In these dark days of COVID-19, we have quickly become an online country. Millions of workers are now away from their offices working remotely via the internet, while they and those not in the workforce continue to rely intensively on an online umbilical cord — often wireless — for vital news and information about the pandemic. Digital connections also enable us to be in touch seamlessly with family and friends during this crisis, which is essential to our overall well-being.

Numerous analysts have pointed out the persistent digital divide we face — namely, that at least 20 million American households currently lack broadband internet access. This divide is especially pronounced in rural areas and among those who are not benefitting from an existing federal Lifeline program that subsidizes internet access at home. This is a real problem that extends to both those who are unserved and underserved online.

But less publicized is the portion of our population that already has residential broadband capability, but believes there is no value in connecting. It may be shocking to realize that 10% of U.S. adults, according to the Pew Research Center, are not using the internet at all. This figure has been relatively static for more than four years. We need to focus immediate attention on how to begin flattening that curve, too.

That’s because there continues to be a drop off in those 65 and older who never go online — 27% of them in the latest Pew Center survey. This age group also is at the highest medical risk for contracting COVID-19, and would benefit greatly by access to vital health and safety information on a 24/7 basis.

There also are economic implications to refusing to go online, again hurting those who may benefit tremendously from internet connections. In addition to health and safety information, telework largely requires such connections. Those who are unwilling to undertake getting connected, especially when the cost may be subsidized by an employer, are increasing the likelihood that they will be considered more expendable in the workforce. Yet according to the Pew Center data, roughly three in 10 adults with less than a high-school education do not use the internet.

Other demographic analyses highlight disparities based on household income and community type; various factors are at play regarding why this problem exists. The important point to focus on now is developing practical ways to reduce the percentage of nationwide internet nonusers as soon as possible, so that we have a broader population base who can take advantage of the internet’s information and communications capabilities.

PSAs Can Build Awareness

Traditional mass media may be the best route to let nonusers know why the national effort to combat the pandemic requires them to go online. Companies can help underwrite public-service ads in print and on radio and television to creatively get this message out. Public health officials, government leaders, and family members and neighbors also can be part of a coordinated Get Online Now campaign.

Although this will not alleviate concerns about those without broadband availability, such a campaign at least could help persuade millions of Americans that it is both in their self-interest and the national interest to join an online community that welcomes them now in a time of great collective need.

Stuart N. Brotman is a Fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, D.C., based in its Science and Technology Innovation Program.

FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel, in a passionate keynote speech to the State of the Net annual conference, focused on growing political challenges to internet freedom. Acknowledging the long run of "rosy propositions" about the internet's value, she warned that "this formidable tool can not only bring us together but can divide us, too." She voiced special concern that government-directed internet shutdowns "can stunt the democratic process, threaten human rights, batter economies, and disrupt modern life" - and emphasized that the U.S. President could institute an internet shutdown under current regulations.

Without ever mentioning the incumbent U.S. President by name during her Tuesday, Jan. 28 speech to the annual SOTN conference of policymakers, Rosenworcel's political invective concentrated on what she sees as a potential threat to American free speech similar to actions that have been implemented globally.

"We have discovered what is ugly—that outrage can travel online with a greater velocity than veracity," Rosenworcel said, citing the "terrifying [ways] that this tool for global collaboration can be used to disrupt democracies as surely as it can be used to destabilize dictatorships." She focused on overseas examples, quoting reports that 21 countries shut down the internet 122 times last year.

After a lengthy tale of overseas internet shutdowns, she brought the story to the U.S.

"You might think this is at some distance from what could happen in the United States. But you might want to think again," Rosenworcel said, trying to avoid alarmist rhetoric as she outlined a scenario in which the President could use World War II- era regulations to stifle the web.

She pointed to 1942 revisions of the 1934 Communications Act, known as Section 706.

"Section 706 allows the President to shut down or take control of 'any facility or station for wire communication' if he proclaims 'that there exists a state or threat of war involving the United States,'” she explained noting that wireless communications could be suspended "merely if there is a presidential proclamation of a 'state of public peril' or simply a 'disaster or other national emergency.' There is no requirement in the law for the President to provide any advance notice to Congress."

Rosenworcel acknowledged, "These are .... different days."

"Section 706 has not been directly applied to the internet," she said, but quoted a 2010 Senate report that concluded Section 706 “gives the President the authority to take over wire communications in the United States and, if the President so chooses, shut a network down.”

"If a sitting President wants to shut down the internet or selectively cut off a service, all it takes is an opinion from his Attorney General that Section 706 gives him the authority to do so," she said. Citing current "unspoken norms," Rosenworcel contended "that past practice may no longer be the best guide for future behavior. Norms are being broken all the time in Washington and relying on them to cabin legal interpretation is not the best way to go."

With bold political inference, she said, "We should be straightforward."

"We should acknowledge that internet shutdowns can stunt elections and the democratic process, threaten human rights, batter economies, and disrupt modern life," the Democratic Commissioner said, calling for a "modern assessment of this language" in Section 706, reflecting "what it should mean in the digital age."

"The United States should develop a formal policy on government-directed internet shutdowns, informed by the experience of the State Department, National Telecommunications and Information Administration and Federal Communications Commission," she proposed.

"We need to have this discussion if we are committed to an open internet for all," Rosenworcel concluded. "Because without it our own laws could be contorted to support such outages. Because without it we can expect the number of government-directed internet shutdowns to grow."