You've run into a chicken-or-the-egg scenario. The people that are in rural areas that don't have broadband are the people that DON'T need it. If they did, they wouldn't be in rural areas that don't have it.

This article speaks to a generation that would crap their pants if their DVR broke. Typically when people move to the rural areas, their moving to GET AWAY from the denser population with the subtle poisons that it brings and perceive a lack of broadband access as nothing more than a minor inconvenience.

You can't outpace the economics. If enough people move out in the rural areas that want it, it will appear in one form or another. It will be more expensive until enough people subscribe to bring the cost per customer down, then it will become more reasonable. Wash, rinse, repeat.

The concept of treating it like a government-regulated utility doesn't even warrant intelligent debate. Do we really look back on typical governmental programs and think they were a smashing success that should be built upon? No way.