Many individuals and governments consider Internet access an imperative for economic development. More than half of the world doesn’t have reliable access to the Internet. Initiatives like Internet.org are attempting to change that, but not without backlash.
Internet.org is a partnership led by Facebook and including Samsung, Ericsson, MediaTek, Opera, Nokia and Qualcomm. The idea is to provide access to services like Babycenter, which provides health information to mothers, or SmartBusiness, which takes you through the mechanics of starting a business.
However, the entire concept has been flagged in some circles as a violation of net neutrality in that Facebook and its partners act as the arbiter of content accessible through the service – commonly known as a walled garden. Quartz India writer Alice Truong called it “poor Internet for poor people” in a Dec. 28 article.
To add context, India’s telecommunications regulator asked Facebook partner Reliance, a major service provider in India, to shutdown Internet.org in the country as the net neutrality issue is considered. That prompted Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg to write an op-ed piece published in the Times of India that asks, “Who could possibly be against this?”
“Surprisingly, over the last year there’s been a big debate about this in India,” Zuckerberg wrote. “Instead of wanting to give people access to some basic Internet services for free, critics of the program continue to spread false claims – even if that means leaving behind a billion people. Instead of recognizing the fact that Free Basics is opening up the whole Internet, they continue to claim – falsely – that this will make the Internet more like a walled garden. Instead of welcoming Free Basics as an open platform that will partner with any telco and allows any developer to offer services to people for free, they claim – falsely – that this will give people less choice. Instead of recognizing that Free Basics fully respects net neutrality, they claim – falsely – the exact opposite.”
Zuckerberg equates Internet access to access to healthcare and education, among other fundamental services.
Truong makes the counterpoint, writing that Zuckerberg’s “arguments don’t directly address the concerns of net neutrality activists. For the people who choose not to upgrade to or can’t afford to pay for full Internet access, Internet.org does indeed provide a walled garden of online content. Millions of people already have a skewed perception of the Web, believing Facebook to be the Internet, a Quartz analysis has shown. Furthermore, while Facebook can add more telecom partners, which would theoretically open up the number of sites and services Internet.org users could access for free, it currently has only one partner in India, Reliance.”
Internet.org is operational in more than 30 countries. What do you think? Let me know @seankinneyRCR.
