Those things all have much more redundancy than comms. The US has three mobile internet providers (there's also MVNO's, but they use the same physical infrastructure as the big three), and any given home will usually only have access to two or three landline ISP's in terms of infra (e.g. cable, DSL, fiber).

In contrast, food can be shipped in to a city from innumerable farms, ditto for clothing. Home construction, there's lot of different home builders around, it's not a natural monopoly like communication.

For food production, I don't really have to trust any particular two or three farming companies -- if they fuck up, food can be shipped in from elsewhere. Whereas if my local ISP's are exploitative or simply incompetent, what's my recourse?

No one has monopoly control of the infrastructure in those industries. Anyone can buy and farm land, textile plants, etc. Its not possible to simply lay more conduit and compete.

What "infrastructure" means needs to be nailed down before this can be discussed.

Internet service is seen as something in the same league as roads, power, water, and other utilities. Things that require public rights of way, extensive digging, cooperations among many jurisdictions or land owners, and special rules to make it all possible.

Clothing, food, and construction are all businesses that don't require that level of centralized coordination. Anyone can open their own bakery, or buy a farm. Anyone can set up sewing machines and purchase fabric, or get a contractors' license and start nailing sticks of wood together. Government still sets standards, of course. But these businesses don't have inherent monopolies the same way infrastructure businesses do.