internet cable dilemma

Recently had a last mile experience when Comcast stopped providing service to my building because they couldn't access their own utility pole!
Sometime in the dim past, copper TV cable service was installed in the back of my building; Comcast now uses the wires for TV and internet. My cable stretches across three fenced-in backyards to a pole located on property facing an adjacent street. Here's a diagram:

cable diagram

Last week a branch cracked off the Giant Dead Tree (about five stories high) behind Bldg B-2, breaking the cable that extends from the backyard of Bldg B-1 to my building, Bldg A-2. In order to repair the cable, the Comcast technician would have to get the permission of owners or tenants of Bldg B-1 to let him into their backyard so he could climb the pole there. He couldn't get access, so he says, so he gave up and went on to his next job.

Comcast's customer service said the only way I could get the connection restored was to try to convince the residents of Bldg B-1 to give them access to Comcast's pole -- to act as the company's real estate agent, in other words. As if! Comcast was behaving as if it still had a monopoly but FIOS recently came to our neighborhood (via a competitor provider) so I have an alternative to knocking on doors on their behalf.

the earth is flat (this is not Thomas Friedman saying this)

The following press release came via email, for an exhibition at carriage trade gallery, "the earth is flat":

Suspicion, vengeance, and irrationality have become the new norm. As in previous times of radical social change, zealotry and demagoguery surge as faith in the established order recedes. The collective pursuit of democratic ideals, built on Enlightenment principles never quite fulfilled, suffers waves of backlash, resentment built up from centuries of promise and disappointment. Democracy, gamed by the twin forces of privatization and media spectacle, is forced to watch its failures writ large, its susceptibility to rule by personality at last delivering the role of leader as farce.

Retreating further and further from a collective sphere into the digital bantustans of social media, the entity once known as the public concedes to the machinations and experiments of technocrats in the service of youthful billionaires whose unassuming presence distract us from otherwise obvious comparisons to robber barons of the 19th century. Mining not coal or iron but the depths of billions of individual psyches, the growth model of unfettered capitalism turns in on itself, atomizing individuals into dark recesses of a new medieval realm which thrives on irrational fervor, antagonism, and polarization.

Pit against one another and therefore the whole, society gropes backward to a darker, unenlightened past that technology promised to deliver us from. As YouTube's "recommend" algorithms, fueled by contempt and suspicion for empirical inquiry, send us down the rabbit hole of sensation and conspiracy, we're offered proof, once again, that the earth is flat.

The words "the earth is flat" in the last sentence link to a YouTube video of a BBC documentary about people who believe the Earth is literally flat and have meet-and-greet conventions in hotels where they discuss this concept. We're supposed to be horrified that "social media" makes such intellectual devolution possible. Yet the link is another time-waster, inviting us to gawk at weirdos about a subject that doesn't matter. On the other hand, perhaps the weirdos have a point, that believing in the old-style flat earth and getting together to hobknob about it is as worthwhile an activity as watching BBC and clicking YouTube links. Their concept certainly trumps New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman's paradoxical, not very well thought out view that the Earth is being made "flat" by globalization (globes are round, aren't they?).

carriage trade and its director Peter Scott have a fine tradition of presenting socially critical art but it's debatable how well served we are by the style of apocalyptic writing above. Let's break it down a bit:

As in previous times of radical social change, zealotry and demagoguery surge as faith in the established order recedes.

Yet how much radical social change are we actually seeing? The established order, as in the old military industrial complex, thrives. Its current project is to get the US into a war with Iran or Russia (both suicidal). Newspapers have receded in influence but propaganda coming from the top still presents a far greater danger than flat-earthers meeting at the Marriott.

Democracy, gamed by the twin forces of privatization and media spectacle, is forced to watch its failures writ large, its susceptibility to rule by personality at last delivering the role of leader as farce.

Yet the confused electorate was not wrong in its desire to "throw the bums out of office," rejecting two horrible candidates the media had decided were inevitable (a Clinton and a Bush). The platform of the supposedly "democratic" party was so compromised and unappealing that a demagogue got in. This has nothing to do with self-reinforcing popular narratives controlled by Silicon Valley.

The second paragraph of the press release is eloquent but shifts the focus to the new robber barons without considering their role in providing cover for, and distraction from, the activities of the old ones (energy, transportation, armaments, finance), and also, doesn't consider what can be done about it -- i.e., not using social media or succumbing to its flighty narratives.