities will generally grant right away access to other interested parties which is why some places have both Verizon and Comcast or Comcast and Uverse etc. In fact the franchise fees collected by municipalities are a great source of revenue. I don't think there's a city in the US that isn't interested in collecting more money. NYC recently sued Verizon for failing to fulfill its obligations of providing full coverage(and an alternative to the incumbent) to residents of the city[2]. So no local governments are not to blame for the corrosive and corrupt culture of these ISPs. Certainly not in any appreciable manner. [1] http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/02/14/chart-of-the-week-a-long-history-of-cable-consolidation/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/02/14/chart-of-the... [2] https://www.wired.com/story/new-york-city-verizon-internet/ https://www.wired.com/story/new-york-city-verizon-internet/