As the Internet grows in popularity, telecommunications infrastructure in the United States continues to increase in capacity and geographic reach to meet market demand. Important components of this infrastructure include the commercial fiber-optic backbones used to transport digital information between locations. The spatial organization of commercial Internet backbones reflects an increasingly competitive privatized market for service provision, in which certain locations are more accessible and better connected than others. The authors have three objectives. First, they explore the current state of the telecommunications industry, paying special attention to current trends, mergers, and new company business models. Second, they use a standardized methodology to examine the topological structure of the US commercial Internet and the resulting differences in city accessibility. Third, this methodology is put to the test by an exploration of an empirical database of 41 network providers in the United States. Results suggest that significant changes in city accessibility to the commercial Internet occurred between 1997 and 2000.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Boardwatch, 2000Boardwatch Magazine's Directory of Internet Service Providers12th edition (Penton Media, Cleveland, OH)
GrimesS, 2000, “Rural areas in the information society: Diminishing distance or increasing learning capacity?”Journal of Rural Studies16, 13–21
13.
GrubesicT H, 2002a, “Urban v rural: Market demand and broadband access in the state of Ohio”, draft manuscript, Department of Geography, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
14.
GrubesicT H, 2002b, “Spatial dimensions of Internet activity”Telecommunications Policy forthcoming.
15.
GrubesicT HO'KellyM E, 2002, “Using points of presence to measure city accessibility to the commercial Internet”The Professional Geographer forthcoming
McCarthyB, 2000, “Introduction to the directory of Internet service providers, 12th edition”, in Boardwatch Magazine's Directory of Internet Service Providers12th edition (Penton Media, Cleveland, OH) 4–6
MaleckiE J, 2000a, “The Internet: A preliminary analysis of its evolving economic geography”, paper presented for the Global Economic Geography Conference Singapore; copy available from the author, Department of Geography, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
21.
MaleckiE J, 2000b, “Going digital in rural America”, paper prepared for the conference Exploring Policy Options for a New Rural America Kansas City; copy available from the author, Department of Geography, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
22.
MaleckiE JGormanS P, 2001, “Maybe the death of distance, but not the end of geography: The Internet as a network”, in Worlds of E-commerce Eds LeinbachT RBrunnS D, (John Wiley, New York) pp 87–105
23.
MossM LTownsendA, 1997, “The role of the real city in cyberspace: Understanding regional variations in Internet accessibility and utilization”, paper prepared for the Project Varenius meeting, Pacific Grove, California, http://www.informationcity.org/research/role-real-city/index.htm
24.
MossM LTownsendA, 2000, “The Internet backbone and the American metropolis”Information Society Journal16(1) 35–47
25.
NewtonH, 2000Newton's Telecom Dictionary7th edition (Telecom Books, New York)
RichardsonRGillespieA, 2000, “The economic development of peripheral rural areas in the information age”, in Information Tectonics Eds WilsonM ICoreyK E (John Wiley, New York) pp 199–217
