That twenty years is nothing

One of the main mantras of the telecommunications industry at the end of the last decade of the 20th century was “build it and they will come.” Those were times of exuberance and exaggerated predictions about the demand for services. The important thing at the time was to place as many transponders in orbit, exponentially expand terrestrial and submarine fiber optic networks, and increase the population coverage of mobile networks.

The studies of hundreds of consultants, from the smallest boutique type, to the largest with global reach, could not be wrong. Neither were the recipes of multilateral entities that saw no possible ceiling for the unbridled growth in the number of contracted lines.

Advertisements at the time featured fully connected homes, and the advent of 3G promised ubiquitous connectivity that would close the digital divide in emerging countries. We were in an unstoppable phase of development, the future was in our hands and nothing would be able to stop so much modernity.

Until the bankruptcies started. Many followed the dogma as a religion and built the infrastructure waiting for customers who never showed up. The promises of modernity were set aside and in their place we saw the return of blocks of radioelectric spectrum, the indefinite postponement of spectrum allocation processes, and the multiple daily announcements of bankruptcies of companies in the sector. Those were very hard years for a telecommunications sector badly hurt by an industry that had become a hyperbolic ghost in every way. Connectivity was not sold, panaceas were marketed that never came true.

Fast forward a couple of decades and many of the same symptoms are seen in the telecommunications sector. The difference is that now we are experiencing it with a small fraction of the companies that existed at the beginning of the decade and the hype is no longer a viral phenomenon, but a few that make a lot of noise.

What is interesting is the contradiction that is observed in the messages. On the one hand, they applaud the arrival of low-orbit satellites as a key element to eliminate the digital divide and, on the other, they complain that it will be years before connectivity reaches the entire population, so it will take a long time to correct the difference. between connected and not connected. Did nobody warn you that with the satellite fleets the coverage is 100% of the population and also of the geography?

Then there are those who repeat the precepts of 3G, but this time with a 5G that will be able to eliminate differences in connection speeds in remote and rural areas of Latin America. Yes, they are the ones who talk about how the new technology will be able to cover those areas that make up 95% of the regional geography, but are home to only 18% of the population in an efficient and profitable manner for investors.

Today, like yesterday, we see that the situation is not so simple. That the letter in decrees, declarations or laws do not have much weight unless investment is assigned to ensure their implementation. Thus, the declaration of the Internet as a human right remains like a beautiful Christmas wreath, useless if the measure is not accompanied by concrete actions to make it reach the majority of the population.

So today, like yesterday, officials realize that coverage is not everything. Elements such as investment and public policy act as filters that accelerate or prevent actions aimed at increasing the use of digital technologies. Issues such as education in the use of new technologies, the development of applications that meet local needs and the establishment of technical training programs in rural and remote areas are some of the ideas that create consensus but are rarely implemented by the authorities. . It is much easier to allocate the money to the urban areas that are home to the majority of the population, which in the end are the ones that elect and re-elect the rulers of each jurisdiction.

The result is that every time we talk about digital transformation or smart territories, we are focusing on urban initiatives that, due to population density, have more opportunities to be successful than the almost always deficient rural investments. At the end of the day, the most disconnected are the ones with the fewest resources to complain about the lack of care provided by the government. They are also the ones who have the least time to waste, since with more than 70% to 80% of labor informality, they have little spare time to worry about whether or not there is access to social networks.

Likewise, if any protest is heard, they are reminded that with 5G all connectivity problems and digital divides will be solved. Whoever says otherwise simply does not want to see the healthy social and economic development of Latin America, since the big consultancies and the main telecommunications experts in the region cannot be wrong. Who cares about eating if you can play World of Warcraft or record a Tik Tok?