Odd article starts out looking at conflict between government agencies and private companies: But the information about government bodies using Wi-Fi is off-base. For instance, the piece notes that many airports are run by government agencies that offer Wi-Fi in the terminals, presumably for free. All the large commercial airports I know of that have Wi-Fi charge for the service and most use third-party companies to manage the networks. Perhaps the author is referring to smaller airports for private planes?
The article also points to the fact that agencies like the FCC run their own Wi-Fi hot spots in their lobbies. So does the author think that instead Wayport ought to offer service there? It seems reasonable to me that the FCC should offer its own Wi-Fi service to its workers and visitors.
This is a pretty misguided article by someone who doesn't have a firm grasp of the free vs. fee topic.