5G, the digital divide, and how to organize against the telecom industry
A few weeks ago, I received a call from a community activist who was fighting a bill in her county — a zoning amendment that would allow for the proliferation of “small” cell towers, the infrastructure necessary for county-wide access to 5G, aka the newest wave of technology that promises faster and better internet access. The activist explained that she was concerned about a couple of things including RF (which we will get into in a minute), that this bill required no notice to residents or municipalities around the installation of these towers, and that the pandemic was being used as an excuse to rush this bill without any community input. I’ll be honest — I knew nothing about this issue. I was concerned about 5G conspiracy theories, being perceived as anti-technology, and generally not being sure that I was on the right side of this issue — was this just NIMBY folks concerned about their property values? But as I dug in, I realized this story is familiar. A powerful industry, using a moment of crisis to profit and move forward their agenda, with little concern for the mess they leave behind.
First, let me address the science. To “bring 5G to a community” requires the installation of “small” cell towers on utility poles — either existing or new poles. RF or Radiofrequency waves emit low levels of radiation. The fact is, across the board, scientists and public health officials agree, more research needs to be done on this issue and its impact on our health. While mainstream groups like the American Cancer Society don’t have a position on this issue, just this summer, the Environmental Working Group released a study that asserts, “Wireless radiation exposure for children should be hundreds of times lower than federal limits.” This past week the Environmental Health Trust won their lawsuit against the FCC for not updating those exposure limits since 1996. The thing that we do know from fights like this — from climate change to the tobacco industry — is that the industry is not going to tell us when their product is killing us and we tend to regret not listening to science that gets ignored early on.
The second issue at play is the “digital divide”. The digital divide has become front and center this past year and a half. According to a key report by the Abell Foundation, the digital divide is not just about having fast internet or not, it breaks down along three key lines: (1) having access to devices to run the internet, (2) knowledge of how to use those devices and how to use the internet, and (3) having reliable, affordable internet access. Those of us with the privilege to safely stay in our homes during this pandemic have relied on the internet to connect with loved ones, go to school, work, and keep what shreds of our mental health remain intact. Well-meaning and industry-friendly politicians alike will make a compelling case that expanding 5G and the associated small-cell tower infrastructure is crucial to providing much-needed service to our homes. But the truth is, expanding 5G will not solve the digital divide alone. While there is a case to be made that 5G helps address the third component of the digital divide, the trouble is that to run 5G, you need devices compatible with the technology and those are newer (read: more expensive) and often out of reach for low-income families. Finally, 5G is good for cell phones — for watching movies on your phone, for streaming music as you drive in your car, and not so good for older laptops and desktops that folks typically use to do things like access unemployment resources or attend school remotely. The most tried and true way to increase access to the internet is by expanding wired fiber and broadband.
If one of these bills is moving in your community, here are some key factors to investigate to assess its potential impacts:
Setbacks — this term refers to how far these “small” cell towers are allowed to be from structures including homes and schools. These can range anywhere from 1,000 to 15 feet from residences. For folks concerned about RF, this is the thing to look out for.
Prioritization of communities that need access — if the policymakers that are pushing this legislation in your community are talking about equitable access, make sure that the bill requires that the telecom prioritizes expanding access to those communities who experience a lack of it.
Community Engagement — one thing community organizers and planners know well, is that for any legislation to be equitable and inclusive, policymakers need significant input from those most impacted. Any bill that doesn’t require significant public input is guaranteed to overlook the needs of those communities.
Notice to residents and municipalities — does this bill include any language about requiring notice about the installation and placement of these towers? We found that regardless of how folks felt about the cell towers, they were deeply concerned that they could be erected in front of their homes without notifying them. This can be a great organizing lever for homeowners and local elected officials who are being excluded from the process.
Accountability — see what provisions exist in the legislation for disputing the placement of a tower in the bill once it has been built. Even if there are strong setbacks in the legislation, the telecom may be able to violate these setbacks if there are no measures for accountability, leaving residents with a cell tower feet from their homes.
My biggest takeaway from organizing on this campaign is not different from other issues– work with communities who are most directly impacted by the problem that the legislation purports to serve and make sure those spokespeople are at the front of any opposition to this bill. Don’t let the telecom industry get away with pushing the idea that 5G will solve the digital divide. Focus your efforts by identifying a small universe including decision-makers and their close allies, and organize so that each target receives multiple touches using different tactics. For example, a mailer, a door knock, and a phone call. (This is a good practice for any campaign where the legislation is already in front of the decision-makers.) Finally, meet people where they are at — but don’t always lean on their messaging. Homeowners will likely be outraged at the exposure to radiation, and yes, the maligned “property values” argument. While it is helpful to have this loud opposition, they will show up with little outreach efforts. These folks have the time, energy, and resources to organize themselves — spend your energy reaching out to those who will likely be left out of the process. We all want the same things — affordable and reliable internet access that allows us to stay safe, connect with our communities, and go about our lives. Don’t let this get lost in the shuffle and make sure to assert these shared values early and often.
While we ended up losing this fight at the end (it was always going to be a hard one). My hope is that the lessons learned can help others in similar fights across the country. While the characters may differ, the story is all too familiar. While 5G might be the thing right now, in a few years it will be something else. The important thing is to stick to our values, support those so often left out, and advocate for public engagement and a democratic process.
