This is a puff piece with a linkbait headline. In no way is Google Fiber a "lesson on free market failure." Moreover, the article concludes we need the all too

This is a puff piece with a linkbait headline. In no way is Google Fiber a "lesson on free market failure." Moreover, the article concludes we need the all too broad "simplified" regulation for fiber/cable networks. This is all launched off of generating a straw man argument of a conservative and then going from there. Laying down a network is a huge undertaking. Not only is it expensive in terms of infrastructure costs, but it turns out that you can't just dig up people's yards in order to lay your cable down. You have to (rightly) go through a lot of red tape to do so. No person in their right minds would ever back complete deregulation of a market which essentially requires imminent domain to be imbued. Moreover, Kansas City did not deregulate. Kansas City is granting Google part in the oligopoly--Google did not arise as a fiber competitor without help from the city. Kansas City did, however, seek Google out and entice them to come to their city to provide competition. This article is a long-winded straw man argument without much substance. I was hoping it would expound on some of the ways that cities can adopt broadband-friendly policies, or at least figure out why Google Fiber was a free market failure.