In fact, according to a study reported on by CNN, if you want cheap and/or free Internet while staying at a hotel, you would be wise to avoid the five star offerings, and stay at cheaper hotel instead. According to the report, most of the higher end hotels charge customers a premium for Internet access, which, after paying in excess of $500 a night to stay, is pretty ridiculous. It becomes even more silly when you realize the cheaper hotels don’t go that route, instead preferring to “comp” Internet access for their customers.

From the findings:

Three-quarters of luxury and “upper upscale” hotel chains — segments that include brands such as Four Seasons, Hilton and Marriott — charge for in-room Internet access, according to the American Hotel & Lodging Association 2010 Lodging Survey conducted by STR Global.

In comparison, just 2% of full-service midrange hotel chains — a segment that includes brands such as Holiday Inn — ask you to pay a fee for surfing the Web in your room, the survey found.

Clearly, the lesson here is avoid the big time hotels if you’re a business traveler who needs to connect to the Internet while in your hotel room. This becomes even more obvious when the reason why these expensive hotels charge a premium for Internet access–because they can.

Granted, the sheets and pillows at the four seasons are better than they are at the Holiday Inn, but is luxury the motivating factor when deciding on a hotel or is affordability? Obviously, if you’re paying for $500 a night, you can probably afford to pay for Internet access, but the question is, why would you? Especially when less expensive hotels don’t gouge customers in such a manner?

As with most things related to supply and demand, as long as these customers willingly pay for their Internet access, these expensive hotels will continue to charge for it. If business travelers began eschewing the more expensive hotels that charge for cheaper places that don’t, it’s easy to see these charges either reducing or disappearing altogether.

The question is, are these kinds of travelers willing to swallow their pride and stay in cheaper hotel that has free Internet access or is the allure of the local Four Seasons just that hard to overcome?

The survey found that the majority of Americans (65%) feel they cannot live without Internet access.  In addition 71 percent said it is important or very important to have Internet-enabled devices, such as laptops, netbooks and mobile Internet devices that offer them updates on important issues including the economy.

Most U.S. adults recognize the Internet as a key tool in today’s economy for managing personal finances, finding bargains while shopping online, finding information about dining out, shopping for clothes and gym memberships.

Nearly half of women (46%) and 30 percent of men would rather go without sex for 2 weeks than give up Internet access for the same amount of time. For women 18-34 it was 40 percent and for women 35-44 it was 52 percent. For men 18-34, it was 39 percent.

Almost all of Americans (95%) feel that it is very important, or somewhat important for people to have devices that allow them to access the Internet. Eighty-seven percent say Internet access has helped them save money. Eighty-four percent have save money by comparing prices online and finding the best deals before making a purchase.

Over half (60%) have save money just by shopping online and sixty-five percent say the Internet helped them save money by finding coupons or special Internet promotions.

The majority (61%) of women would rather give up watching TV for 2 weeks instead of giving up access to the Internet for only 1 week, and more than half of people agree.

Nine out of 10 adults (91%) indicated that the ability to access the Internet has improved at least one aspect of their lives. Seventy-eight percent said it has allowed them to stay in better touch with family and friends. Close to half (47%) say they are able to better manage their finances because of the Internet through activities such as online banking and paying bills.
 

The airline has announced that it is "marking the beginning of the next wireless revolution."  A bit overstated perhaps. They’re offering in-flight Internet access at $12.95 a flight.

Anyhow, this offering comes in light of a new deal American has made with Aircell for its mobile broadband service Gogo. The service is available immediately on cross-country flights in the U.S. over three hours for the above fee. American notes in a statement that cell phone and VoIP use is not included, but think of all the Twittering you can do!

The service should also inspire a great deal more productivity on business trips – a welcome alternative to listening to the guy beside you snore and working out emergency survival scenarios in your head when you don’t want to watch the latest Martin Lawrence comedy that is being offered on board.

On second thought, maybe "revolution" isn’t such an overstatement after all.  I expect that more airlines and service providers will be reaching similar deals in the near future, so stay tuned.

An annual phone survey of households by Parks found 20 million households have no Internet access, making up approximately 18 percent of all U.S. households.

"Nearly one out of three household heads has never used a computer to create a document," said John Barrett, director, research, Parks Associates. "These data underscore the significant digital divide between the connected majority and the unconnected minority that rarely, if ever, uses a computer."

Age and education play a role in this divide. One-half of those who have never used email are over 65, and 56 percent had no education beyond high school.

Just seven percent of the 20 million without Internet access plan to get an Internet connection within the next year. The study did find a decline in the number of households that were disconnected compared to previous years. At the end of 2006, 29 percent of households (31 million homes) did not have Internet access, citing low perceived value of the Internet.

"Internet connections have slowly increased in U.S. households, but getting the disconnected minority online will continue to be difficult," Barrett said.

"Age and economics are important factors, but the heart of the challenge is deeper. Many people just don’t see a reason to use computers and do not associate technology with the needs and demands of their daily lives."
 

The reasoning behind the shutting down of the Internet was inconsistent. "Shutting down the Internet service will depend on security plans and on the Ministry of Telecommunication," said Mostafa Pourmohammadi, the interior minister.

Senior election official Muhammad Javad Mahmoudi, said a shutdown would allow the government to have unimpeded Internet service for the election, despite the fact the governments Internet connections have been upgraded.

Iran has been widely  known to censor and block Web sites along with putting journalists in prison for speaking out against the regime. Reporters Without Borders lists Iran 166th in its Worldwide Press Freedom Index for 2007 out of a possible 169 countries.

Reporters Without Borders says in its annual report, "Iran comes last in the region in the Reporters Without Borders worldwide press freedom index. Evin prison, overlooking Teheran, is the region’s biggest jail for journalists and at the end of the year, five journalists were still languishing there for ‘undermining national security’ by simply being outspoken."

"Only journalists in media outlets close to the regime’s leaders (and thus protected by them) are allowed to criticize President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s government."

If Southwest decides to offer Internet in-flight on a regular basis, they will join other airlines who now offer the service. This includes: JetBlue, American Airlines, Virgin Airlines, and Alaska Airlines. All except Alaska Airlines and Southwest use an air-to-ground cellular network.

JetBlue started offering the service just last month. They do restrict the sites or programs people can access while in the air. Most concerns are about passengers using VoIP or passengers accessing porn sites. Perhaps some restrictions also have to do with limited bandwidth.

The longer the flight, the more willing people seem to be to pay for Internet access. A recent survey by Forrester Research found that 26 percent of leisure travelers would pay $10 for Internet access on a two-to-four-hour flight. The percentage jumps to 45 percent if the flight is longer than four hours. Initial reports I’ve seen cite slow or spotty connections rather than issues offending customers. What I wonder about is if people are packing extra batteries or how hard it is to plug in your laptop (which is my number one complaint at conferences, and in my car – not enough plugs).

A search of the Delta airline blog and other searches weren’t conclusive. I don’t think Delta offers in-flight Internet access. They do let you check-in with your mobile device and scan the “bar code” that you save to your PDA or Smart phone at the kiosk to get your boarding pass.

If you’ve used the Internet in the air recently, what has been your experience? Have you been annoyed, or offended by other passengers using the service? How much did you pay? Has the connection been good or patchy? What airline did you fly?

Comments

Just like the early days of the World Wide Web, FreePress.net and SaveTheInternet.com fear that the mobile web will be a walled garden with limited access as telecommunications companies and wireless companies seek to capitalize on every entry point and turn consumers take.

At the heart of this issue is the outcome of the 700 MHz auction, soon to be kicked off by the Federal Communications Commissions. Upon the pressure of Google and counter-pressure of the telecommunications industry, the FCC took what activists call a "half-step" toward open access requirements by requiring true mobility between networks and the ability to use the application of your choice.

However, the winners of the auction (in which the field of players is now smaller given the folding of Frontline) are not required, as Google requested to guaranteed any type of Network Neutrality or to wholesale spectrum in order to increase wireless competition.

The result of that could be that those who might have enjoyed Internet access similar to the access they enjoy with fixed connections (i.e., unlimited data streams – unless you’re a Comcast customer using torrents) will have to shell out cash at every turn, thus limiting the possibilities an open wireless net could produce.

SaveTheInternet.com puts it this way:

"[T]he promise of more universal access will only come to be if those who win 700 band licenses are actually interested in bringing choice to the market.
 

"Companies like AT&T and Verizon hope to horde this spectrum and stifle competitive and cheaper alternatives to their closed networks. Letting them gain exclusive control over the 700 band would likely spell disaster — a wireless world that’s still dominated by a handful of carriers with a track record of price gouging and an aversion to innovation."
 

And likely the US will fall further behind in broadband and mobile Internet access as powerbrokers put profits and shareholders above the wants and needs of customers.

Sometimes, depending on where you live, a sex offender can be someone who went streaking at a ballgame, or somebody busted at the local rub-and-tug. The definition can be very broad, and degrees of offense can be expansive.

The KIDS Act, passed in New Jersey, like proposed laws in other states, would prevent these types of sex offenders from using a "computer or any other device with Internet capability," unless it is for work-related purposes.

Parole officers would regularly supervise, of course.

Now, when it comes to child molesters/rapists, I don’t have any interest in getting into recidivism rates or debates about the effectiveness of rehabilitation, as in this InternetNews.com article; as far as I’m concerned they should be sentenced to a slow, tortuous death via means similar to the nature of their offense (i.e., something horribly invasive and icky). That’s why I can’t be king; my vengeance would be great.

But aside from the broad definition of what makes someone a sex offender, Technology and Marketing Law Blog writer Eric Goldman points out that the New Jersey law suffers from grammatical ambiguity that will eventually make it overreaching. Ten years into the future, for example, a device with Internet capability could be mean just about anything.

Goldman writes, "A TiVo can access the Internet–is that off-limits to sex offenders? When a refrigerator is Internet-accessible, will that be off-limits? Cars are Internet-connected; are they off-limits too? This law makes about as much sense as banning sex offenders from using our road system (which they also use to commit their crimes)."

Yes, that could be a problem. Like I said, I don’t really care what awful things befall the molesters, but blocking access to the Internet because an 18-year-old kid stripped off and ran across a football field seems a little excessive and potentially problematic. 
 

According to the New York Times, JetBlue Airways began its first test Tuesday, with free email and IM on one of its planes. American Airlines, Virgin Airlines and Alaska Airlines all have plans to begin full Internet access. The Times says access will cost from $10 per flight. The wireless Internet access will not be available during take off and landing.

On JetBlue’s test flight Wednesday, the Times likened the service to dial up with its delays and “dropped calls.” The touch-and-go access is part of the reason why JetBlue isn’t charging during its test.

As for other carriers’ plans, American will have its test plane equipped this month. Alaska Airlines still plans to begin its test in spring, with plans to equip the full fleet by the end of 2009 if all goes well.

Is there a market for this? Forrester Research says there is:

But other companies are convinced that plenty of travelers will pay for more robust Web access. That view is bolstered by a recent survey by Forrester Research that found that 26 percent of leisure travelers would pay $10 for Internet access on a two-to-four-hour flight and 45 percent would pay that on a flight longer than four hours.

Voice calls from cellphones. will still not be allowed.

Comments

The GIA wants to move the journalists to a newly built pressroom at the Central Government Complex. Most journalists say they will not move to the new briefing center and accuse the government of attempting to muzzle the press.

Journalists who cover nine government agencies issued a joint protest statement. "The government’s cut-off of the Internet and telephone connections in the pressrooms is an anti-democratic and reckless act that seriously infringes the people’s right to know and damages the watchdog function of the press."

The government campaign started when president Roh Moo-hyun told a cabinet meeting in January that reporters conspire to write critical stories about his government. The Korea News Editor’s Association says the entire plan is being used as a way to oppress media freedom. Others critical of the move said its reminiscent of the days when South Korean dictators censored the media.