Sorry, the Government Is Not Creating Free Nationwide Wi-Fi Networks

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


You would be forgiven for thinking that the U.S. government just announced a plan to build a free public Wi-Fi system. After the Washington Post ran a front-page story on Monday morning that began “The federal government wants to create super WiFi networks across the nation, so powerful and broad in reach that consumers could use them to make calls or surf the Internet without paying a cellphone bill every month,” others picked up on the incredible story. “FCC Proposes Free WiFi For Everyone In The U.S.” trumpeted Popular Science (referring to the Federal Communications Commission). “The FCC Wants to Blanket the Country in Free Wi-Fi” read Motherboard. Blogswentwild over the prospect of a nationwide network that would allow people to get online from wherever they are with no monthly bill.

Unfortunately, none of this is true. The government is not going to build a nationwide super-Wi-Fi system. The FCC does want to reclaim part of the electromagnetic spectrum that is held by television broadcasters—spectrum that the switch to digital TV has made obsolete. It wants to buy that spectrum back from the television companies and free it for other so-called “unlicensed” uses. It’s the digital equivalent of the government purchasing a plot of unused land and turning it into a national park—free to use but left undeveloped.

What would it take for a nationwide Wi-Fi system to actually be built? The unused spectrum is necessary, but not sufficient. Someone would have to come along and actually construct the system—the broadcast towers, the wiring, the routers, the electronics. Someone would have to connect this physical infrastructure to the Internet’s backbone. Someone would have to manage the traffic on the network just as surely as AT&T currently manages its network. In short, someone would have to invest a ton of money into building and operating a giant Wi-Fi network. The Washington Post story is silent on who would do this.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Moreover, any efforts in the past to have local government provide Internet access have run into fierce opposition from telecom lobbying efforts. In multiple states, Internet service providers have succeeded in pushing bills that forbid municipal governments from providing Internet access to its residents—even when that access is better or cheaper than the private alternative. Would the telecom industry really let the government offer nationwide Wi-Fi that would directly compete with its services? You don’t need to be a reporter at the Washington Post to answer that.

Michael Moyer is the editor in charge of physics and space coverage at Scientific American. Previously he spent eight years at Popular Science magazine, where he was the articles editor. He was awarded the 2005 American Institute of Physics Science Writing Award for his article "Journey to the 10th Dimension," and has appeared on CBS, ABC, CNN, Fox and the Discovery Channel. He studied physics at the University of California at Berkeley and at Columbia University.

More by Michael Moyer

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe