Broadband Adoption and Use In America
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
BroadBandadoption and
Use in america
OBI WOrkIng PaPer SerIeS nO. 1
B y J o h n B . h o r r i g a n , P h . D .
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | F e B r u a r y 2 0 1 0
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
The FCC Omnibus Broadband Initiative (OBI) Working Paper Series presents analysis and research by broadband team staffmembers. These papers reflect work performed in support of the National Broadband Plan and provide context for the Plan. The
analyses and conclusions in the OBI Working Paper Series are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of other
Commission staff, or any Commissioner.
2
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
Summary Of fIndIngS➤ Among low-income Americans—those whose annual
household incomes fall below $20,000—broadband
adoption stands at 40 percent.
the Federal Communications Commission’s October-
african-americans and Hispanics trail the average in
november 2009 survey finds that nearly two-thirds (65
broadband access, although gaps have narrowed since
percent) of american adults use high-speed Internet con-
early 2009.
nections to go online from home.
➤ 59 percent of African-Americans have broadband at
The FCC conducted a survey of 5,005 Americans in October
home.
and November 2009 in an effort to understand the state of
➤ 49 percent of Hispanics (English and Spanish speaking)
broadband adoption and use, as well as barriers facing those
have broadband at home.
who do not have broadband at home. The main findings are:
➤ For Hispanics who took the survey in Spanish, broad-
band adoption is only 20 percent.
➤ 78 percent of adults are Internet users, whether that
➤ For Hispanics who opted to take the survey in English,
means broadband, dial-up, access from home or access
65 percent have broadband.
from someplace other than home.
➤ 74 percent of adults have access at home.
These figures represent increases from levels registered in
➤ 67 percent of U.S. households contain a broadband user
surveys conducted in early 2009 by the Pew Research Center,
who accesses the service at home.
which found in April that 46% of African Americans and 40%
➤ 65 percent of adults are broadband adopters. The dis-
of Hispanics (English and Spanish speaking) used broadband
crepancy of two percentage points between household
at home.
and individual home use is because some survey respon-
dents are nonbroadband users but live with someone
Some 42 percent of americans with disabilities have broad-
who, at home, is.band at home.
➤ 6 percent of Americans use dial-up Internet connections
The FCC survey asked adults a series of six questions to
as their main form of home access.
determine whether a respondent should be classified as having
➤ 6 percent are Internet users but do not use it from home;
a disability. Nearly one-quarter (24 percent) responded “yes”
they access the Internet from places such as work, the
to at least one of the questions, indicating they have a disability;
library or community centers.
their broadband adoption rate is two-thirds the national aver-
age. Looking at the data differently, 39 percent of all Americans
For the purposes of this report, home broadband users are
without broadband have some type of disability.
those who said they used any one of the following technologies
to access the internet from home: cable modem, a DSL-enabled
Senior citizens (those over the age of 65) continue to trail
the national average in broadband adoption with a 35 per-
less connection for your computer or cell phone, fiber optic,
cent broadband-at-home penetration rate.
T-1. In other words, home broadband users opt in to that classi-
➤ Nearly half (48 percent) of senior citizens are Internet
fication through a survey question not by adhering to definition
users, regardless of connection type.
of broadband by speed that might be read to them.
On average, americans pay nearly $41 per month for broad-
the main dividing lines for access are along socioeconomic band service, but half of those who receive their broadbanddimensions such as income and education.
in a bundle with other services cannot identify the Internet
➤ 46 percent of adults whose highest level of education is
portion of their bill.
a high school degree are broadband users at home; 82
➤ When asked the level of their monthly Internet bill, to the
percent of adults who have attended or graduated from
nearest dollar, broadband users, on average, cited a figure
college are broadband users at home.
of $40.68
➤ 52 percent of Americans in households with annual
➤ Most users (70 percent) receive broadband bundled with
incomes of $50,000 or below have broadband at home,
other services. Of these, 50 percent could specify their
compared with 87 percent of those in households with
bundled monthly price: $37.70.
incomes above that level.
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
3O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
➤ Among broadband users who subscribe to a stand-alonethree pitfalls cited are less active online than those who do not
high-speed service at home (i.e., they do not have ser-
share those views. These relationships do not show cause and
vice in a bundle), the average monthly bill reported was
effect, but they do suggest how attitudes influence the way
$46.25.
people engage with the Internet.
Broadband users overwhelmingly view the social aspects of non-adopters are almost 50 percent more likely than
the Internet as very important to them, while watching tV, broadband users to say they believe it is too easy for per-videos or movies online and playing games were deemed
sonal information to be stolen online.
less important.
➤ By a 57 percent to 39 percent margin, non-adopters of
When asked what types of online applications are important
broadband at home say they strongly agree that it is too
to them, here is what broadband users said were very important
easy to have their personal information stolen online.
to them.
➤ 68 percent cited the Internet’s capacity to ease
This is one factor linked to their lower likelihood of adop-
communication with family and friends.
tion. Although this concern is not necessarily a causal factor
➤ 39 percent said the ability to use the Internet to keep up
behind non-adoption decisions, there is a significant positive
with community news.
correlation between high levels of worries about personal pri-
➤ 35 percent mentioned the ability to share content, such
vacy and non-adoption.
as photos, videos or text.
➤ 24 percent cited online shopping.
Broadband users exhibit varying degrees of understanding
➤ 10 percent said watching television shows, videosof digital concepts. that, in turn, influences what they do
or movies online.
online.
➤ 9 percent identified playing games online is very
Respondents received a series of questions asking how well
important.
they understood various terms relating to computers and the
Internet; such questions serve as proxy measures for people’s
although most users of broadband at home have positive
online skill levels. What follows is the share of broadband users
perspectives on the Internet, worries about inappropriate
who say they understood very well the listed terms:
online content and security of personal information can
➤ 61 percent—refresh or reload
put a damper on online activity.
➤ 44 percent—operating system
Most broadband users see the Internet as a tool for learning
➤ 42 percent—Internet browser cookie
and productivity.
➤ 41 percent—JPEG file
➤ 81 percent strongly agree that the Internet is a valuable
➤ 40 percent—spyware or malware
resource for information and learning.
➤ 16 percent—widget
➤ 74 percent strongly agree that it is important for children
to learn to use the Internet.
Those with greater understanding of these terms are heavier
➤ 56 percent strongly agree that people can be more
online users. Some 29 percent of broadband users said they
productive using the Internet.
did not understand any of the listed terms very well, while 24
percent understood five or six of the terms very well. On aver-
Nonetheless, broadband users view the Internet as having
age, the former group engaged in about half as many online
pitfalls.
activities as their more informed counterparts. Again, a causal
➤ 56 percent strongly agree that too much pornography
relationship is not suggested here, but the findings indicate
and offensive material is online.
how skills can shape how heavily they use the internet.
➤ 39 percent strongly agree that it is too easy for personal
information to be stolen online.
People take advantage of multiple devices and services to
➤ 24 percent strongly agree that the Internet is toogo online, but these are usually supplementary access paths
dangerous for children.
for them.
➤ 30 percent of American adults have used a handheld
Users with positive outlooks about the Internet tend to be
device (e.g., cell phone or smart phone) to access the
more active online (as measured by how many online activi-
Internet.1
ties they do) than those with less upbeat views on the Internet.
➤ This behavior is more prevalent among minority groups.
Similarly, broadband users with strong concerns about the
4
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
➤ 39 percent of African-Americans have accessed thethere are three primary reasons why the 35 percent of
Internet with a handheld device.
non-adopting americans do not have broadband: cost, lack
➤ 39 percent of Hispanics have accessed the Internet
of digital literacy and broadband is not sufficiently relevant
with a handheld device.
for them to purchase it:
➤ 84 percent of those who use the Internet via a handheld
➤ 36 percent of non-adopters cite cost as the main rea-
device have broadband at home. That figure is somewhat
son they do not have high-speed Internet at home. This
lower for African-Americans (78 percent) and Hispanics
breaks out in the following ways:
(68 percent).
➤ 15 percent say the price of the monthly bill is too much
➤ 15 percent of all Americans use a mobile wireless broad-
for them.
band service with their laptop computers.2
➤ 10 percent say the cost of a computer is too much.
➤ The vast majority (92 percent) of wireless broadband
➤ 9 percent say they do not want a long-term service
users have wireline broadband at home.
contract or cannot afford the installation fee.
➤ Broadband users also access the Internet from places
➤ 2 percent cite a combination of these reasons.
other than home.
➤ 22 percent of non-adopters cite factors pointing to lack
➤ 67 percent have at some time used the Internet at the
of digital literacy as the main reason they are not online.
homes of friends or family.
These include people who are not comfortable with com-
➤ 62 percent have used the Internet at work.
puters or, for non-internet users, are “worried about all
➤ 33 percent have used the Internet at a public library.
the bad things that can happen if I use the Internet.” As
➤ 30 percent have used the Internet at school.
people who cite digital literacy as barrier tend to be older
➤ 13 percent have used the Internet at a community
(the median age is 62), concerns about the safety of the
center.
online environment is understandable.
➤ 5 percent have used the Internet at a place of worship.
➤ 19 percent of non-adopters do not have broadband
because they question its relevance to their lives. They
thirty-five percent of americans do not use broadband at
do not believe digital content is sufficiently compelling
home. they fall into three categories, each with distinct
to justify getting it. Specifically, these non-adopters say
demographic characteristics.
the Internet is a “waste of time,” do not think there is
➤ 22 percent of adults are not Internet users. They are the
anything worth seeing online and (for dial-up users) say
oldest non-adopting group, with a median age of 60, and
they are content with their current service. Dial-up users
include the highest share of Hispanics (at 20 percent).
make up a disproportionate share of those citing lack of
Some 84 percent have high school degrees or less and half
relevance as a barrier.
live in households with annual incomes of $30,000 per
year or less.
non-adopters concerned with cost would be willing to pay,
➤ 6 percent of adults have dial-up connections at home.
on average, $25 per month for broadband.
Nearly one-third (29 percent) of them live in rural areas,
Non-adopters who cited the monthly cost of broadband as a
twice the rate for broadband users, and one-quarter
reason they did not have service received a follow-up question
(23 percent) have college degrees, which modestly lags
asking them to estimate how much they would pay for service.
the national average. The median age is 53.
Among this group:
➤ 6 percent of adults are Internet users, but do not have
➤ 52 percent were able to provide an estimate; it averaged
access from home. The group is relatively young (the
$25 per month.
median age is 38) and female (59 percent), but they
➤ 28 percent answered “don’t know” to this question.
tend to have low incomes and low levels of educational
➤ 20 percent said they were not willing to pay anything for
attainment.3
broadband.
Of these non-adopters, 12 percent say they cannot get broad-
Some 65 percent of those who estimated their willingness to
band where they live. This translates into a 4 percent share
pay (WTP) cited a figure of $20 per month or more.
of Americans—on the basis of their reports on infrastructure
➤ If all of those who cited this figure had a service offering
availability in their neighborhood—who say they are unable to
at $20 before them and took service, broadband adoption
obtain broadband because it is not available. This means that
would be 6 percentage points higher in the United States.
31 percent of all Americans can get service but do not.
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
5O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
Nearly all (91 percent) who provided a WTP estimate identi-Together, users in these two groups with direct experience
fied a figure of $10 per month or more.
with broadband equate to 24 percent of the non-adopting
➤ If all of those who cited this figure had a service offering
population, or 8 percent of all adults.
at $10 before them and took service, broadband adoption
would be 8 percentage points higher in the United States.
“Proxy Internet” use is evident for 22 percent of non-In-
non-adopters have a variety of outlooks on the Internet
ternet or “not-at-home” users who live with someone with
and information and communications technologies (ICts). online access. among these users:
Some non-adopters, notwithstanding worries they may have
➤ 16 percent ask the Internet user in the home to carry out
about the Internet and their capacity to use it, have a hopeful
an online task at least once a week.
outlook on the benefits it may confer. Many are users of ICTs,
➤ 20 percent ask the Internet user in the house to carry out
just not broadband at home. Among nonbroadband adopters:
an online task about once a month.
➤ 80 percent have premium television, i.e., either satellite
➤ About half of this “proxy access” is done using a broad-
or cable.
band connection in the home.
➤ 70 percent have cell phones.
➤ 42 percent have at least one working computer at home.
When it comes to outlooks toward the Internet and levels
of ownership of ICt products, non-adopting americans fallWith respect to attitudes, most express high degrees of worry
into four categories, each with different barriers to broad-
about the privacy of their personal information and inappropri- band adoption.
ate online content:
digitally distant non-adopters make up 10 percent of the
➤ 65 percent strongly agree there is too much pornography
general population, and members of this group do not see the
and offensive material on the internet.
point of being online. Few in this group see the Internet as a
➤ 57 percent strongly agree that it too easy for their per-
tool for learning and most see it as a dangerous place for chil-
sonal information to be stolen online.
dren. This is an older group (the median age is 63), nearly half
➤ 46 percent strongly agree that the internet is too danger-
are retired and half say that either lack of relevance or digital
ous for children.
literacy are barriers to adoption.
The digital Hopefuls make up 8 percent of the population.
At the same time, many non-adopters see the upsides to
They like the idea of being online but lack the resources for ac-
online access
cess. Few have a computer and, among those who use one, few
➤ 59 percent strongly agree that the Internet is a valuable
feel comfortable with the technology. They are most likely to
tool for learning.
cite cost as a barrier to adoption, with affordability of the com-
➤ 54 percent strongly agree that it is important for children
puter playing an important role. They are also more likely than
to learn to use the Internet.
average to say digital literacy is a barrier. Demographically,
➤ 37 percent strongly agree that people can be more pro-
this group is heavily Hispanic (26 percent), has a high share of
ductive using the Internet.
African-Americans (20 percent) and is low-income.
The digitally uncomfortable make up 7 percent of the
One-quarter (24 percent) of non-adopters have had expe-
population, and are the mirror image of the Digital Hopefuls;rience with broadband, meaning they once had service at
they have the resources for access but not a bright outlook
home or have used it at work or someplace else:
on what it means to be online. Nearly all of the Digitally
➤ 17 percent of all non-Internet users had home access in
Uncomfortable have computers, but they lack the skills to use
the past.
them and have tepid attitudes toward the Internet. This group
➤ Of this group, 49 percent said they had home high-
reports a variety of barriers, including cost, lack of available
speed Internet access.
infrastructure where they live, low perceptions of the Internet’s
➤ 46 percent of dial-up or “not-at-home” Internet users
relevance and low digital literacy.
have used a broadband connection from somewhere other
The near Converts, who make up 10 percent of the popu-
than home, such as at work, school or a friend or family
lation, have many of the same characteristics of broadband
member’s house.
adopters. They have high rates of computer ownership, positive
6
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
attitudes about the Internet and are, relative to other non-take a class for credit online (37 percent versus the 26 percent
adopters, youthful (at a median age of 45). Many are dial-up
average). With respect to barriers to adoption, 42 percent of
or “not-at-home” users, and monthly access cost is the largest
African-Americans say cost is the main reason they do not have
reason for non-adoption among this group.
broadband.
looking across various population segments reveals dif-
ferences in what they do online and what keeps them from
Hispanics: Half (49 percent) of Hispanics have broadband at
having broadband.
home. While young African-Americans have broadband access
on par with the average, “under 30” Hispanics trail the aver-
Families: Parents with minor children at home are more
age for their age cohort, 57 percent versus 75 percent. Those
likely than average to have broadband at home, by a 75 percent Hispanics with broadband use it for downloading and stream-
to 65 percent margin. The strong majority (87 percent) has at
ing music (69 percent have done this, in comparison with the
least one working computer at home, leaving a 13-percentage-
52 percent average). They also find broadband very important
point gap between adopters and those with a functioning
for keeping up with news about their community; 52 percent
computer. Among those without broadband, nearly half (48
say this compared with the 39 percent average. As to adoption
percent) cite cost as the main barrier to adoption, with 24 per-
barriers, 52 percent of Hispanic non-adopters cite cost, equally
cent specifically pointing to the level of the monthly access fee.
split between those who point to the monthly fee and those who
say they cannot afford a computer.
Low-income Americans: Some 40 percent of low-income
Americans (with annual household incomes at $20,000 or
People with disabilities: Of the 24 percent of respondents
below) have broadband, compared with 91 percent among those who have some sort of disability, 42 percent have broadband.
living in homes with annual incomes above $75,000. Low-in-
The online activities of broadband-using people with disabili-
come broadband users are more likely than well-off broadband ties are narrower in scope than others; that is, they do fewer
users to look for or apply for a job online – by a 77 percent to 60 things online. That may reflect difficulties some people with
percent margin. Not surprisingly, 47 percent of this group iden- disabilities have in using the devices to get online or interacting
tifies cost as the biggest barrier to broadband adoption. That is with Web pages. Barriers for non-adopting people with disabili-
twice the rate of the (relatively few) upper-income nonbroad-
ties do not differ significantly from the average.
band adopters.
Rural Americans: Fifty percent of rural residents have
African-Americans: Although African-Americans trail
broadband, a rate that reflects in part the older and less
the average in overall broadband adoption, the adoption gap
wealthy rural population but also the lack of available infra-
does not exist for adults under age 30; some 75 percent of
structure. One in 10 rural non-adopters say they cannot get
African-Americans in this younger age group have broadband,
broadband where they live. That is more than twice the aver-
which equals the average. By contrast, 21 percent of African-
age. Rural Americans with broadband, meanwhile, are as active
American senior citizens have broadband; that compares with
as their urban and suburban counterparts in using the Internet
the 35 percent average. African-American broadband users are for shopping and taking classes online, suggesting that they use
highly likely to have used their broadband connection to look
broadband as a way to virtually access the benefits associated
for or apply for a job; 83 percent versus the 60 percent aver-
with urban or suburban living.
age. African-Americans with broadband are also more likely to
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
7O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
8F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
TaBle Of COnTenTSIntroduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
I. Adoption: who uses broadband at home—and who doesn’t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
Who uses broadband at home–and who doesn’t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
Dividing lines on broadband access. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
Adoption patterns for key population segments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
How people connect to the Internet at home. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
Monthly cost of service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15
II. Online behaviors: what shapes them and what matters to users . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16
Online activities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16
Attitudes about the Internet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16
Skills: Understanding information and communications technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
The activities people say are most important . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18
Why new users get online . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19
III. Alternative access: different place, different platforms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
The places people access the Internet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Use of the handheld for online access and other purposes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21
Mobile Wireless Broadband . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
What people pay for cell phone service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
IV. Non-adopters: who they are and the barriers they face . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Overview of non-adopters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Past and proxy broadband use for adopters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
The role of disabilities in non-adoption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Why non-adopters do not have broadband . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
What non-adopters are willing to pay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Summary of most important reasons for non-adoption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
When respondents can cite multiple reasons for not adopting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31
Segmenting the population of non-adopters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31
V. Focus on key population groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Families. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Low-income Americans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
African-Americans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Hispanics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
People with disabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Rural Americans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..39
Appendix: Tables on demographics and use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Acknowledgements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
9O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
1 0F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
InTrOduCTIOnFor the survey, the margin of error based on results based
on the entire sample of 5,005 is plus or minus 1.6 percentage
points. For results on 2,671 home broadband adopters, the
The Federal Communications Commission in the fall of
margin of error is plus or minus 2.1 percentage points; for the
2009 fielded a national survey of Americans under author-
oversample of non-adopters (n=2,334) the margin of error is
ity granted by the Broadband Data Improvement Act (BDIA).
plus or minus 2.2 percentage points. Finally, results based on
The BDIA, which became law in October 2008 but needed
all internet users (n=3,555), the margin of error is plus or mi-
and received funding approval under the American Recovery
nus 1.8 percentage points. Interviewers conducting the survey
and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), requires the FCC to conduct
provided a Spanish-language option for respondents wishing to
periodic surveys that explore the broadband experience of
take the survey in Spanish.
American consumers. Specifically, the BDIA directs the survey
The FCC’s survey results compare favorably to a similar
to probe the types of technology people use for their home
survey conducted in the fall of 2009 by the Census Bureau
broadband service, what they pay, the applications they use
for the National Telecommunications and Information
and, for those who do not use broadband, the barriers to adopt-
Administration, which found that 63.5 percent of American
ing broadband.
households used high-speed internet to go online.4
This paper reports the national findings from the random
digit dialing telephone survey that interviewed 5,005 adult
What is neW about this survey
Americans, 2,671 of whom are broadband-at-home users. TheThe survey is unique for the FCC, in that it is the first time that
remaining 2,334 either do not have broadband at home, report
the Commission has conducted its own survey of end-users of
that they do not use the Internet or say they are Internet us-
the Internet. The Commission, using data gathered from FCC
ers but without access at home. The number of non-adopters
Form 477 (a semi-annual reporting document for telecom-
surveyed represents an oversample of this population; this was munications entities) has previously reported on the number
done to facilitate statistical analysis of non-adopters.
of broadband lines in service to end users based on carrier-re-
The Methodology section in the report’s appendix provides
ported data at the Census tract level.5 This survey, as it involves
detail on the sampling design for this survey, and also discusses interviewing adults, presents adoption data based on what
such issues as response rate and use of cell phone numbers in
users say about how they access the Internet at home.
the sample. Cell phone numbers were used in the sample in
The survey is distinct in a broader sense owing to its focus
recognition of the fact many Americans do not have landline
on non-adopters of broadband at home. There have been other
telephone service at home, but rather rely only on their cell
national surveys that have examined why people do not use
phones. Overall, interviewers conducted 31% of the surveys
the Internet, most notably the Pew Internet & American Life
with respondents who were on a cell phone; 13% said they were Project’s 2002 survey on why people did not use the (mainly)
“cell phone only” households, while 18% had a landline, yet
dial-up Internet.6 Other Pew Internet research has analyzed
were contacted on their cell phone.
non-adoption of broadband based on a few questions in na-
It is also worth noting that the data presented throughout
tional surveys.7
is weighted to take into account characteristics of the sample,
Finally, the FCC survey develops segments of non-adoption.
including the oversample of non-adopters. The weighting
This segmentation permits non-adopters to be placed in cat-
corrects for the fact that, in the figures noted in above, 2,671
egories that yield insights into the reasons people do not have
adopters does not represent 65% of 5,005 respondents, the
broadband—and possible solutions that might be targeted at
home broadband adoption figure highlighted at the outset. In
non-adopters. The British regulator Ofcom undertook a similar
results reported within, percentage figures represent weighted segmentation of non-adoption8 but this is the first time na-
results; the number of cases reported for various sub-samples
tional data collected by the U.S. government has been examined
are actual number of cases.
in that way.
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
1 1O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
1 2F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
I. adOPTIOn: WhO uSeS This means that 22 percent of Americans are not Internetusers (1 percent of respondents did not know the type of
BrOadBand aT hOme— Internet connection they have at home and thus are not classi-
fied as broadband, dial-up or “not at home” online users).
and WhO dOeSn’T
Although broadband access and reasons for not having it
are the principle themes of the survey, respondents were asked
about several other assets pertaining to information and com-
munications technology (ICT), such as use of computers, TVs
Who uses broadband at home—and Who doesn’t
and cell phones. Specifically:The October-November FCC survey finds that a strong major-
➤ 86 percent of Americans have a cell phone.
ity of Americans use the Internet. Among adults, 78 percent
➤ 65 percent have cable TV at home.
are Internet users, meaning they have access from home or
➤ 66 percent have a desktop computer at home.
someplace other from home, and with any type of connection
➤ 52 percent have a laptop computer at home.
(i.e., dial-up or broadband). The findings about access:
➤ 29 percent have satellite TV.
➤ 65 percent of adults use broadband at home.
Combining cable and satellite TV, as well as desktop and lap-
➤ 67 percent of households have broadband. The survey
top adoption, yields the following figures for home computer
asked non-adopters whether another person in the house and home premium TV use:
uses the Internet with a home high-speed connection.
➤ 86 percent of Americans have either cable TV or satellite
Affirmative answers to that question add two additional
TV.
percentage points to overall penetration.
➤ 79 percent of Americans have either a desktop or laptop
➤ 6 percent of Americans have dial-up Internet connections
computer at home.
at home.
➤ 6 percent of Americans are Internet users but do not ac-
The appendix to this paper provides detail on adoption pat-
cess the Internet from home.
terns for each of these technologies across demographic and
socio-economic categories.
Exhibit 1:
100
Broadband Adoption
93
by American Adults by
90
86
84
Socio-Economic and
80
77
75
74
Demographic Factors
70
68
69
64
59
59
60
55
50
49
50
American adults
4040
35
30
24
20
10
0
65+
Rural
18–29Black
$75K +30–49
50–64
White
College +
$20–40K$40–75K
Non Rural
Hispanic*
Some college
Less than $20K
Less than high school
High school graduate
*Hispanics includes both English and Spanish-speaking HispanicsF e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
1 3O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
dividing lines on broadband accesstake the survey in Spanish; among these Spanish speakers,
Broadband adoption is not distributed evenly in the population broadband adoption was 20 percent.
(See Exhibit 1). The differences in adoption break out promi-
nently along two particular dimensions, which are not mutually
People with disabilities: The FCC survey finds that 42 per-
exclusive:
cent of those who identify themselves with disabilities has broad-
band at home. A July 2003 survey from the Pew Internet Project
Education:Among adults, roughly half of Americans have
showed that 10 percent of those with disabilities had broadband
had some college experience (even if they have not or did not
at a time when 18 percent of Americans had broadband.9
graduate). Among those who have some college experience, 82
The FCC survey sampled all Americans, but for several
percent have broadband at home, compared with 46 percent of racial or ethnic categories, there were not enough respondents
those whose highest level of educational attainment is a high
to draw statistically reliable inferences. For Asian-Americans,
school degree.
American Indians, and Alaskan natives, the sample yielded
fewer than 100 respondents in each group. The first two groups
Income: Americans in the lower half of the income distri-
in particular have a sizable population that may not speak
bution demographic, meaning an annual household income of
English or that have low telephone penetration rates. Because
$50,000 per year or less, are much less likely to have broadband of that and the small sample of respondents, it is inadvisable to
at home than those with higher incomes. Among respondents
report results.
reporting household incomes of $50,000 or less, 52 percent
have broadband at home, far below the 87 percent adoption
hoW people connect to the internet at home
rate for those above that income threshold.
The survey asked respondents what type of Internet connec-
tion they use at home. The question, which is the same one
adoption patterns for key population segments used in surveys conducted by the Census, allowed respondents
Surveys conducted by the Pew Research Center’s Internet &
to pick any of the categories listed that the respondent believed
American Life Project found that broadband adoption within
described his home broadband connection. In other words,
two minority groups, African-Americans and Hispanics, lags
respondents could pick more than one type of home broadband
the average and, for African-Americans, has grown very little
connection from the list (See Exhibit 2).
from 2007 to the beginning of 2009. The FCC survey shows
The answers underscore the difficulty in asking people
some breaks from those patterns.
about the technological dimensions of their home Internet
access points. Although it is possible that some consumers
african-americans: FCC figures found 59 percent of
have more than one home high-speed connection, these figures
African-Americans had broadband at home in the October-
suggest that most Americans have two broadband connec-
November survey, up considerably from 46 percent in Pew’s
tions. It is likely that a significant number of consumers do not
April survey.
know the details of their home Internet connections. Some,
for instance, may confuse a wireless home network working
hispanics: Slightly less than half (49 percent) of Hispan-
off wireline broadband with a “fixed wireless provider.” Given
ics have broadband at home in the FCC survey compared with
the opportunity to pick more than one category, in conjunc-
40 percent of Hispanics in a Pew Research Center April 2009
tion with uncertainty over how they connect to the internet
survey. In the FCC survey, 3 percent of respondents chose to
Exhibit 2:
Cable modem
58
At home, what do you
DSL-enabled phone line
44
now use to connect to the Mobile broadband wireless connection for your computer or cell phone
44
Internet (figures as a
percent of home Internet
Fixed wireless provider
29
users)
Dial-up telephone line
12
Satellite connection
10
A fiber optic connection such as FiOS
10
T-1 connection
5
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey of 5,005 adult Americans, October-November 2009.
1 4
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
at home, some respondents inaccurately chose more than onebundle, whether the respondents knew the Internet portion
category of connection type.
and, if so, what the monthly Internet bill was.
Notwithstanding the possible confusion reflected in the
This careful approach to bundling has the advantage of strip-
survey responses, it seems likely that the vast majority of home ping out those who do not know the Internet portion of their
broadband access is wireline. In fact, estimates place wireless
bundle before they are asked to quantify their monthly Internet
home broadband access at 2 percent of homes—that would
bill. Those who do not know are not asked to make an estimate.
include fixed wireless or satellite service.10
However, by appropriately excluding these respondents, the
The survey also made extensive efforts to determine
overall sample of respondents offering cost estimates is re-
whether a respondent had dial-up service at home or not. First, duced. One-third of broadband users did not give an estimate of
interviewers asked respondents first whether they connect at
their monthly broadband payments.
home “through a slow-speed connection such as dial-up or…a
For Internet users, bundling their bill with other services is
high-speed, broadband connection.” Among home users (72
common. A majority of home broadband users (70 percent) say
percent of respondents), 8 percent said they had a slow-speed
their Internet service is bundled with another service in their
connection.
monthly bill, with 29 percent saying they receive a stand-alone
Second, a follow-up question for the 8 percent who said
bill for broadband.
they had a slow speed connection asked them to confirm that
Among those who bundle Internet with another service, 50
they “now use a dial-up connection to the Internet at home,
percent said they knew what the Internet portion of the bill was,
not a higher-speed connection.” Most (93 percent) who first
a figure that was the same for broadband and dial-up users alike.
said they had a slow-speed connection confirmed that they
The survey finds that:
now have dial-up at home. For the purposes of this report, only
➤ Overall, users report paying $40.68 per month for their
those who were able to confirm in the second question that
broadband Internet connections.11
they have dial-up at home are defined as home dial-up users.
➤ Those who report they take service in a bundle (among
This amounts to 6 percent of the entire adult population.
those who can report what the Internet portion of the
With the questioning approach isolating home dial-up
bundle is), the average bill is $37.70.
users, home broadband users are defined, in this report, as
➤ Those with stand-alone broadband service report a
respondents who chose any of the options listed in Exhibit 2
monthly bill of $46.25.
that are home high-speed connections, that is, cable modem,
➤ Those use dial-up at home to go online report a monthly
a DSL-enabled phone line, fixed wireless, satellite, a mobile
bill of $22.98.
broadband wireless connection for your computer or cell
phone, fiber optic, T-1. Thus, home broadband users opt in to
Several other sources gather data on what people pay for
that classification through a survey question not by adhering to broadband and offer points of comparison. They are:
definition of broadband by speed that might be read to them.
➤ The Pew Internet Project found in its April 2009 survey
that users report an average monthly broadband bill of
monthly cost of service
$39.
As the BDIA directs, the survey also asked consumers what
➤ TNS Telecoms, through analysis of consumer bills, 90
they pay per month for home broadband service. This question
percent of which are bundled offerings, finds an average
presents another challenge for respondents, separate and apart
broadband bill of $34.50.
from knowing the details about home connection technology.
➤ Telogical Systems examines stand-alone nonpromotional
Many consumers have Internet service bundled with other
offers of providers, and its figures show an average broad-
services (such as telephone or cable TV), making it difficult for
band bill of $46 per month.
the respondent to know what portion of the total bill reflects
the cost of Internet service.
Telogical’s figures for stand-alone prices track reason-
To address bundling, the survey asked consumers if they paid ably well with what respondents in the FCC survey say about
for various services (cell phone, landline phone, Internet, cable stand-alone bills. Those in the FCC survey able to identify the
TV, satellite or wireless broadband) in conjunction with other
Internet component of their bundle cited an average figure
services. If consumers said they paid for the Internet in a sepa-
about $3 more than the bill analysis of TNS Telecoms, which
rate bill, they were asked to tell interviewers what their average focuses mainly on bundled offerings.12
monthly bill was to the nearest dollar. If respondents said their
Internet service was bundled with another service, follow-up
questions addressed what the monthly bills were for the entire
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
1 5O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
II. OnlIne BehavIOrS: half received the other eight. Among the first set of activities(designated with an asterisk in the chart), broadband users on
WhaT ShaPeS Them
average participated in five of them. For the second set, broad-
band users did 3.7 of them, on average.
and WhaT maTTerS
Those averages are affected by a host of factors. Young
people are generally more attuned to digital life, so it is no
TO uSerS
surprise that adults under the age of 30 are typically more ac-
tive. Respondents in that group say, on average, that they do 5.9
and 4.6 of the online activities across the two sets. The better
This section describes the kinds of online activities people
educated also do more things online: College graduates say
engage in, as well as two factors that influence intensity of use.
they have done 5.3 and 3.9 activities, on average, of the activi-
This involves analyzing: a) how attitudes toward the Internet
ties listed. A table in the appendix details how online activities
influence how much they do online; and b) how the level of
break out along demographic dimensions.
understanding of computers and the Internet influences what
As influential as demographics may be in explaining the
they do online. The section concludes by looking at what
scope of what people do online, there are two other relevant
people find most important about their online activities.
factors: attitudes about the Internet (its strengths and hazards)
and skills (using measures of people’s understanding of com-
online activities
puters and the Internet as a proxy for their level of skill).
The Internet, as has been well documented, is a means for
communication, collaboration and content creation directed
attitudes about the internet
at users, shoppers, social networkers, information seekers and
Respondents were read a series of six statements about the
people searching for entertainment. The survey asked Internet Internet—three about the Internet’s upsides and three about its
users if they had ever engaged in particular online activities,
less attractive qualities (See Exhibit 4).
with the topics chosen to reflect the variety of activities people
In general, broadband users who showed strong levels of con-
may pursue online.
cern about potential hazards online reported doing a narrower
To economize on the survey length, half the respondents
scope of online activities than respondents without such wor-
received eight of the listed activities in Exhibit 3, and the other
ries. Similarly, those with positive perspectives were more active
Exhibit 3:
All Internet
Dial-up
Broadband
Online Activities ofusers
users
users
American Adults
Buy a product online*
78
56
83
(figures as a % of users
Get local or community news*
75
55
80
in each group)
Visit local, state or federal government Web site*
75
53
79
Use a social networking site*
52
41
55
Submit a review for a product or service*
52
36
55
Download or stream music*
47
22
52
Upload or share content*
45
26
48
Play games online*
46
38
48
Get international or national news
73
54
77
Bank online
63
43
69
Get information about or apply for a job
57
39
60
Get advice from a government agency about a health or safety issue
50
39
54
Download or stream video
38
18
42
Post to own blog or group blog
23
7
26
Take a class online
22
8
24
Play complicated role-playing games online
14
9
14
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey of 5,005 adult Americans, October-November 2009. Draft final results. For broadband users,
n=1,378 for activities marked by * and n=1,278 for other activities. For dial-up user, n=212 for activities marked by * and n=247 for other activities.
1 6
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
online. It is important to note that worries about online dangersIt is too easy for my personal information to be stolen
do not always translate into behavioral changes. People may reg-
online: Those who strongly agreed with this did an average of
ister concerns about identity theft, but this may not prevent many 4.6 and 3.4 activities, 11 percent lower than those who do not
users from sharing personal information at online social network- share this view (across both sets of activities).
ing or shopping sites.
Overall, broadband users who strongly registered any of
The following analysis shows how scope of activity varies by
the three worries listed above (theft of personal information,
respondents’ attitudes. Recall that half the sample was asked
inappropriate content, online dangers for children) engaged
about eight different online activities, and the other half asked
in 4.8 and 3.5 of the online activities probed. The share of
about a separate set of eight activities. To show the interaction of
all broadband users who cited any of those three things as
attitude and activity, the analysis below reports the average num-
strong concerns is 70 percent and, when compared with the 30
ber of activities (across both sets) among those who strongly agree percent of broadband users who share none of these concerns
with a specific attitudinal proposition. That is then contrasted, in strongly, they do 14 percent fewer online activities. These com-
percentage terms, with those who did not share that view.
parisons do not mean that the attitudes in question cause or
are sole drivers of the differences identified. However, they do
The Internet is too dangerous for children: Those who
indicate that how people perceive the Internet shapes how they
strongly agreed with this did an average of 4.3 and 3.1 activities, use it. It is worth noting that the differences identified above
19 percent lower than those who do not share this view (aver-
are statistically significant when controlling for other respon-
aged across both sets of activities).
dent characteristics, such as age, race, education and income.13
It is important for children to know how to use the
skills: understanding information and
Internet: : Those who strongly agreed with this did an average communications technology
of 5.2 and 3.8 activities, 16 percent more than those who do not The scope of activities people do online may also have to do
share this view (averaged across both sets of activities).
with the skills they bring to the online experience. Measuring
the level of skill or literacy for a user is challenging in a survey
The Internet is a valuable source for information and environment. Merely asking people to rate how well they can
learning: As was the case for the importance of the Internet
carry out a given task can be problematic, and research has found
for learning among children, those who strongly agreed with
that such self-assessment about skill is not the best predictor of
this engaged in an average of 5.2 and 3.8 activities, 25 percent
actual skill levels. A better predictor of actual skill comes from
more than those who do not share this view (averaged across
asking respondents to rate on a scale their understanding of vari-
both sets of activities).
ous concepts relating to the Internet or computers.14
The FCC survey borrowed this approach, asking Internet us-
There is too much pornography and offensive materi- ers how well they understand six terms relating to the Internet
al on the Internet: Those who strongly agreed did an average or computers (See Exhibit 5).
of 4.7 and 3.4 activities, 11 percent lower than those who do not
Not surprisingly, education is strongly associated with the
share this view (averaged across both sets of activities).
likelihood that people say they understand a particular concept
very well (See Exhibit 6).
People can be more productive using the Internet:
An important consequence of low levels of digital literacy
Those who strongly agreed with this did an average of 5.2 and
is less engagement with online life. Those who say they under-
4.0 activities, 18 percent more than those who do not share this stand the queried concepts “very well” are likely to do more of
view (across both sets of activities).
the online activities discussed. This correlation is significant
Exhibit 4:
The Internet is a valuable source for information and learning
81
Public Attitudes
It is important for children to learn how to use the Internet
74
about the Internet
There is too much pornography and offensive material on the Internet
56
(% of broadband users
who strongly agree)
People can be more productive using the Internet
56
It is too easy for my personal information to be stolen online
39
The Internet is too dangerous for children
24
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009, n=2,671 for broadband users.
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
1 7O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
when holding constant income, education, age and other fac-the terms very well doing, on average, more than twice as many
tors that might also affect people’s probability of doing a range
activities as those who understood none of them.
of things online.15
Exhibits 7, 8 and 9 demonstrate this point by showing, for
the activities people say are most important
broadband users, how the number of online activities in which
What people do online and how they value a particular activity
they engage increases in tandem with the number of computer
can differ for a number of reasons, often due to the context in
and Internet terms they say they understand “very well.” For
which an activity is undertaken. More Internet users have, at
the first set of activities, broadband users who did not say they
some point, bought something online (78 percent) than have
understood any of the computer or Internet terms listed (29
uploaded content they have created (45 percent) or partici-
percent of respondents) engaged in an average of 3.8 of the
pated in a blog (23 percent). However, seeing a video of a child’s
online activities about which they were asked. Those who un-
birthday party may be more important to some people than
derstood very well all of them (24 percent of respondents) did,
buying a product online – especially if offline shopping oppor-
on average, 6.1 activities. The differences are more pronounced tunities are abundant. Conversely, coming upon a hard-to-find
for the second set of activities, with those who understand all of
Exhibit 5:
Very well
Somewhat well
Not too well
Not well at all
Broadband Users’Internet browser cookie
42
30
12
15
Understanding of
Spyware and malware
40
34
11
14
Computer and Internet
Concepts (figures as a
Operating system
44
29
11
16
% of users)
Refresh or reload
61
22
5
11
Widget
16
13
15
54
JPEG file
41
22
8
27
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009; n=2,671 for home broadband users.
Exhibit 6:
Less than
By Education,High School
High school grad
Some college
College+
Broadband Users’Internet browser cookie
23
32
44
50
Understanding of
Spyware and malware
26
33
41
47
Computer and Internet
Operating system
21
31
44
55
Concepts (% “very well”
Refresh or reload
46
52
64
68
in each group)
Widget
4
11
15
22
JPEG file
17
28
41
55
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009; n=2,671 for home broadband users.
Exhibit 7:
Average number of online activities
Average number of online activities
Number of Online(first set of eight activities)
(second set of eight activities)
Activities and Digital
None
3.8
2.5
Literacy
One term
4.9
3.3
Two terms
5.1
3.5
Three terms
5.4
4.2
Four terms
5.6
4.0
Five or more terms
6.1
4.8
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009; n=1,378 for home broadband users for first set of activities and
n=1,293 for home broadband users for second set of activities.
1 8
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
good in the far- flung corner of the Web may be extremelyWhy neW users get online
important if the buyer is a collector or shopping for a specialWhat existing users value about online activities and what trig-
occasion.
gers new adoption can be two different things. To address this,
Even though context is key to interpreting how people value the survey asked about new users’ motives for getting online.
different online activities, the survey nonetheless sought to
The level of Internet penetration has not grown substan-
explore this by asking Internet users to assess the importance
tially in recent years. As noted, the FCC survey finds that 78
of six different categories of online activities. Exhibits 8 and 9
percent of Americans use the Internet, whether that is at home
show results for all users and broadband users when they were
or somewhere else, dial-up or broadband. Surveys conducted
asked to assess how important each online activity was to them. by the Pew Internet Project show that Internet penetration
For most Internet users, the communicative aspects of the
first exceeded 70 percent in early 2006, with that figure reach-
Internet are most important to them, followed by keeping up
ing 75 percent for the first time at the end of 2007. The FCC
with news in the community and sharing content with oth-
asked how long respondents have been using the Internet; just
ers. Applications oriented to entertainment rate notably low,
6 percent report that they have been online for two or fewer
perhaps because (for watching TV shows or movies) excellent
years. Those who have been online for two or fewer years
offline alternatives exist. Young broadband users are more
received follow-up questions asking them to cite the reasons
likely to cite entertainment applications or online entertain-
they chose to get Internet access and then the most important
ment as “very important” than average, with 20 percent and 13
reason for getting access.
percent saying this. They are also more likely to say communi-
As Exhibit 9 shows, most new users cite social reasons as a
cating with family and friends (79 percent) and sharing content motive for beginning to use the Internet, with e-mail communi-
(45 percent) are very important online activities.
cation and content sharing as chief reasons. Accessing video or
Exhibit 8:
% as a share of broadband Internet users at
Not too
Not important
Broadband Surveyhome
Very important
Somewhat
importantimportant
at all
Users on the Importance
Making it easy to communicate with friends and
of These Activities
family, even if they are far away
68
23
5
4
Keeping up with the news in my community
39
39
11
10
Sharing content with others, such as photos,
videos or text
34
38
15
13
Shopping online
23
41
19
18
Watching TV shows, movies and other video
online
10
26
24
39
Playing games online
9
18
23
50
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009; n=2,671 for home broadband users.
Exhibit 9:
% who cite as
Broadband Survey
% who cite
reason
most important
Users on Their Reasons
reason
for Getting Online
To e-mail and stay in touch with family and friends
61
31
(% among Internet
To gain access to music, movies and other entertainment
46
9
users who have been
To share my photos or videos with family and friends
41
3
online for 2 years or less)
My children wanted Internet access
41
7
My children needed it for school
35
19
I needed it for school
27
10
An Internet provider made a special offer too good to pass up
21
2
My job required online access
20
6
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey of adult Americans, October-November 2009. N=92 for new users.
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
1 9O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
other Internet entertainment online also was a factor for many laptop computer) and Internet access from places outside thenew users. A great offer by an Internet service provider was not home (often public access points).
widely cited by new users. When pressed about the most impor-
tant reason, social and educational uses are most prominent.
the places people access the internet
E-mail is the main reason for one-third of new users, while
Although most online users have access from home, there are
school—either for themselves or children—is the main reason
plenty of places outside the household where people can go
for another one-third of new users. It is worth pointing out the
online. To examine how people access the Internet away from
small number of cases (92) for the subset of new users who
home, respondents received questions that tried to fix whether
received these questions.
they have gone online from someplace other than home and, if
so, where. Exhibit 10 shows the places from which people ac-
III. alTernaTIve
cess the Internet.
These results show that 93 percent of Internet users have
aCCeSS: dIfferenT
some form of access at home. Yet, it is apparent people access
the Internet in other contexts as well—particularly at work or a
PlaCeS, dIfferenT
friend or family member’s house.
Exhibit 11 indicates that a majority of Americans (59 per-
PlaTfOrm
cent) who access the Internet do so in more than three places;
17 percent of Americans go online in 5 or more places.
Focusing on alternative access places that exclude home or
Access to the Internet is portable and shareable. People may
work, 57 percent of all Americans (or 73 percent of Internet
take access with them or, if they cannot, they may access the
users) have at one point gone online at some place other than
Internet from different places. The survey looked at this in
home or work, often at a friend or family member’s house.
three contexts: handheld access, mobile broadband (from a
Eliminating the latter from consideration, 39 percent of
Americans (or 48 percent of Internet users) have gone online
Exhibit 10 :
All Internet
Broadband at
Broadband Surveyusers
home
Dial-up at home
Not-at-home
usersUsers on Where They
Home
92%
100%
99%
7%
Access the Internet
Friend or family member’s house
65
67
48
67
Work
58
62
36
48
Public library
35
33
32
57
School
29
30
17
21
Community Center
14
13
9
25
Church
5
5
4
5
Number of cases
3,555
2,671
459
392
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009.
Exhibit 11:
(% of Internet users)
Broadband Survey
One access point
17
Users on the Number of
Two access points
24
Places They go Online
Three access points
25
Four access points
17
Five or more access points
17%
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009.
2 0
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
at a library, school, community center or church. It is worththe share of the adult population with smart devices at 17
noting that these figures do not include those who may access
percent in November 2009.16 The survey did not ask directly
the internet at a local coffee shop.
whether a respondent had a smart phone, but rather whether
Exhibit 12 shows how incidence of using the internet at
cell users did specific activities—some of which are likely to
different access sites varies across demographic and socio-
require having a smart phone.
economic characteristics of the respondent.
Exhibit 13 shows the findings from these questions, with a
breakout by age, as young adults are more frequent users of
use of the handheld for online access and
mobile devices than their elders.
other purposes
Although basic communication functions dominate the
With Internet access increasingly in people’s pockets, it is
portfolio of cell phone activities, there is a substantial inci-
important to probe the activities people pursue using their
dence of information seeking, such as accessing Web pages or
handheld devices. Fully 86 percent of Americans have a cell
searching for directions. Twenty percent of cell phone users say
phone. Estimates of the share of people with “smart phones”
they have downloaded an application to their device, suggest-
that permit online access vary, but Forrester Research places
ing that at least that share has a smart phone; the actual level of
Exhibit 12:
Use of Public Access
(% of those surveyed)
Public library
School
Community
centerChurch
Points and RespondentMale
33
26
15
5
Characteristics
Female
38
31
13
5
Parents with minor children at home
35
28
13
5
Those who report they have a disability
35
22
16
4
18–29
56
58
26
5
30–49
33
26
13
4
50–64
25
14
8
4
65+
20
6
5
5
White (not Hispanic)
31
25
11
4
Black (not Hispanic)
51
36
21
6
Hispanic (English or Spanish speaking)
46
43
26
5
Less than high school
41
24
19
2
High school graduate
33
21
14
4
Some college
41
34
15
5
College +
31
31
11
6
Under $20K
55
41
25
4
$20K–$30K
44
30
20
6
$30K–$40K
41
33
13
5
$40K–$50K
30
23
12
4
$50K–$75K
28
24
10
5
$75K–$100K
31
27
11
5
Over $100K
28
30
10
4
Urban
38
33
16
5
Suburban
33
27
12
4
Rural
34
22
13
4
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009.
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
2 1O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
smart phone usage is probably higher since not all smart phoneIn defining the scope of Internet use on a mobile handheld,
users are likely to download applications.
the activities chosen for inclusion in the definition are: sending
As documented by the Pew Internet Project, use of mobile
or receiving e-mail, accessing Web pages on the Internet and
devices for non-voice data applications is particularly popular
downloading an application to a cell phone. When those three
among African-Americans and Hispanics.17 Unlike the Pew
items constitute accessing the Internet on a cell phone, 36
survey, the FCC survey had a Spanish-language option, which
percent of all cell users have used the Internet on their devices.
means data reported here on mobile use among Hispanics
Since not everyone has a cell phone, this means 30 percent of
represents a more complete sample of the Hispanic population. all adults have gone online with a cell phone or smart phone.
Still, African-Americans and Hispanics, consistent with prior
As with the entire suite of handheld activities, minorities are
research, are the most frequent users of the handheld device for more active in handheld Internet use than whites. This is how
a variety of applications (See Exhibit 14).
results break down across racial categories:
Not all of the activities listed in Exhibit 14 constitute
➤ 39 percent of Hispanics and of African-Americans have
Internet use on a handheld. Texting is not an application that
used the Internet on their mobile handheld device.
runs on the Internet while downloading maps and directions
➤ 27 percent of whites have accessed the Internet on a mo-
may require Global Positioning System (GPS) capability. Not
bile handheld.
all downloading or streaming of music or video to a handheld
A question to consider is if the differences are racial in
requires Internet access.
origin or whether they can be explained by other factors, such
as age or income, which may vary systematically across racial
Exhibit 13:
All adults
Age 18–29
Age 30–49
Age 50–64
Age 65+
Cell Phone Activity% with a cell phone
86
94
93
86
66
% as a share of those with cell phone
Send or receive text messages
66
94
79
51
15
Send or receive pictures
52
77
61
38
14
Send or receive e-mail
26
40
30
17
5
Send or receive Instant Messages
28
42
35
20
8
Access Web pages on the Internet
28
48
32
15
5
Get a map or directions to another location
27
44
30
16
8
Download an application to your cell phone
20
36
24
9
3
Download or stream music or video
17
32
18
8
3
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey of 5,005 adult Americans, October-November 2009.
Exhibit 14:
Whites
African-Americans
Hispanics
By Race, Cell Phone% with a cell phone
87
86
85
Activities
% as a share of those with cell phone
Send or receive text messages
63
75
75
Send or receive pictures
50
61
58
Send or receive e-mail
24
34
28
Access Web pages on the Internet
24
36
36
Get a map or directions to another location
23
36
34
Send or receive Instant Messages
23
47
47
Download an application to your cell phone
17
26
24
Download or stream music or video
13
28
25
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey of 5,005 adult Americans, October-November 2009.
2 2
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
categories. White adults in the sample are, on the whole, olderaccess replacing home Internet connection. Rather—since
than the African-American respondents and much older than
most mobile Internet users also have broadband—it is an ad-
the Hispanics. The median age for white adults in the sample
ditional pathway to access. This pattern is not quite as strong
is 49; for African-Americans it is 46, and for Hispanics it is 33.
for African-Americans and Hispanics, but the general trend is,
As seen above, younger respondents are heavier users of mobile nonetheless, the same for those groups.
devices than older ones. While age, education and income are
It is important not to confuse mobile Internet use with
all indicators of the likelihood of using the Internet on a hand-
mobile broadband. To be sure, some of those using their mobile
held device, the racial or ethnic classification of the respondent device for online access do so via relatively fast 3G and WiFi
also emerges as a predictor—even when other factors are held
networks. However, it is difficult, using a survey, to determine
constant. In other words, the differences that appear across
what portion of mobile Internet users do this or how often.
races are not simply due to age or educational level.
Another issue is whether mobile Internet access is a sub-
mobile Wireless broadband
stitute for home access. African-Americans and Hispanics
Another access pathway for people is mobile wireless broad-
report lower levels of home broadband adoption than whites
band service on a laptop. The survey asked laptop users the
yet are more likely to use the Internet on their handheld device following question to probe mobile broadband use:
(See Exhibit 15).
“Do you use a service with your laptop computer that is
Are lower home adoption rates attributable to mobile
called wireless broadband, allowing you to access the Internet
Internet use? The survey results indicate the answer is, for
virtually anywhere? This is usually a service that you have to
the most part, “no.” There is a positive correlation between
pay a monthly fee for, either by itself or as part of another com-
home Internet adoption and mobile Internet use—91 percent
munications bill. This is NOT what is called Wi-Fi.”
of mobile Internet users have Internet at home and 84 percent
This access pathway appears at only modest levels in the
have broadband. Yet while African-Americans and Hispanics
general population. Among laptop users (52 percent of all
are more likely to be mobile Internet users, most users in these
adults), 28 percent said they used wireless broadband. As a per-
groups have broadband at home. More than three-quarters
centage of the entire adult population, this comes to 15 percent
(78 percent) of African-American mobile Internet users have
who use wireless broadband.
broadband at home, and more than two-thirds (68 percent) of
African-Americans and Hispanics who have laptops were
Hispanic mobile Internet users have high-speed access at home. more likely than average to say they use such a service. Looking
Viewed from the perspective of nonbroadband adopters, few at the racial breakdown:
non-adopters access the Internet on their handheld devices,
➤ Among African-Americans with laptops, 36 percent re-
though African-Americans and Hispanics do this at a higher
port using a mobile broadband service.
rate than average. Specifically, among those who do not go
➤ Among Hispanics with laptops, 30 percent report using a
online at home with a broadband connection:
mobile broadband service.
➤ 14 percent of all non-adopters have accessed the Internet
➤ Among whites with laptops, 26 percent report using a
on their mobile devices.
mobile broadband service.
➤ 20 percent of African-American non-adopters have ac-
cessed the Internet on a mobile device.
The context for these findings is important. First, these
➤ 25 percent of Hispanic non-adopters have accessed the
figures apply to respondents with laptop computers—devices
Internet on their mobile devices.
that Hispanics and African-Americans are less likely to have.
Overall, there is not a high incidence of mobile Internet
(Some 54 percent of whites have a laptop, while 44 percent of
Exhibit 15:
(% of mobile Internet users)
By Race, Mobile and
Internet at home
Broadband at home
Home Internet UseWhite
94
89
African-American
92
78
Hispanic
78
68
Total
91
84
Number of cases
3,455
2,671
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey of 5,005 adult Americans, October-November 2009.
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
2 3O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
African-Americans and 43 percent of Hispanics do.) As a share➤ 6 percent use dial-up Internet connections to go online
of the entire population of each of these groups, mobile broad-
from home.
band use unfolds as follows:
➤ Among all African-Americans, 16 percent say they use a
Overall, 35 percent of Americans do not use broadband at
mobile broadband service.
home. (One percent of respondents were not broadband us-
➤ Among all whites, 14 percent say they use a mobile broad-
ers, but could not be placed in any of three categories above).
band service.
A small share—just 4 percent—say they cannot get service
➤ Among all Hispanics, 13 percent say they use a mobile
where they live. This is an imperfect measure of infrastructure
broadband service.
availability, as it relies on the user accurately knowing about
infrastructure in the neighborhood. This means that about one-
Second, as noted, mobile broadband users are overwhelming- third (31%) of Americans do not have broadband at home but
ly home broadband users; 94 percent of all mobile broadband
could subscribe. However, the full cohort of non-adopters (35
users have broadband at home, figures that are only modestly
percent) is included in our analysis and discussion.
lower for African-Americans (91 percent) and Hispanics (84
Key demographic differences when contrasting all non-
percent). Although some may be using their mobile broadband
adopters with adopters are:
connection as their principle home access means, those saying
➤ gender: 57 percent of non-adopters are women versus 49
they use mobile broadband were as likely as the average to say
percent of home broadband adopters.
they use DSL, cable modem service and other wireline means
➤ People with disabilities: 39 percent of non-adopters
such as fiber. As with mobile Internet use, mobile broadband is
have a disability, compared with 15 percent of adopters.
mainly a supplementary broadband access pathway.
➤ College graduates: Just 11 percent of non-adopters have
college degrees versus 37 percent of broadband users.
What people pay for cell phone service
➤ age: 32 percent of non-adopters are age 65 or older ver-The survey asked cell phone users what their monthly bill was,
sus 9 percent of adopters.
and the question included a prompt for respondents to include
➤ Nearly two-thirds (65%) of non-adopters who are
charges for texting or long-distance service. Only respon-
senior citizens are women.
dents who receive a stand-alone cell phone bill—80 percent of
➤ Income: 43 percent of non-adopters live in households
respondents—received this question. The average figure they
with annual incomes of $20,000 or less, compared with 17
gave was $92 per month.
percent of home broadband users.
By comparison, bill analysis from TNS Telecoms shows an
➤ rural: 24 percent of non-adopters live in rural areas
average monthly cell phone bill of $99 per month. Many cell
versus 13 percent of broadband adopters.
users have more than one line on their bill; for TNS, the aver-
age bill covered 1.9 lines. The FCC survey did not ask how many
Exhibit 16 presents detail on the demographic and so-
lines users had on their plan.
cio-economic profiles for each of the three categories of
non-adopters. Non-Internet users, the largest group, are older,
Iv. nOn-adOPTerS:
lower-income and the least educated of the three. Online users
who do not have home access tend to be younger women, usu-
WhO They are and
ally with no more than a high school degree and low incomes.
Dial-up users, though not as well off economically as broad-
The BarrIerS They
band users, are higher on the socioeconomic scale than the
other groups of non-adopters.
faCe
past and proxy broadband use for non-
adopters
Although those classified as non-adopters are not broadband
overvieW of non-adopters
users at home today, this does not mean that all of them are com-
Roughly one-third of Americans do not use broadband Internet pletely cut off from modern ICT goods or services. Many have
at home. They fall into three categories of non-adoption:
a working computer at home (discussed below) and 49 percent
➤ 22 percent of Americans do not use the Internet at all.
uses computers occasionally, either at home, work or school.
➤ 6 percent use the Internet but do not have access
Additionally, some have had experience with broadband.
at home.
Among dial-up users or “not-at-home” users, 46 percent have
2 4
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
used broadband at some point—maybe at work, perhaps aInternet users at home. Of these former users, 49 percent say
friend’s house or possibly somewhere else. Among the wider
broadband was the type of home connection they had.
set of all non-Internet users, 17 percent in this group were once
Combining these two sets of nonusers’ past broadband
Exhibit 16:
Broadband at
Dial-up
Internet users,
Non-Internet
The Demographicshome
at home
not at home
users
of Non-adopters
Gender
Male
51%
49%
41%
45%
Female
49
51
59
55
Families
Parents with minor children at home
36
24
27
19
Disabled
Those who report they have a disability
15
19
28
47
Age
18-29
25%
16%
39%
11%
30-49
39
27
34
20
50-64
26
33
20
28
65+
9
24
8
41
Median Age
43
53
38
60
Race/ethnicity
White (not Hispanic)
74%
75%
64%
63%
Black (not Hispanic)
10
10
15
13
Hispanic (English or Spanish speaking)
10
10
15
20
Educational attainment
Less than high school
5%
12%
8%
39%
High school graduate
29
37
50
45
Some college
29
28
23
11
College +
37
23
19
5
Household income
Under $20K
10%
16%
30%
32%
$20K-$30K
7
13
16
17
$30K-$40K
9
11
18
7
$40K-$50K
9
15
7
8
$50K-$75K
16
14
11
6
$75K-$100K
15
8
6
1
Over $100K
20
5
3
2
Don’t know/refused
15
19
10
27
Community type
Urban
31
24
22
31
Suburban
51
43
40
45
Rural
14
29
21
22
Number of cases
2,671
459
392
1,450
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009. Total number of cases in this table is 4,972. This does not reflect the
entire sample size of 5,005 because some responses did not permit classification into any of the categories.
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
2 5O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
experience yields reveals that one-quarter of non-adoptersthe role of disabilities in non-adoption
have had some experience with broadband—meaning they once The largest group of nonbroadband adopters—non-Internet
had broadband access at home or have used it at work, a friend’s users—has a high likelihood of having some sort of disability.
house or some other place. Put differently, 8 percent of the
Overall, 39 percent of non-adopters have some sort of disabil-
general population have had some exposure to broadband but
ity. The survey posed six questions, which, if any one yielded a
do not presently have it at home.
“yes” answer, classified the respondent as a disabled American
As to prospects for moving nonusers to broadband, 20 per-
(See Exhibit 17).
cent of nonusers say they would be interested in getting online
Collectively, 24 percent of respondents had an affirmative
access. Among current “not-at-home” Internet users, 46
response to one of those questions and, for purposes of this
percentwould be interested in getting home access, while 41
report, are classified as people with disabilities.18 Within this
percent of dial-up users say they would be interested in getting group, 42 percent have broadband at home—much lower than
broadband. Only 17 percent of dial-up users say they are very
the 65 percent average. Some 56 percent of those with disabili-
likely to get broadband in the next year. Similarly, among all
ties are Internet users, below the 78 percent average. As the
interested nonusers, broadband access is not a sure bet in the
exhibit presenting the demographic and socioeconomic profiles
near future. Out of all non-adopters, 26 percent say it is very
of non-adopters shows, nearly half (47 percent) of non-Internet
likely they will get broadband in the next 12 months, with an-
users report having some sort of disability.
other 28 percent saying this is somewhat likely.
It is important to note that people with disabilities and
There is also the phenomenon of proxy access, that is,
non-adopters overlap quite a bit and in fact share many charac-
nonusers who cohabit with another Internet user. Among
teristics with non-adopters: They are generally older and have
respondents who are non-Internet users or who do not use the
lower incomes. For that reason, it is not a surprise that non-
Internet at home, 22 percent live with someone who uses the
adopters include a disproportionately high share of people with
Internet at home. These nonusers often ask their online house- disabilities. Some of the difference in adoption rates is due to in-
mates to carry out tasks online for them. One in six (16 percent) dividuals’ disabilities and some is due lower incomes, advanced
say they ask their online housemates to do something online
age or other factors associated with low adoption.
for them once a week. Another 20 percent say they do this once
a month, while an additional 24 percent say they do a few times
Why non-adopters do not have broadband
The survey sought to determine with as much specificity as
A portion of the proxy access that nonusers’ housemates
possible why people without broadband choose not to have the
carry out is broadband. Nonusers who live with someone who
service at home. Respondents were read a list of possible rea-
goes online from home were asked about the household’s
sons for not having broadband and permitted to list as many as
access. Some 21 percent say it is a dial-up connection, 47 per-
they chose as barriers. They then received a follow-up question
cent state it is some other way and 32 percent do not know.
asking the most important reason they did not have broadband.
Assuming that the response “some other way” reflects a home
The question wording and choices offered varied slightly
high-speed connection, these questions suggest that 2 percent
across different non-adopter groups. Dial-up users, for ex-
of the general population fall into the category of nonusers who ample, were offered the choice of “happy with current service,”
live in a broadband-connected household.
which is not a relevant choice for those who do not use the
Internet at all. A number of the exhibits show how people
responded to the question that allowed them to list multiple
Exhibit 17:
Do you have serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs?
12
Questions Used to
Because of a physical, mental or emotional condition, do you have serious difficulty concentrating,
Determine Disability
remembering or making decisions?
8
(by Percentage)
Are you deaf or do you have serious difficulty hearing?
8
Because of a physical, mental or emotional condition, do you have difficulty doing errands alone such as
visiting a doctor’s office or shopping?
6
Are you blind or do you have serious difficulty seeing even when wearing glasses?
5
Do you have difficulty dressing or bathing?
2
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey of 5,005 adult Americans, October-November 2009.
2 6
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
reasons for non-adoption, then how they responded to theusers. Some 12 percent are worried about risks online, and 14
question asking about the most important reason.
percent cite factors that suggest they are unclear about the
Internet’s relevance to them (with 7 percent saying the Internet
Non-Internet users—22 percent of the adult population
is a waste of time and 7 percent saying there is nothing they
Those who do not use the Internet offer a range of reasons for
want to see online). (See Exhibit 19)
not being online. Nearly half cite the monthly cost, and similar
Those who cited monthly cost as a barrier (47% in this cat-
numbers point to comfort with computers or worries about
egory of non-users) received follow-up questions on what they
online content—that is, digital literacy looms as a barrier for
would be willing to pay for service. The responses sorted into
them. The affordability of the computer is also a prominent
three categories:
reason for nonusers (See Exhibit 18).
➤ 40 percent of nonusers provided an estimate and, among
The survey permitted respondents to choose more than one
this group, the average monthly figure they said they
reason from the list of barriers to adoption. Fifty percent of
would pay for Internet access at home was $26; the me-
nonusers picked at least three reasons, and one-quarter (24
dian figure was $20.
percent) cited at least five of the reasons listed.
➤ 31 percent said either they don’t know or refused to
When asked the most important reason for not using the
answer.
Internet, no single reason stands out for nonusers. About 16
➤ 29 percent said they were not willing to pay anything for
percent cite lack of comfort in using a computer as the main
access.
barrier, but cost (either monthly fee, cost of computer or ac-
tivation fee) is the main reason cited by 25 percent of dial-up
Exhibit 18:
Monthly cost is too expensive
47
Reasons Nonusers
I am not comfortable using a computer
46
Do Not Use the Internet
I am worried about all the bad things that can happen if I use the Internet
45
(by Percentage)
The activation and installation fee to get service is too much
42
I cannot afford a computer
40
There is nothing on the Internet I want to see or use
35
The Internet is just a waste of time
33
I can access the Internet all I need to at work
14
It’s not available where I live
13
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009; n=1,450 for nonusers.
Exhibit 19:
I am not comfortable using a computer
16
Main Reasons Nonusers
I cannot afford a computer
14
Do Not Use the Internet
I am worried about all the bad things that can happen if I use the Internet
12
(by Percentage)
Monthly cost is too expensive
11
The Internet is just a waste of time
7
There is nothing on the Internet I want to see or use
7
The activation and installation fee to get service is too much
5
It’s not available where I live
2
I can access the Internet all I need to at work
1
None of above reasons
9
Combination of reasons
5
Other reason
5
Don’t know/refused
3
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009; n=1,450 for nonusers.
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
2 7O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
As with nonusers, it is common for dial-up users to cite more fee, unwillingness to enter into a long-term contract—are next,than one reason that keeps them from using the Internet. Fifty- cited as most important by 28 percent of dial-up users.
six percent cite at least three reasons and 18 percent cite five or
Dial-up users who cited cost as a barrier then received a
more (See Exhibit 20).
follow-up question asking how much they would be willing to
About half of dial-up users are satisfied with their service or pay for a broadband connection at home (See Exhibit 21). As
are not heavy Internet users. Half also cite the monthly cost,
with nonusers, responses fell into three categories. Among
with a significant share saying the installation fee is a barrier.
dial-up users citing monthly cost as a reason they do not have
Nearly one-third say broadband is not available where they live. broadband:
However, it is important to put this figure in proper context.
➤ 62 percent provided an estimate. The average amount
First, dial-up users make up 6 percent of the adult population;
this group was willing to pay for broadband was $28 per
if 30 percent truly cannot get broadband where they live, this
month and the median figure was $25.
means just 2 percent of adults (from this set of respondents
➤ 25 percent said they did not know or refused to answer
who received the question) lack broadband availability. Second,
the question.
since this is self-reported data on infrastructure availability, it
➤ 13 percent said they would not be willing to pay anything
is possible that respondents are wrong as to whether broadband
for broadband.
is available where they live. Nonetheless, most (74 percent) of
dial-up users who say availability is a barrier report that they
Not-at-home users—6 percent of the adult population
would get broadband if it were available in their area.
Although the vast majority of Internet users have the means to
When probed further on the most important barrier, issues
go online from home, 6 percent do not. They use the Internet
pertaining to the relevance of the service (that is, not using the
from elsewhere—perhaps work, perhaps the library—but not
Internet very much, being content with current dial-up service where they live.
and not needing additional speed) together loom largest (38
For “not-at-home” users, worries about comfort with a
percent) for dial-up users. Cost issues—monthly fee, activation computer or thinking there is nothing worthwhile online are not
big barriers. Rather, affordability (e.g., monthly fee, activation
Exhibit 20:
The monthly cost is too expensive
50
Reasons Dial-Up Users,
I’m happy with my current service
49
Who Make Up 6% of
I do not use the Internet that much
44
the Adult Population,
Have Not Switched to
I do not want to enter into a long-term service contract
44
Broadband
The activation or installation fee to get service is too much
44
(by Percentage)
I do not need the additional speed it would offer
31
It’s not available where I live
29
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009; n=567 for home dial-up users or those who did not know
connection type.
Exhibit 21:
The monthly cost is too expensive
19
Reasons Dial-Up Users
I do not use the Internet that much
18
Have Not Switched
It’s not available where I live
17
to Broadband
(by Percentage)
I’m happy with my current service
16
I do not want to enter into a long-term service contract
4
I do not need the additional speed it would offer
4
The activation or installation fee to get service is too much
5
None of these reasons
7
Other/Don’t know
2
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009; n=567 for home dial-up users or those who did not know
connection type.
2 8
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
charge or computer cost) plays a larger role. While those reasonsWhat non-adopters are Willing to pay
Across the three categories, 51 percent of all non-adopters
why they are not online. Two-thirds (66 percent) list at least
said monthly cost was a barrier, although fewer said it was the
three reasons and 11 percent cite five or more (See Exhibit 22).
primary reason they lack service. As is evident from the pre-
Affordability clearly comes to the forefront when “not-at-
ceding discussion, not all of those who said cost was a barrier
home” users are asked about the most important barrier they
were able to respond to follow-up questions on how much they
face. Some 41 percent cite the monthly cost or the outlay for
would be willing to pay for service. Across all three categories,
a computer as the reasons they do not use the Internet from
just more than half (52 percent) of those who said monthly cost
home.
was a barrier could provide an estimate to the nearest dollar of
As with prior groups, “not-at-home” users who said monthly what they would pay for service. As a share of all non-adopters,
cost was a barrier received a follow-up question on what they
26 percent provided an estimate of willingness to pay for
would be willing to pay for Internet access at home. Among
service. The willingness-to-pay figure for all non-adopters was
“not-at-home” users for whom cost is a barrier (See Exhibit 23): $25 per month.
➤ 74 percent gave a dollar estimate; the average figure cited
The $25 average does not mean that all non-adopters asked
as this group’s willingness to pay for broadband was $21
the question would purchase service if they faced a price at that
per month and the median figure was $20.
level. Some respondents cited a figure above $25, many cited
➤ 16 percent said they did not know or refused to answer
a figure below. In fact, among those who offered an answer, 65
the question.
percent cited a figure of $20 per month or more for WTP. The
➤ 10 percent said they would not be willing to pay anything
vast majority (91 percent) of those who gave an answer cited a
for broadband.
figure of $10 per month or more.
Taking these respondents at their word—that they really
would get broadband at the price they state—and representing
Exhibit 22:
Monthly cost is too expensive
57
Reasons “Not-at-
The activation and installation fee to get service is too much
51
Home” Users Have Not
I can access the Internet all I need to at work
34
Switched to Broadband
(by Percentage)
I cannot afford a computer
32
I am worried about all the bad things that can happen if I use the Internet
31
It’s not available where I live
15
There is nothing on the Internet I want to see or use
14
The Internet is just a waste of time
14
I am not comfortable using a computer
13
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009; n=392 for not-at-home users.
Exhibit 23:
Monthly cost is too expensive
27
Reasons “Not-at-
I cannot afford a computer
15
Home” Users Have Not
I can access the Internet all I need to at work
11
Switched to Broadband
(by Percentage)
I am worried about all the bad things that can happen if I use the Internet
9
The activation and installation fee to get service is too much
6
It’s not available where I live
5
I am not comfortable using a computer
5
The Internet is just a waste of time
4
There is nothing on the Internet I want to see or use
2
None of these reasons
7
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009; n=392 for not-at-home users.
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
2 9O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
the figures above for $20 per month and $10 per month as aexist for many current broadband users, some non-adopters are
share of all adults:
concerned enough to avoid the Internet altogether. This may
➤ A $20 offer would yield an increase in overall broadband
have to do with the age of those citing digital literacy as a bar-
adoption of 6 percentage points.
rier. Their median age is 62.
➤ A $10 offer would yield an increase of 8 percentage
points.
relevance: 19 percent of non-adopters say they do not think
digital content delivered using broadband is sufficiently com-
These small impacts reflect the fact that the survey tested
pelling to justify getting it. Many view broadband as an avenue
the hypothesis that there are multiple reasons for non-adop-
to irrelevant content, and others seem content with the offline
tion, with cost being one among them. The survey found that
alternatives currently available to them. These respondents say,
people had multiple barriers with, as noted previously, 51
for instance, that the Internet is a “waste of time,” they do not
percent citing cost as one of them, followed up by a question
believe there is anything worth viewing online or, for dial-up
on willingness-to-pay. Just more than half cited a figure, while
users, they cite contentment with their current service. Each
28 percent answered “don’t know” and the balance said they
of those reasons indicates that these non-adopters are on the
would pay nothing for broadband.
other side of a perceptual chasm with respect to broadband.
Finally, it is important to underscore the uncertainties
Unlike broadband users, they are not attuned to online con-
inherent in measures of willingness-to-pay. Respondents are
tent’s potential to provide information or opportunities for
asked to make judgments on the value of a service that, many at learning.
least, have used sparingly (if at all); they therefore lack infor-
mation on service attributes, which is key to placing a dollar
other: 11 percent of non-adopters cited a variety of reasons
value. For that reason, measures of willingness to pay, and the
that did not group into an identifiable category or offered no
scenario on how much additional adoption would ensue from
response.
specific price offerings, should be taken as illustrative, not
predictive.
combination: 4 percent of non-adopters cited as their main
reason a combination of reasons listed, whether that was price,
summary on most important reason
worries about “bad” things online or other items.
for non-adoption
The three baskets of non-adopters were asked similar kinds
lack of availability: 5 percent of non-adopters said that
of questions about why they do not have broadband or any
the main reason they do not have the Internet or broadband is
Internet service at home. Pulling the reasons together across
that it is not available where they live. This response is highest
all three groups of non-adopters yields the following consoli-
among dial-up users, 21 percent of whom say that broadband is
dated reasons for non-adoption among all those who do not
not available where they live.
have broadband at home.
use high-speed at work: Finally, 3 percent of non-adopt-
cost: 36 percent of non-adopters cite a cost-related reason
ers said the main reason they do not have broadband at home
as their main barrier to adoption, with 15 percent pointing to
is because they use broadband as much as they want at the
the monthly cost of service, another 10 percent citing afford-
workplace.
ability of a computer and 9 percent saying they do not want a
For the “lack of availability” reason, it is also important to
long-term service contract or find the installation fee too high.
distinguish respondents citing lack of availability as the most
The remaining 2 percent cited a combination of these reasons.
important reason for not having broadband from those who
cited it as one of several reasons. Because people could list
digital literacy: 22 percent of non-adopters give a digital
multiple reasons for not adopting (prior to being asked the
literacy-related topic as their main barrier. These are non-
most important reason), some who cited lack of infrastructure
adopters who said that “they are not comfortable using a
availability could (and did) not cite that as their most impor-
computer” or they “are worried about all the bad things that
tant reason for non-adopting. The upshot is that 12 percent of
can happen on the Internet.” Digital literacy breaks down as
non-adopters cited lack of availability as a reason for not hav-
follows: 10 percent of non-adopters cite “worries about bad
ing broadband, while 5 percent of non-adopters cited it as the
things” and 12 percent said they are “not comfortable with com- most important reason. The 12 percent of non-adopters citing
puters.” Although worries about online hazards (e.g., exposure
lack of available infrastructure translates into 4 percent of all
to inappropriate content or the possibility of identity theft)
Americans who say they cannot get broadband because it is not
3 0
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
available where they live. Finally, it is important to underscoreAmong the 47 percent of non-adopters who listed digital
that this is a self-reported assessment about the availability of
literacy as a barrier:
broadband infrastructure, not an actual measure of whether
➤ 70 percent also listed cost as a barrier.
broadband is in the respondent’s neighborhood.
➤ 57 percent also listed lack of relevance as a barrier.
When respondents can cite multiple reasons
An important consequence of this analysis is that non-for not adopting
adopters typically face multiple barriers to adoption. Even
It is also worth summarizing, for all non-adopters, what share
though cost leads the way, most of the time even those who
cited any of the reasons listed as possible barriers. The survey
worry about cost need help in other areas. Likewise, those who
permitted non-adopters to list several reasons for not adopting say lack of relevance is a barrier also have issues with digital
before asking them to state the most important reason. Because literacy and, to a less extent, cost.
respondents could list more than one reason—in fact most
cited multiple reasons—the figures below sum to more than
segmenting the population of non-adopters
100 percent.
Each of the three baskets of non-adopters reveals tendencies
as to why people do not have broadband. Financial matters are
cost: 66 percent of non-adopters cited any of the reasons
critical for not-at-home Internet users, while dial-up users
that constitute the “cost” category, that is, two-thirds of non-
seem distant from the Internet, apparently not seeing a lot
adopters listed monthly access fee, cost of computer, installa-
online that might lure them to faster service. Nonusers—the
tion fee, or reluctance in entering into a long term contract, as a largest group of non-adopters, constituting two-thirds of
reason they do not use the internet or broadband.
non-adopters—are harder to pin down. Many cite reasons sug-
gesting they do not see the relevance of the Internet, yet some
relevance: 52 percent of non-adopters said that they found point to costs and others worry about risks in being online.
the internet to be a waste of time, they did not think there is
Even if the survey responses yielded crisp reasons for non-
anything worth seeing online, or they were content with their
adoption across categories of nonbroadband users, it would be
current service.
worthwhile to know more than just a person’s stated barrier to
adopting. In particular, it would help to know something about
digital literacy: 47 percent of non-adopters listed their
the person’s ability to clear the barrier.
lack of comfort with computers or worries “about all the bad
One technique to do this is to segment the population of
things that can happen on the internet” as reasons for not hav-
non-adopters into several groups based on measures of a re-
ing broadband.
spondent’s relationship to the Internet. The following analysis
does this and it is built on two dimensions:
lack of availability: 12 percent of non-adopters said that
➤ Proximity to ICts: All survey respondents were asked
their inability to get service where they live is why they do not
whether they have computers, cell phone or premium TV
have broadband.
at home. Nonbroadband adopters also were asked if they
To underscore how barriers to access interact in users’
had ever used a computer.
minds, the following shows the frequency with which those who
➤ attitudes about the Internet and computers:
cited a particular barrier also pointed to others.
Respondents received questions about their overall com-
Among the 66 percent of non-adopters who cited cost as a
fort with computers and attitudes about the Internet.
barrier:
➤ 50 percent also listed a digital literacy-related barrier.
The survey details the specific attitudinal questions and
➤ 48 percent also listed concerns about the relevance of the responses for broadband adopters and non-adopters. It is
internet as a barrier.
clear that people without broadband at home use ICTs. Among
non-adopters:
Among the 52 percent of non-adopters who listed lack of
➤ 80 percent have premium TV, either cable or satellite
relevance as a barrier:
television.
➤ 45 percent also listed a digital literacy-related barrier.
➤ 70 percent have a cell phone.
➤ 28 percent also listed on the cost-related reasons.
➤ On average, these cell phone users spend $73 per
month on service.
➤ 49 percent say they use computers, at least occasionally.
➤ 42 percent have at least one working computer at home.
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
3 1O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
➤ Among nonbroadband-adopting computer users,Group 2: Digital Hopefuls: 8 percent
34 percent say they are very comfortable using them.
The Digital Hopefuls like the idea of being online, but lack
the resources to connect using broadband. Members of this
On the second issue, non-adopters have a mix of attitudes
group have positive attitudes about how the Internet might
about the Internet—some positive, others less so. Exhibit 24
be a tool for learning and personal productivity; 86 percent
compares “strongly agree” responses for broadband adopters
strongly believe it is a useful tool for learning and 68 percent
and non-adopters.
believe people can be more productive using the Internet. But
The attitudinal and proximity questions serve as input into
22 percent cannot afford a computer (and only 3 percent have
statistical analysis that classifies respondents based on their
one at home), 15 percent cannot afford the monthly access fee
responses. That analysis includes all non-adopters—dial-up,
and only 9 percent have past experience using broadband. A
not-at-home users and nonusers. The analysis yielded four
significant share (28 percent) cites digital literacy as a barrier,
groups of non-adopters, each with distinct characteristics
the highest of any group. Given help—likely a lot of it—in clear-
described below. The analysis also identifies the key adoption
ing cost hurdles to access, members of this group have a positive
barriers in each group, although answers to those questions
probability of adopting broadband.
were not inputs into the statistical analysis that created the
Consistent with their lack of resources to connect, the
groups.19
Digital Hopefuls are the least well off economically of any
group. Some 44 percent live in households with annual incomes
Group 1: Digitally Distant: 10 percent of the general
of $20,000 or less. Nearly half (49 percent) have not gradu-
population
ated from high school. This group, with a median age is 57, has
This group does not see the point of being online and does not
the highest share of Hispanics (26 percent). One in five are
have the computer skills to dive in even if its members were
African-Americans and 50 percent are white.
so inclined. Few (15 percent) in this group see the Internet as
a tool for learning and most see it as a dangerous place, either
Group 3: Digitally Uncomfortable: 7 percent
for children (53 percent) or personal information (56 percent). The Digitally Uncomfortable has the equipment for access
Very few (11 percent) have a computer. Many (25 percent)
(nearly all have a computer), but the group has tepid attitudes
cite digital literacy as a barrier to adoption, and nearly half
about the usefulness of the Internet and low comfort levels
are retired from the work force. Just 8 percent of this group
with computers. Just 24 percent say they are very comfortable
have any experience with broadband (i.e., they used at a place
using them, and just more than one-third (37 percent) see the
other than home or used to have home high-speed service). The internet as a productivity tool. Although some in the Digitally
Digitally Distant group has a low probability of adoption in the
Uncomfortable group could use a break on the monthly ac-
near future.
cess fee (16 percent), more need help learning about relevant
The important demographic characteristics of this group
content (18 percent) and improving their digital literacy (17
have to do with age. With a median age of 63, it is the oldest of
percent). Twenty-one percent cite a lack of available infra-
any of the groups; 47 percent are age 65 or older. The Digitally
structure as a reason they do not have broadband.
Distant also has the highest rate of retirees across the four
As to attitudes, 53 percent worries about security of per-
groups, at 45 percent. They are also not well off economically,
sonal information online, although a majority (68 percent)
with 50 percent reporting annual household incomes below
sees the Internet as a useful tool for learning and information
$30,000.
gathering. The path to access and robust use might be long for
this group. Because they have already cleared the computer
ownership hurdle and because one-third (35 percent) have
Exhibit 24:
There is too much pornography and offensive material on the Internet
65
How Strongly Do You
It is too easy for my personal information to be stolen online
57
Agree or Disagree
The Internet is a valuable source for information and learning
59
With the Following
Statements
It is important for children to learn how to use the Internet
54
(% of Non-adopters
The Internet is too dangerous for children
46
Who “Strongly Agree”)
People can be more productive using the Internet
37
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009; n=2,334 for non-adopters.
3 2
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
past experience with broadband, the Digitally Uncomfortable,affordability for the Digitally Adrift, monthly bill for the
with the right support, stand a reasonable chance of adopting
Digitally Disposed), but other factors are important, too.
broadband.
At the same time, although cost leads as a primary barrier
From a socioeconomic perspective, members of the Digitally for non-adopters, nearly two-thirds cite a reason other than
Uncomfortable group are very much the average non-adopter.
cost. As noted earlier, non-adopters generally mention more
The median age is 55 (versus 54 for all non-adopters), 63 per-
than one obstacle for adoption—meaning interventions to lure
cent are white (the same as the average), and 27 percent have
people to broadband should be comprehensive in nature. Cost
either graduated from college or at least attended college (also
relief will work effectively for many non-adopters but only
the average).
when accompanied by training programs to bolster their digital
skills and information about content that is relevant to their
Group 4: Near Converts: 10 percent
lives. Similarly, addressing digital literacy in isolation is not
This group has many of the qualities of broadband adopters—
likely to be effective unless cost is addressed and efforts are
a high rate of computer ownership (76 percent use them oc-
made to inform people about online content relevant to them.
casionally and 68 percent own one), comfort with computers
(56 percent describe themselves as very comfortable with
the device) and positive attitudes about the Internet’s useful-
v. fOCuS On key
ness (three-quarters say it is a valuable learning tool). And 42
percent have used broadband in the past. However, nearly 41
POPulaTIOn grOuPS
percent cite financial issues as the main barrier to home broad-
band access, principally the monthly access fee. Concerns about
the Internet’s relevance to their lives also play a role. At 10 per-
Although this paper has referred to differences among popula-
cent of the general population, this group has a high probability tion subgroups, this section has key figures for several groups
of adopting broadband—if they clear financial constraints.
of interest, as well as discussion of notable variations in behav-
The Near Converts are much younger than other non-adopt- ior and attitudes for these groups. This focus on specific groups
ers (their median age is 45) and they have much higher levels
covers data on adoption and non-adoption.
of educational attainment. Half have either graduated from
college or attended college. Their incomes are in the middle
families (respondent is the parent of child
ranges (30 percent have annual household incomes between
under 18 Who lives in household)
$40,000 and $75,000) and most are employed full or part time. With the integration of information technology into so many
Exhibit 25 summarizes the main barriers that each seg-
dimensions of family life—whether is communicating with one
ment of non-adopters faces. A clear implication of Exhibit 25
another or schools—it is no surprise that those with children
is this: The greater the conversion probability, the larger role
under age 18 in the house generally have a lot of information
the monthly Internet bill plays as a barrier. The Near Converts technology. Nine out of 10 (87 percent) have Internet access,
have the highest probability of becoming broadband adopt-
and 74 percent have broadband at home. The survey inter-
ers; the monthly access cost is the main hurdle. The most
viewed parents, of whom 92 percent have a cell phone, and
difficult-to-convert group is the Digitally Distant; they have
many (39 percent) use it sometimes to access the Internet.
no single reason standing out as a barrier. In between the two
Among kids under 18 living at home, 45 percent have cell
extremes, cost plays a role in slightly different ways (computer
phones. For children between the ages of 12 and 17, some 75
percent have cell phones.
Exhibit 25:
Segment
% as share of all Americans todayAdoption barriers faced
Summary of MostImportant Barriers by
1. Near Converts
10
Cost
(mostly monthly bill)
Segment
2. Digital Hopefuls
7
Cost (mostly monthly bill), relevance
3. Digitally Uncomfortable
8
Cost (mostly PC),
digital literacy, accessibility
4. Digitally Distant
10
Cost, digital literacy,
relevance, accessibility
Total Non-adopters
35F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
3 3O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
Although families with minor children at home have higherloW-income americans
broadband adoption rates, there is still a gap between broadband There is a clear relationship between broadband adoption and
adoption and computer ownership. Among such families, 87 per- income. Some 40 percent of those with household incomes of
cent have a working computer at home—a 13-percentage-point
$20,000 per year or less have broadband at home, while 91 per-
gap compared with 74 percent of those without children who
cent of those with household incomes above $75,000 per year
have a working computer at home.
have it (See Exhibit 27).
The survey asked parents or guardians the ages of their
Not only does broadband adoption vary by income, indi-
children. When it came broadband adoption, there was little
viduals with broadband at home exhibit some differences in
difference between parents with children from ages 5 to 12, and
behavior and attitude toward broadband depending on their
those with children between 13 and 17; the level was 72 percent
income. In general terms, lower-income broadband users
for families with younger children and 75 percent for families
are more likely to use their home high-speed connections to
with older ones. To the extent large adoption differences unfold
address important life issues, such as job searches or educa-
by age, younger parents are less likely to have broadband at
tion, and for entertainment. Higher-income broadband users,
home than older ones. For parents with offspring at home in the
however, are more likely than low-income ones to shop online,
18-to-29 age range, 65 percent have broadband at home, com-
contact government and bank (See Exhibit 27).
pared with 77 percent of parents older than that.
When asked whether particular online activities were very
As to online activities, parents tend to engage in activities
important to them, low-income and upper-income broadband
that focus on convenience and community. Fully 86 percent have users share the idea that communicating with family and
used their broadband connection to keep up with community
friends is very important. By a modest margin (74 percent to 68
news, 85 percent for online purchases and 57 percent to get
percent), low-income broadband users are more likely to say
advice or information from a government agency about a health
that than upper-income ones. Low-income users are also more
or safety issue; all of these exceed the average. When asked what likely to say that entertainment activities are very important to
activities are very important to them, 44 percent cite keeping up them. One in five (21 percent) low-income broadband users say
with news about the community; that is above the average.
that watching TV, movies or videos online is very important to
them, compared with 8 percent of upper-income users who say
Non-adopters
this. However, upper-income broadband users are nearly twice
Cost—and the monthly fee in particular—comes front and
as likely to say that shopping online is very important to them;
center as the barrier to adoption for non-adopting families.
32 percent say this versus 17 percent of low-income broadband
Half (48 percent) say that cost is the primary reason they are
users.
not online, with 24 percent specifically citing the monthly.
Issues such as digital literacy (16 percent) or lack of relevance
Non-adopters
(13 percent) figure much less. Note that the “other” category
Unsurprisingly, those with the lowest incomes are most likely
in Exhibit 26, and ones that follow, refers to all other reasons
to cite cost as the main barrier to having broadband at home
cited by respondents, which may include items such as lack of
(See Exhibit 28).
availability and ability to use the Internet from work.
For the other barriers—digital literacy and relevance—the
stories are mixed. For digital literacy, aside from low-income
Exhibit 26:
Main reason cited for not having the
Barriers to Adoption:Internet or broadband
Families with minor children at home
Other non-adopters
Families with MinorCost
46
31
Children at Home
Digital literacy
16
24
(by Percentage)
Relevance
13
21
Other
25
25
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009.
3 4
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
people citing it less often, around one-fourth of non-adoptersTo an extent greater than average, African-Americans with-
point to it as a primary barrier. The Internet’s perceived lack of out broadband at home use the mobile Internet as a substitute,
relevance is more of an issue in the middle-income ranges. For
but it is not a very widespread practice. Among African-
higher-income non-adopters (of which there are few), hard-to-
Americans who have gone online with their mobile device,
categorize “other” reasons dominate.
78 percent have broadband at home; for all mobile Internet
users, the home broadband adoption rate is 89 percent. For
african-americans
African-Americans without broadband at home, 20 percent
For African-Americans, online access is, relative to the average, have used the Internet on their handheld devices; that figure is
somewhat less oriented to home high-speed wireline access
just 9 percent for all non-adopters.
and more focused on mobile Internet. Nearly three in five
(59 percent) African-Americans have broadband at home, but
Another distinctive pattern among African-Americans is
39 percent have used the Internet on their mobile handheld
that broadband adoption gaps are particularly acute for older
device. For African-Americans, home broadband adoption
African-Americans. In fact, broadband adoption for African-
trails the national average by six percentage points; for mobile
Americans is 76 percent in the 18–29 age group, essentially the
Internet use, African-Americans outpace the national average
same others. Thereafter, however, African-Americans are much
by nine percentage points.
less likely than average to adopt broadband at home when the
Exhibit 27:
Low-income broadband users
Upper-income broadband users
By Income, Reasons(annual household income
(annual household income
for Broadband Use
of $20K or less)
of $75K or more)
(by Percentage)
Activities in which
low-income users lead
Get information about a job or apply for one
77
60
Play games
70
44
Stream music to your computer
64
55
Take a class for credit
31
25
Play complicated role-playing games
21
9
Activities in which
upper-income users lead
Buy a product
74
93
Go to local, state, or government Web site
68
86
Get international news
64
85
Banking
51
80
Review a product or service
49
62
Contact a government agency
about health or safety issue
42
62
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009.
Exhibit 28:
Cost
Digital literacy
Relevance
Other
Reasons for NotUnder $20K
47
17
15
21
Adopting Broadband
$20K–$30K
37
23
18
23
(by Percentage)
$30K–$40K
38
21
14
27
$40K–$50K
29
24
23
25
$50K–$75K
25
23
26
23
Over $75K
25
20
12
43
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009.
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
3 5O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
focus is on age and the gap is most pronounced among seniorhome; this compares to an average 36 percent among non-
citizens (See Exhibit 29).
adopters (See Exhibit 32).
Because of the high share of young people in the ranks of
Dissecting the cost factor shows that 15 percent of African-
African-American broadband adopters, the online activities
Americans point to the affordability of a personal computer
of African-American broadband users takes on a youthful
(above the 10 percent average), and 15 percent cite the level of
cast. Some 83 percent of African-Americans with broadband
the monthly bill (right at the average).
have used the connection to search for or apply for a job, far
above the 57 percent rate for other broadband users. African-
hispanics
American broadband users are also more likely to take a class
The gap separating Hispanics’ home broadband use from
for credit online or participate in a blog (See Exhibit 30).
the average is wider than the comparable figure for African-
As to what they see as very important, African-American
Americans; 49 percent of Hispanics have broadband at home.
broadband users are very likely to say communicating with
There is also a gap in adoption within the groups, as Spanish-
family and friends, although at a somewhat lower rate than
speaking Hispanics are far less likely to have broadband at
average. African-Americans are, however, more likely to say
home than those whose facility with English is such that they
that the Internet is very important to them for keeping up with opted to take the survey in English. For Hispanic respondents
community news and entertainment (See Exhibit 31).
who chose to take the survey in Spanish, just 20 percent have
broadband at home. Hispanics who took the survey in English
Non-adopters
are right at the 65 percent average for home high-speed adop-
For African-Americans without broadband access at home, cost tion (See Exhibit 33).
is cited as the main reason—and it weighs in at a rate somewhat
The adoption gap for Hispanics is most acute among young
higher than average. Forty-two percent of African-Americans
adults. Some 57 percent of Hispanics between the ages of 18 and
cite cost as the primary reason they do not have broadband at
29 have broadband, more than 20 points below the average. Just
Exhibit 29:
African-Americans
All others in sample
Broadband Adoption byAll
59
66
Age: African-Americans
(by Percentage)
Ages 18–29
76
75
Ages 30–49
67
75
Ages 50–64
49
66
Ages 65+
21
36
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009.
Exhibit 30:
African-Americans
All other broadband adopters
Online Activities:Get information about or apply for a job
83
57
African-Americans
Update a blog (either own or group blog)
37
24
(by Percentage)
Take a class toward a degree
37
22
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009.
Exhibit 31:
% who say this is very important to them
African-Americans
All other broadband adopters
Online Attitudes:Communicating with family & friends
61
67
African-Americans
Keeping up with news in the community
51
38
Watching TV shows, movies or other video
18
9
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009.
3 6
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
more than half (53 percent) of those between the ages of 30 and➤ Streaming or downloading music: Consistent with the
49 have broadband, 25 points behind the average.
youthful Hispanic population, they are more likely to
Hispanics are not laggards when it comes to the cell phone.
download or stream music—69 percent versus the 49 per-
The vast majority (85 percent) has one and, along with African-
cent average.
Americans, members of this group are active users of the
At the same time, the broadband connection is also im-
mobile Internet; 39 percent have taken advantage of online
portant for Hispanics for following what is going on in the
access with their handheld. To a somewhat greater extent than
community. Fully 80 percent use the Internet for getting local
African-Americans, mobile access takes the place of broadband or community news, and 52 percent identify this kind of activ-
at home. One-quarter of Hispanics who do not have broadband
ity as very important to them, compared with the 38 percent
at home access the Internet using their mobile device. Among
figure for others.
Hispanics who have used the Internet via handheld devices, 68
percent have broadband at home, another indication that the
Non-adopters
mobile Internet fills the wireline void for some Hispanics.
The story among Hispanic non-adopters is cost. Half cite
As to online activities, Hispanics stand out, relative to the
it as the main barrier to adoption. Twenty-one percent
average, in two clear ways.
(See Exhibit 34) say the monthly online bill is too much for
➤ Job Search: Hispanics are more likely to use their
them, and 23 percent say they cannot afford a computer.
high-speed connection to search for or apply for a
job—68 percent versus the 59 percent average.
Exhibit 32:
Main reason cited for not having
Barriers to Adoption:the Internet or broadband
African-Americans
Other non-adopters
African-AmericansCost
42
35
(by Percentage)
Digital literacy
20
22
Relevance
13
20
Other
25
24
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009.
Exhibit 33:
Hispanics
All others in sample
Broadband AdoptionAll
49
67
by Age: Hispanics
(by Percentage)
Ages 18–29
57
81
Ages 30–49
53
78
Ages 50–64
32
67
Ages 65+
23
36
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009.
Exhibit 34:
Main reason cited for not having
Barriers to Adoption:the Internet or broadband
Hispanics
Other non-adopters
HispanicsCost
52
32
(by Percentage)
Digital literacy
18
22
Relevance
14
20
Other
16
26
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009.
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
3 7O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
people With disabilitiesOn the whole, however, broadband-using people with dis-
As noted earlier, 23 percent of respondents in this survey
abilities do fewer things online than average. The survey asked
answered “yes” to one of six questions intended to identify an
half of all respondents about eight different online activities,
individual as having a disability. In the survey, those with a dis-
and the other half about another eight activities. Among both
ability were older than most respondents, with a median age of sets of activities, respondents with disabilities and broadband
57. This explains, in part, the lower overall Internet penetration were less active than the average. For one set, broadband-using
rate for this group (56 percent) and the low rate of home high-
people with disabilities did 4.6 activities on average compared
speed adoption (42 percent). Although 74 percent have a cell
to 5.1 for broadband users without a disability. For the other
phone, people with disabilities are not very likely to access the
set, the figures were 3.3 and 3.7, respectively, for broadband us-
Internet with it (only 18 percent have).
ers with disabilities and other broadband users. The differences
One-third of respondents with a disability were over the
may not seem great, but they indicate a level of online activity
age of 65 in the survey, and only 25 percent have broadband at
for broadband users with disabilities that is about 12 percent
home. At the other end of the spectrum, one-third is under the
lower than that of broadband users who are not disabled.
age of 50, and 57 percent has broadband at home—more than
People with disabilities share have many of the character-
20 points below average. It is notable that senior citizens with
istics that are often associated with lower levels of Internet
disabilities are 76% less likely to have broadband than seniors
use—advanced age and lower income. However, having a dis-
who do not have a disability. (See Exhibit 35)
ability—even when those other characteristics are taken into
Notable among those with disabilities is the narrower scope account—is significantly correlated with lower levels of online
of online activities. For some activities, people with disabili-
activity.
ties who have broadband are nearly as likely to engage in them
as the overall average. Three quarters (73 percent) of people
Non-adopters
with disabilities use their broadband connection to get news
People with disabilities do not differ greatly from the average
about their communities, not too far from what other broad-
in terms of why they do not have broadband at home. They are
band users say (81 percent). People with disabilities are also
somewhat more likely to say they cannot afford a computer (15
within range of others for use of their broadband connection to percent cite it as the main reason versus the 10 percent aver-
visit a government Web site (71 percent versus the 80 percent
age), which may be due to the extra expense for some users
average).
for fitting a computer with the capability to allow them to use
broadband (See Exhibit 36).
Exhibit 35:
People with disabilities
All others in sample
Broadband AdoptionAll
42
72
by Age for People with
a Disability
Ages 18–29
59
78
(by Percentage)
Ages 30–49
56
77
Ages 50–64
43
72
Ages 65+
25
44
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009.
Exhibit 36:
Main reason cited for not having
Barriers to Adoption:
the Internet or broadband
People with Disabilities
Other non-adopters
People with DisabilitiesCost
37
35
(by Percentage)
Digital literacy
25
19
Relevance
17
19
Other
21
27
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009.
3 8
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
rural americansresidents between 18 and 29 have broadband at home, com-
In the survey, rural Americans are people living in counties that pared with the average of 75 percent.
do not contain any portion of a metropolitan statistical area
It appears that some rural high-speed users take advantage
(MSA). This is distinct from urban areas, defined as central
of the distance-bridging capacity of broadband. More than
cities in MSAs, and suburban areas, which are any portion of
three-quarters (77 percent) of rural broadband users have
an MSA county that is not a central city. Place of residence
bought a product online. Although this is below the average
is typically easy to determine from the respondents’ landline
84 percent rate for other broadband users, it is notable in light
telephone number. Cell phone numbers may not map as eas-
of the fact that rural Americans have a higher share of two
ily to place of residence, and for that reason, respondents are
qualities that discourage online buying: age and lower incomes.
asked to name the zip code for where they live. This is used to
Similarly, 25 percent of rural Americans have taken a class on-
determine place of residence (rural, urban, or suburban) for
line—something more the province of young people—matching
respondents contacted on their cell phone. Using these two
the 24 percent rate for other broadband users.
methods, 17 percent of respondents met the definition of resi-
As to what is important to them, 60 percent of rural broad-
dents of rural America.
band users say communicating with family and friends is very
There is a sizable gap between rural Americans with any sort important, followed by 33 percent who value keeping up with
of access to the Internet (71 percent) and those with broad-
community news and 33 percent who say sharing content with
band at home (50 percent). Ten percent of rural residents have others is very important.
dial-up Internet connection, above the average, reflecting the
difficulty in running broadband infrastructure to some corners Non-adopters
of rural America (See Exhibit 37). Fully 80 percent of rural
The reasons rural Americans cite for not having broadband at
Americans have cell phones, but just 20 percent have used
home differ modestly from the average—with one exception.
them for Internet access.
Rural non-adopters are twice as likely as urban or suburban
Rural Americans tend to be older than their suburban
non-adopters to say broadband is not available where they live
and urban counterpart (the median age for rural adults is 50
(by a 10 percent to 4 percent margin, which is reflected in the
compared with 46 for all American adults) and with somewhat
“other” category below). They are less likely than other non-
lower incomes. Younger rural Americans are far behind when it adopters to say cost is a barrier (31 percent to 38 percent) and
comes to broadband adoption by age; 56 percent of rural
relatively few (9 percent) say that the expense of a computer
keeps them from broadband (See Exhibit 38).
Exhibit 37:
Rural residents
All others in sample
Broadband AdoptionAll
50
68
by Geographic Location
(by Percentage)
Ages 18–29
56
78
Ages 30–49
63
76
Ages 50–64
51
67
Ages 65+
29
37
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009.
Exhibit 38:
Main reason cited for not having
Barriers to Adoption:the Internet or broadband
Rural residents
National Average
Rural AmericansCost
31
38
(by Percentage)
Digital literacy
23
21
Relevance
19
18
Service not available
10
4
Other
18
19
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009.
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
3 9O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
Appendix:Demographic and socio-economic overview of those with various technological assets
Tables on(as a percentage of Americans)
Demographics
Cable or
Landline
Cell
Working com-
and Usesatellite TV
phone
phone
puter at home
Gender
Male
48
46
50
50
Female
52
54
50
50
Parents with minor children at home
33
33
34
36
Those who report they have a disability
23
25
20
18
18–29
20
15
24
24
30–49
34
34
37
38
50–64
27
29
26
26
65+
17
20
13
12
White (not Hispanic)
71
74
71
73
Black (not Hispanic)
11
11
12
10
Hispanic (English or Spanish speaking)
12
10
12
11
Less than high school
13
12
10
7
High school graduate
34
35
34
32
Some college
25
24
26
28
College +
29
29
30
34
Under $20K
15
14
15
12
$20K–$30K
9
9
9
8
$30K–$40K
9
8
10
10
$40K–$50K
9
9
9
10
$50K–$75K
14
14
15
16
$75K–$100K
11
11
12
13
Over $100K
15
15
15
17
Don’t know/refused
18
20
17
16
Urban
29
28
30
29
Suburban
50
52
49
51
Rural
17
18
16
17
Number of cases
4,301
4,373
4,268
3,650
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October-November 2009.
4 0
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
Appendix:Demographic & socio-economic overview of those who do various activities online
(% broadband adapters in group)
Visit local,
state orUse a
Submit a
Get local or
Upload
federalDownload
Buy a
socialreview for
Play
communityor share
government or stream
product
network-
a product
games
news*
content*
Web site*
music*online*
ing site*
or service*
online*
Male
78
44
79
54
82
52
53
41
Female
82
52
78
49
84
58
57
56
Parents with
minor children at
86
51
82
58
85
59
56
53
home
Those who report
they have a
73
41
71
45
73
47
57
52
disability
18–29
86
67
75
75
86
85
57
63
30–49
85
49
80
58
84
57
58
50
50–64
74
37
83
34
84
38
53
38
65+
58
26
68
17
69
16
39
27
White
(not Hispanic)
79
48
81
49
87
54
55
46
Black
(not Hispanic)
80
48
70
52
69
56
63
63
Hispanic
(English or
80
45
74
70
70
59
49
49
Spanish speaking)
Less than high
school
75
48
60
57
64
55
51
76
High school
graduate
73
36
66
48
74
50
47
47
Some college
81
48
83
53
84
58
56
54
College+
85
56
87
53
92
57
60
40
Under $20K
80
46
68
64
74
58
49
70
$20–30K
78
50
78
56
64
57
55
58
$30–40K
78
43
77
58
76
48
51
54
$40–50K
80
51
70
48
84
53
57
38
$50–75K
75
42
80
42
87
54
52
45
$75–$100K
84
49
87
52
92
60
54
45
Over $100K
86
60
85
58
95
61
69
43
Don’t know/
refused
73
40
72
42
73
45
48
43
Number of cases
1,378
1,378
1,378
1,378
1,378
1,378
1,378
1,378
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October–November 2009.
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
4 1O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
Appendix:Demographic & socio-economic overview of those who do various activities online
(% broadband adapters in group)
Get infor-
Get advice
Play com-
Get inter-
mationfrom a govern-
plicated
national or
about or
Post to own
ment agencyDownload Do any Take a role playing
nationalapply for
blog or
about a health or stream banking class
games
news*
a job
group blog
or safety issue
video
online
online
online
Male
70
60
23
52
46
69
21
18
Female
78
65
27
57
44
73
28
14
Parents with
minor children at
78
65
27
57
44
73
28
14
home
Those who report
they have a
66
50
24
49
41
58
19
21
disability
18–29
80
83
45
52
66
72
38
23
30–49
80
65
26
55
43
75
27
16
50–64
75
47
16
56
29
64
13
7
65+
64
14
6
44
18
55
6
7
White
(not Hispanic)
77
55
24
53
40
71
22
11
Black
(not Hispanic)
72
83
37
55
54
57
37
31
Hispanic
(English or
78
68
27
56
47
68
25
22
Spanish speaking)
Less than high
school
65
64
22
43
38
46
19
17
High school
graduate
67
60
25
42
43
59
17
18
Some college
77
61
27
57
42
70
30
18
College+
87
58
26
62
43
78
25
9
Under $20K
64
77
30
43
47
51
32
22
$20–30K
70
63
29
45
36
62
28
21
$30–40K
76
64
33
59
48
64
22
19
$40–50K
79
53
23
45
36
68
13
13
$50–75K
76
56
25
52
48
77
27
15
$75–$100K
86
66
26
55
52
77
25
14
Over $100K
84
56
24
67
49
82
26
5
Don’t know/
refused
73
50
20
50
36
57
18
15
Number of cases
1,293
1,293
1,293
1,293
1,293
1,293
1,293
1,293
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October–November 2009.
4 2
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
Appendix:Demographic and socioeconomic overview of non-adopters by selected barriers
(% of those facing barrier, by demographic)
Cost
Digital Literacy
Relevance
Lack of availability
Male40
45
43
49
Female
60
55
57
51
Parents with minor children at home
32
17
15
33
Those who report they have a disability
41
46
37
21
18–29
24
6
10
18
30–49
29
22
21
30
50–64
26
28
22
35
65+
19
44
44
16
Median Age
47
61
61
50
White (not Hispanic)
54
65
71
78
Black (not Hispanic)
16
13
9
11
Hispanic (English or Spanish speaking)
27
16
14
5
Less than high school
34
29
27
10
High school graduate
42
51
47
38
Some college
14
12
15
33
College+
9
8
11
20
Under $20K
38
24
24
22
$20–30K
15
15
14
15
$30–40K
10
10
7
10
$40–50K
7
9
10
7
$50–75K
5
8
11
5
$75–$100K
3
4
2
3
Over $100K
2
2
3
2
Don’t know/refused
21
28
30
21
Urban
37
28
24
8
Suburban
38
44
47
42
Rural
21
26
25
46
Number of cases
738
516
445
148
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October–November 2009.
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
4 3O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
Appendix:Demographic & socio-economic overview of non-adopter segments
(% of non-adopters)
Digitally
Digitally Distant
Digital Hopefuls
Uncomfortable
Near Converts
Male37
42
43
50
Female
63
58
57
50
Parents with minor children at home
18
22
25
28
Those who report they have a disability
49
51
35
24
18–29
10
13
17
21
30–49
18
22
22
37
50–64
25
26
27
30
65+
47
38
34
12
Median Age
63
57
55
45
White (not Hispanic)
66
50
63
71
Black (not Hispanic)
11
20
10
13
Hispanic (English or Spanish speaking)
18
26
22
10
Less than high school
36
49
30
5
High school graduate
48
38
43
45
Some college
9
9
17
28
College+
6
4
10
22
Under $20K
36
44
27
13
$20–30K
14
15
22
9
$30–40K
8
8
12
12
$40–50K
5
3
8
14
$50–75K
3
3
7
16
$75–$100K
1
1
3
8
Over $100K
1
0
3
8
Don’t know/refused
32
26
20
22
Urban
25
20
27
25
Suburban
43
35
44
43
Rural
29
39
26
27
Number of cases
649
450
478
757
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October–November 2009.
4 4
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
Appendix:Non-adopter segments’ attitudes towards the Internet and technological assets
(% of non-adopters)
Digitally
Digitally Distant
Digital Hopefuls
Uncomfortable
Near Converts
The Internet is dangerous for children53
48
43
40
It is important for children to learn
to use Internet
16
76
63
66
The Internet is valuable for info/learning
15
86
68
74
There is too much offensive or
questionable material on the Internet
62
68
65
65
People can be more productive with
Internet
0
68
37
49
It is too easy for personal
information to be stolen online
56
66
53
54
Number of cases
649
450
478
757
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October–November 2009.
Appendix:
Information and Communication Technologies by Segment
(% of segment)
Digitally
Digitally Distant
Digital Hopefuls
Uncomfortable
Near Converts
Cable TV59
56
46
61
Satellite TV
27
26
37
33
Cable OR Satellite TV
78
75
75
86
Desktop computer
9
2
83
55
Laptop computer
3
1
38
32
Desktop OR laptop computer
11
3
97
68
Cell phone
52
56
76
93
Number of cases
649
450
478
757
Source: Federal Communications Commission survey, October–November 2009.
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
4 5O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
meThOdOlOgywere made to contact every sampled cellular telephone num-
ber. Sample was released for interviewing in replicates, which
are representative subsamples. Using replicates to control the
Broadband Consumer Survey
release of sample helps ensure that complete call proceduresPrepared by Princeton Survey Research Associates
are followed. Calls were staggered over times of day and days of
Internationalfor the Federal Communications Commission
the week to maximize the chance of making contact with poten-
December 2009
tial respondents. Interviewing was spread as evenly as possible
across the field period.
summary
For the landline sample, interviewers asked to speak with
The Broadband Service Capability Survey, sponsored by the
the adult in the household who had the most recent birthday.
Federal Communications Commission, obtained telephone
If the selected adult was not at home or could not complete the
interviews with a nationally representative sample of 5,005
interview at the time of contact, interviewers arranged to call
adults living in the United States. The survey was conducted by back the selected person at a later time. For the cellular sample,
Princeton Survey Research International. Interviews were con- interviews were conducted with the person who answered the
ducted in English and Spanish by Princeton Data Source LLC
phone. Interviewers verified that the person was an adult and
from October 19 to November 23, 2009. The data was weighted in a safe place before administering the survey. Cellular sample
to correct known demographic discrepancies. The margin of
respondents were offered a post-paid cash reimbursement for
sampling error for the complete set of weighted data is ±1.6
their participation.
percentage points.
The interviewing was done in two phases that ran concur-
Details on the design, execution and analysis of the survey
rently. The first phase included interviews with all adults while
are discussed below.
the second phase obtained interviews with an oversample of
adults who were not broadband adopters (i.e., the non-adopter
design and data collection procedures
oversample). Respondents who were contacted in phase two
and were adopters were screened out.
Sample Design
Two samples were used for data collection—a random digit
Weighting and analysis
dial (RDD) landline sample and an RDD cell sample. TheWeighting is generally used in survey analysis to compensate
landline sample frame was an equal probability sample across
for sample designs and patterns of non-response that might
all active blocks.20 All blocks within a county were sorted in
bias results. The data was weighted to correct for three sample
ascending order by area code, exchange and block number. A
elements that could potentially bias survey estimates—[1] the
sampling interval was computed for each county in our sample
oversampling through screening of additional non-adopters,
by summing all eligible blocks in the county and dividing that
[2] different probabilities of selection based on the number
sum by the quota assigned to the county. From a random start
of adults in each household and the number of telephones
between zero and the sampling interval, blocks were systemati- that each respondent has access to and [3] disproportionate
cally selected from each county. Once a block was selected, a
non-response.
two-digit random number was appended to the block to create
a phone number. Business numbers were not excluded at the
Non-adopters Oversample
sampling stage. Rather they were flagged during sampling and
A sample adjustment was made to account for the non-adopters
purged before dialing. Additionally, protected numbers were
oversample. This adjustment simply adjusted the proportion
not excluded from the sample frame.21
of non-adopters in our total sample to match the proportion
The cellular sample was not list-assisted because no list of
of non-adopters in the first phase of interviewing. This adjust-
cellular numbers exists. Rather, cellular phone numbers were
ment was made individually for the landline and cell samples.
systematically sampled from dedicated wireless 100-blocks
Table 1 shows the oversample adjustment (OSADJUST) that
and shared service 100-blocks with no directory-listed landline was made to the data.
numbers.
Different Probabilities of Selection
Contact Procedures
We made two sample adjustments to the data that address
Interviews were conducted from October 19 to November
unequal selection probabilities. One adjustment accounts for
23, 2009. As many as 15 attempts were made to contact every
within household clustering and is a function of the number of
sampled landline telephone number and as many as 7 attempts adults in each household while the second adjustment accounts
4 6
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
for the overlapping landline and cell sample frames and thenumber of landline telephones in each household.
(p + p + p )
for respondents with three or more
The Probability of Selection Adjustment (PSA) corrects for
1
2
3
3p + 2p + p
phones
the fact that respondents in the landline sample have different
1
2
3
probabilities of being sampled depending on how many adults
live in the household. Since we only sample one person per
Differential Non-response
household, adults who live with no other adults have a greater
The final step in weighting the data consisted of raking sample
chance of being sample than adults who live with one or more
demographics to match population parameters. The sample
other adults.
was balanced—by form—to match national population param-
To compute the PSA, first define n as the number of people
eters for sex, age, education, race, Hispanic origin, region (U.S.
1
in the landline sample who live in single-adults households and Census definitions), population density, and telephone usage.
n as the number of people in the landline sample that live in
The basic weighting parameters came from a special analysis
2
multi-adult households. The PSA equals:
of the Census Bureau’s 2009 Annual Social and Economic
Supplement (ASEC) that included all households in the United
n + n
States. The population density parameter came from an analy-
1
2
for landline respondents in single-adult
n + 2n
households
sis of Census 2000 data. The telephone usage parameter came
1
2
from an analysis of the most recently available National Health
Interview Survey data.22
2(n + n )
1
2
for landline respondents in multiple-
Raking was accomplished using Sample Balancing, a spe-
n + 2n
adult households
cial iterative sample weighting program that simultaneously
1
2
balances the distributions of all variables using a statistical
technique called the Deming Algorithm. An input weight equal
1
for cellphone respondents
to the product of OSADJUST, PSA and PUA was used for the
raking. Weights were trimmed to prevent individual interviews
The Phone Use Adjustment (PUA) corrects for different
from having too much influence on the final results. The use
probabilities of selection based on the number of landline
of these weights in statistical analysis ensures that the demo-
phones in each respondent’s household and whether or not the
graphic characteristics of the sample closely approximate the
respondent has a cell phone.
demographic characteristics of the national adult population.
To compute the PUA, first define p as the number of respon- Table 2 compares weighted and unweighted sample demo-
1
dents with only one phone, p as the number of respondents
graphic distributions to population parameters.
2
with two phones and p as the number of respondents with
3
three or more phones, the PUA equals:
Effects of Sample Design on Statistical Inference
Post-data collection statistical adjustments require analysis
3(p + p + p )
procedures that reflect departures from simple random sam-
1
2
3
for respondents with one phone
3p + 2p + p
pling. PSRAI calculates the effects of these design features so
1
2
3
that an appropriate adjustment can be incorporated into tests
of statistical significance when using these data. The so-called
2(p + p + p )
1
2
3
“design effect” or deff represents the loss in statistical effi-
for respondents with two phones
3p + 2p + p
ciency that results from disproportionate sample designs and
1
2
3
Table 1:
Main sample
Main sample + oversample
Adjustment (OSADJUST)
Oversample AdjustmentLandline
Non-adopters
36.2%
48.6%
0.745
Adopters
63.8%
51.4%
1.241
Cellular
Non-adopters
21.2%
37.7%
0.562
Adopters
78.8%
62.3%
1.265
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
4 7O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
systematic non-response. The total sample design effect forn
this survey is 1.37.
n ∑ w 2
PSRAI calculates the composite design effect for a sample of
i
i=1
size n, with each case having a weight, w as:
i
deff =
formula 1
( n∑w )2i
i=1
Table 2:
Parameter
Unweighted Sample
Weighted Sample
Sample DemographicsGender
Male
48.5
45.1
48.1
Female
51.5
54.9
51.9
Age
18–24
12.6
7.4
12.1
25–34
17.8
10.6
16.8
35–44
18.2
13.9
17.8
45–54
19.6
20.2
19.5
55–64
15.1
19.2
15.0
65+
16.6
26.3
16.8
Education
Less than high school
14.1
10.0
13.0
High school graduate
34.7
33.3
34.1
Some college
24.1
22.8
24.3
College +
27.1
33.1
28.0
Race/Ethnicity
White (not Hispanic)
68.8
74.1
68.8
Black (not Hispanic)
11.5
9.2
11.1
Hispanic
13.7
8.7
12.6
Other (not Hispanic)
6.0
6.6
6.1
Region
Northeast
18.5
17.6
18.3
Midwest
22.0
25.8
22.5
South
36.8
37.5
37.0
West
22.7
19.1
22.1
County Pop. Density
1—Lowest
20.1
24.7
20.5
2
20.0
22.5
20.4
3
20.1
20.5
20.4
4
20.2
17.7
20.0
5—Highest
19.6
14.7
18.6
Phone Use
LLO
13.6
14.7
13.6
Dual users
65.6
72.8
66.4
CPO
20.8
12.6
20.1
4 8
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
In a wide range of situations, the adjusted standard errorin 95 out every 100 samples drawn using the same methodol-
of a statistic should be calculated by multiplying the usual
ogy, estimated proportions based on the entire sample will be
formula by the square root of the design effect (√deff ). Thus,
no more than 1.6 percentage points away from their true values
the formula for computing the 95% confidence interval around in the population. The margin of error for estimates based
a percentage is:
on non-adopters is ±2.4 percentage points. It is important to
remember that sampling fluctuations are only one possible
source of error in a survey estimate. Other sources, such as
ˆp ± ( √deff x 1.96 √ ˆp (1- ˆp ) ) formula 2
n
respondent selection bias, questionnaire wording and reporting
inaccuracy, may contribute additional error of greater or lesser
where ˆp is the sample estimate and n is the unweighted number magnitude.
of sample cases in the group being considered.
The survey’s margin of error is the largest 95% confidence
response rate
interval for any estimated proportion based on the total
Table 3 reports the disposition of all sampled telephone
sample—the one around 50%. For example, the margin of error numbers ever dialed from the original telephone number
for the entire sample is ±1.6 percentage points. This means that samples. The response rate estimates the fraction of all eligible
Table 3:
Landline—combined
Cell—combined
Sample DispositionTotal Numbers Dialed
75,974
33,914
Non-residential
6,069
618
Computer/Fax
3,602
34
Cell phone
61
Other not working
39,194
12,847
Additional projected not working
3,330
868
Working numbers
23,718
19,547
Working Rate
31.2%
57.6%
No Answer / Busy
1,110
289
Voice Mail
2,989
4,730
Other Non-Contact
123
12
Contacted numbers
19,496
14,516
Contact Rate
82.2%
74.3%
Callback
2,372
2,278
Refusal
11,661
8,310
Cooperating numbers
5,463
3,928
Cooperation Rate
28.0%
27.1%
Language Barrier
213
78
Child's cell phone
—
1,105
Adopter screen-out
1,580
1,169
Eligible numbers
3,670
1,576
Eligibility Rate
67.2%
40.1%
Break-off
188
53
Completes
3,482
1,523
Completion Rate
94.9%
96.6%
Response Rate
21.9%
19.4%
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
4 9O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
respondents in the sample that were ultimately interviewed.At PSRAI it is calculated by taking the product of three compo- aCknOWledgemenTS
nent rates:23
➤ Contact rate—the proportion of working numbers where
The author wishes to thank several members of the National
a request for interview was made24
Broadband Taskforce for their help in making this report a
➤ Cooperation rate—the proportion of contacted numbers
reality. Foremost is Ellen Satterwhite who provided invaluable
where a consent for interview was at least initially ob-
help on a number of fronts—from insights on survey questions,
tained, versus those refused
to analysis of the data, to editorial judgment. Jessica Strott also
➤ Completion rate—the proportion of initially cooperating
participated in design of the survey instrument, and her ideas
and eligible interviews that were completed
greatly contributed to its quality.
The survey was carried out by Princeton Survey Research
Thus the response rate for the landline sample was 22 per-
Associates International and the entire team there—Evans
cent. The response rate for the cellular sample was 19 percent.
Witt, Margie Engle, and Jonathan Best—were instrumental in
designing and carrying out this survey. They have the author’s
sincere thanks.
5 0
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | W W W . B r O a d B a n d . g O V
O B I W O r k I n g P a P e r S e r I e S n O . 1
e n d n O T e S1
Because it is difficult to tell whether such access meets
15 As in the example above, the findings that the correlation
the standards to qualify as broadband, users of wireless
between skills and number of activities is the result of an
handheld access are not counted as home broadband
OLS regression in which the dependent variable is the
users—though most wireless handheld internet users
number of activities a user has done and the independent
qualify as home broadband users.
variables include gender, race, education, income and
2
Mobile wireless broadband users are counted as home
the number of tech terms the user reports understanding
broadband users if that is their source of home access.
“very well.”
3
1 percent of non-adopters could not be classified into any 16 Cody Barbierri, “Smartphone usage continues to grow
of the three groups of non-adopters.
in US, according to Forrester Research.” Demo Beat,
4
National Telecommunications and Information Admin-
http://demo.venturebeat.com/2010/01/05/smartphone-
istration, Digital Nation: 21st Century America’s Progress
usage-continues-to-grows-in-us-according-to-forrester-
Toward Universal Broadband Internet Access. February
research/. Accessed on February 12, 2010.
2010. Available online at: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/
17 John B. Horrigan, Wireless Internet Use, Pew Internet &
reports/2010/NTIA_internet_use_report_Feb2010.pdf.
American Life Project, July 22, 2009.
5
More information is available at the FCC’s Web site:
18 According to the Census, 54 million people have a
http://www.fcc.gov/form477/.
disability, including speech, hearing, vision, mobility
6
Lee Rainie et.al., The Ever Shifting Internet Population.
or cognitive disorders. U.S. Census Bureau, Americans
Pew Internet & American Life Project, April 2003.
With Disabilities: 2005, Current Population Reports, 3,
Available online at: http://www.pewInternet.org/
4 (2008), http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/
Reports/2003/The-EverShifting-Internet-Population-
releases/archives/income_wealth/013041.html.
A-new-look-at-Internet-access-and-the-digital-divide.
19 In constructing the segments, a statistical cluster
aspx, accessed on January 18, 2010.
analysis was performed only on those respondents
7
John B. Horrigan. If you build it, will they log on? Pew
who did not have broadband at home. Several different
Internet & American Life Project, January 2009. Avail-
cluster solutions were evaluated for their effectiveness
able online at: http://www.pewInternet.org/~/media//
in producing cohesive groups that were distinct from one
Files/Reports/2009/PIP_Broadbandpercent20Barriers.
another and substantively meaningful. The final solution
pdf, accessed on January 18, 2010.
selected was judged to be strongest on a statistical basis
8
Ofcom, Accessing the Internet at Home, June 2009.
and to be most persuasive from a substantive perspec-
Available online at: http://www.ofcom.org.uk/research/
tive.
telecoms/reports/bbresearch/bbathome.pdf, accessed
20 Active blocks are defined as 100 contiguous phone
on January 18, 2010.
numbers (e.g., 609-924-9200 to 609-924-9299) with at
9
John B. Horrigan, How Americans Get in Touch with
least one residential directory listings.
Government, Pew Internet & American Life Project, May
21 Phone numbers in SSI random-digit database are
2004. Available online at: http://www.pewInternet.org/
flagged as “protected” if they have recently been pulled
Reports/2004/How-Americans-Get-in-Touch-With-
for any sample order. While excluding protected num-
Government.aspx, accessed on January 18, 2010.
bers results in a “fresher” sample (i.e., one that consists
10 Omnibus Broadband Initiative (OBI) internal analysis of
of numbers that have not been recently pulled), we feel
various industry sources.
that excluding these numbers would potentially bias our
11 Respondents were asked simply to estimate their
sample.
monthly bill to the nearest, but not prompted to make
22 Blumberg SJ, Luke JV. Wireless substitution: Early
that estimate exclusive or inclusive of taxes or fees that
release of estimates from the National Health Interview
may be imposed on service.
Survey, July-December, 2008. National Center for
12 Internal OBI analysis of data from TNS Telecoms and
Health Statistics. May 2009.
Telogical Systems.
23 PSRAI’s disposition codes and reporting are consistent
13 The finding that the correlations are statistically sig-
with the American Association for Public Opinion
nificant is derived from an ordinary least squares (OLS)
Research standards.
regression in which the dependent variable is the num-
24 PSRAI assumes that 75 percent of cases that result in a
ber of activities a user has done and the independent
constant disposition of “No answer” or “Busy” are actu-
variables include gender, race, education, income, level
ally not working numbers.
of online skills (as discussed in the next section) and the
specific attitudinal variable of interest.
14 Eszter Hargittai, “An Update on Survey Measures of
Web-Oriented Digital Literacy.” Social Science Computer
Review, Volume 27, no. 1, February 2009, pp. 130–137.
F e d e r a l C O m m u n I C a t I O n S C O m m I S S I O n | B r O a d B a n d a d O P t I O n a n d u S e I n a m e r I C a
5 1Note: We are currently transitioning our documents into web compatible formats for easier reading. We have done our best to supply this content to you in a presentable form, but there may be some formatting issues while we improve the technology. The original version of the document is available as a PDF, Word Document, or as plain text.
