5G Technology World

  • 5G Technology and Engineering
  • FAQs
  • Apps
  • Devices
  • IoT
  • RF
  • Radar
  • Wireless Design
  • Learn
    • 5G Videos
    • Ebooks
    • EE Training Days
    • FAQs
    • Learning Center
    • Tech Toolboxes
    • Webinars/Digital Events
  • Handbooks
    • 2024
    • 2023
    • 2022
    • 2021
  • Resources
    • Design Guide Library
    • EE World Digital Issues
    • Engineering Diversity & Inclusion
    • Engineering Training Days
    • LEAP Awards
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe

Residents Allege AT&T Failing to Provide Low-Income Ohio Communities with High-Speed Internet

By Bevin Fletcher | August 28, 2017

Residents from Cleveland, Ohio are accusing AT&T of failing to serve low-income, African-American communities in the area with the same high-speed broadband provided to wealthier and suburban neighborhoods.

In a complaint filed with the FCC Thursday, Joanne Elkins, Hattie Lanfair, and Rachelle Lee, three self-described African-American, low-income residents, allege AT&T is violating the Communications Act’s bar against unjust and unreasonable discrimination. The three are requesting monetary damages and injunctions prohibiting AT&T from discriminatory practices. They also ask the Commission to force the company to provide broadband services to the lower-income minority communities in Cleveland.

Citing a study conducted by the National Digital Inclusion Alliance and Connect Your Community, the complaint says the failure to bring high speed internet to low-income communities is part of a pattern by AT&T.

The study allegedly shows AT&T has withheld its fiber-to-the-node (FTTN) VDSL infrastructure from a majority of high poverty census blocks with individual poverty rates above 35 percent, the complaint alleges.

“Such low-income neighborhoods have been relegated to an older, slower transmission technology called ADSL2, resulting in significantly slower internet access speeds than what AT&T provides to middle-income city neighborhoods as well as most suburbs,” the complainants assert. “As a result, their residents are left with severely limited and uneven internet access; no access to AT&T’s competitive fiber-enabled video service.”

Lawyers for the Elkins, Lanfair, and Lee held settlement discussion talks with AT&T prior to filing the complaint, but the parties remain far apart. The complainants allege AT&T refused to acknowledge its obligation to serve the residents, according to the filing.

Elkins, who is visually impaired, claims she purchased a $1,500 security system to protect her home, but found the system was unusable because of the slow AT&T broadband speeds.

Lanfair, asserts that she attempted to upgrade her services but was told none were available. Her daughter, who is a teacher, can’t stay at Lanfair’s house during the school year because she can’t download homework, the complaint says.

Meanwhile, Lee says that her grandchildren are unable to stream videos or play games on devices when they visit due to the “painfully slow” services.

According to the complaint, AT&T reported that 22 percent of Cleveland census blocks have maximum residential download speeds of 3 Mbps or less, while 55 percent had top download speeds no greater than 6 Mbps.  This is compared to 12 percent and 24 percent for the rest of Cuyahoga County, respectively.

Lawyers for the complainants write that the analysis shows a troubling pattern of what they call “digital redlining” by AT&T.

“A pattern of long-term systematic failure to invest in the infrastructure required to provide equitable, mainstream internet access to residents of the central city (compared to the suburbs) and to lower-income city neighborhoods,” the complaint says.

ArsTechnica reported that Joan Marsh, AT&T’s EVP of regulatory and state external affairs, responded with a statement saying, “We do not redline. Our commitment to diversity and inclusion is unparalleled. Our investment decisions are based on the cost of deployment and demand for our services and are of course fully compliant with the requirements of the Communications Act. We will vigorously defend the complaint filed today.”


Filed Under: Carriers

 

Next Article

← Previous Article
Next Article →

Related Articles Read More >

eSIM
eSIM eases changing carriers for phones and IoT
QoE and QoS comparison
Benchmarking in 5G: More important than ever
iPhone 12
I bought a 5G phone, now what?
6G
Key takeaways from 6G Symposium

Featured Contributions

  • Overcome Open RAN test and certification challenges
  • Wireless engineers need AI to build networks
  • Why AI chips need PCIe 7.0 IP interconnects
  • circuit board timing How timing and synchronization improve 5G spectrum efficiency
  • Wi-Fi 7 and 5G for FWA need testing
More Featured Contributions

EE TECH TOOLBOX

“ee
Tech Toolbox: 5G Technology
This Tech Toolbox covers the basics of 5G technology plus a story about how engineers designed and built a prototype DSL router mostly from old cellphone parts. Download this first 5G/wired/wireless communications Tech Toolbox to learn more!

EE LEARNING CENTER

EE Learning Center
“5g
EXPAND YOUR KNOWLEDGE AND STAY CONNECTED
Get the latest info on technologies, tools and strategies for EE professionals.

Engineering Training Days

engineering
“bills
5G Technology World
  • Enews Signup
  • EE World Online
  • DesignFast
  • EDABoard Forums
  • Electro-Tech-Online Forums
  • Microcontroller Tips
  • Analogic Tips
  • Connector Tips
  • Engineer’s Garage
  • EV Engineering
  • Power Electronic Tips
  • Sensor Tips
  • Test and Measurement Tips
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Advertise

Copyright © 2025 WTWH Media LLC. All Rights Reserved. The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of WTWH Media
Privacy Policy

Search 5G Technology World