Accused of Gatekeeping India's Internet, Facebook CEO Lashes Out
Mark Zuckerberg dismissed widespread concerns that social networking giant's 'Free Basics' program violates net neutrality and internet freedom
People across India are crying foul at Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg's scheme to bring internet "Free Basics" to the South Asian country, and the multi-billionaire is unhappy about it.
In an op-ed published Monday in the Times of India, Zuckerberg lashed out at those raising the alarm over an initiative they say violates the principles of net neutrality and allows the social networking giant to capture India's internet.
Striking a sanctimonious tone, Zuckerberg compared critics of Free Basics to opponents of "free, basic health care," libraries, and public education. "The data is clear. Free Basics is a bridge to the full internet and digital equality," Zuckerberg wrote. "If we accept that everyone deserves access to the internet, then we must surely support free basic internet services."
"In the ultimate Orwellian doublespeak, 'free' for Zuckerberg means 'privatized,' a far cry from privacy -- a word Zuckerberg does not believe in."
--Vandana Shiva, philosopher, environmental activist, eco-feminist
"Surprisingly, over the last year, there's been a big debate about this in India," the Facebook CEO continued. "What reason is there for denying people free access to vital services for communication, education, healthcare, employment, farming, and women's rights?"
But activists, regulators, and ordinary people across India say there are plenty of reasons to be skeptical of the program--which partners with mobile service providers to allow access to some websites without payment for data, but only through the Facebook system.
Nikhil Pahwa, an organizer with Save the Internet-India, raised the question earlier this week in the Times of India: "Why has Facebook chosen the current model for Free Basics, which gives users a selection of around a hundred sites (including a personal blog and a real estate company homepage), while rejecting the option of giving the poor free access to the open, plural and diverse web?"
According to Save the Internet, the program allows Facebook to capture India's market, which is already Facebook's second-largest worldwide. "Facebook doesn't pay for Free Basics; telecom operators do," the advocacy group wrote earlier this week. Where do they make money from? From users who pay."
But according to Vandana Shiva--a philosopher, environmental activist, and eco-feminist--the reality is even more sinister. Reliance Communications, the Indian company partnering with Facebook on the program, "obtained land for its rural cell phone towers from the government of India and grabbed land from farmers for [special economic zones] through violence and deceit," Shiva wrote earlier this week. "As a result and at no cost, Reliance has a huge rural, semi-urban, and suburban user base -- especially farmers."
"In the ultimate Orwellian doublespeak, 'free' for Zuckerberg means 'privatized,' a far cry from privacy -- a word Zuckerberg does not believe in," Shiva continued. "And like corporate-written 'free' trade agreements, Free Basics is anything but free for citizens. It is an enclosure of the commons, which are 'commons' because they guarantee access to the commoner, whether it be seed, water, information or internet."
According to Save the Internet, "Free Basics isn't about bringing people online. It's about keeping Facebook and its partners free while everything else remains paid. Users who pay for Internet access can still access Free Basics for free, giving Facebook and its partners an advantage. Free Basics is a violation of net neutrality."
In a country where hundreds of thousands of people have mobilized to protect net neutrality, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) recently ordered Reliance to halt services. At the same time, the body is investigating potential net neutrality violations. The regulator is nearing the end of a public consultation period that began in March.
"Why has Facebook chosen the current model for Free Basics, which gives users a selection of around a hundred sites (including a personal blog and a real estate company homepage), while rejecting the option of giving the poor free access to the open, plural and diverse web?"
--Nikhil Pahwa, Save the Internet-India
In his op-ed, Zuckerberg directly appealed to Indians to pressure the TRAI to abandon its concerns.
Criticism, however, will not be easy to quell as it spans the globe. As Jeremy Gillula of the U.S.-based Electronic Frontier Foundation recently pointed out, this set-up puts Facebook "in a privileged position to monitor its users' traffic, and allows it to act as gatekeeper (or, depending on the situation, censor)."
While Facebook has taken small steps to address concerns over privacy and application criteria for websites to participate, Gillula argues that, effectively, Free Basics is "still a walled garden."
Zuckerberg, who has visited India twice and was recently photographed embracing Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, appears poised to continue his fight to promote--and spread--Free Basics.
The outcome of the coming battle has global implications, as the Facebook moves to spread the program--initially dubbed Internet.org--across the globe despite widespread concerns. According to Zuckerberg, Facebook has already partnered on the program with over 35 mobile operators in more than 30 countries.
"India is expected to have 500 million Internet users by the end of 2017, and what kind of Internet they get access to is important for our country," wrote Pahwa of Save the Internet. "The battle for Net Neutrality, with the last and current TRAI consultations included, is the battle for our internet freedom."
Urgent. It's never been this bad.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just four days to go in our Spring Campaign, we are not even halfway to our goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
People across India are crying foul at Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg's scheme to bring internet "Free Basics" to the South Asian country, and the multi-billionaire is unhappy about it.
In an op-ed published Monday in the Times of India, Zuckerberg lashed out at those raising the alarm over an initiative they say violates the principles of net neutrality and allows the social networking giant to capture India's internet.
Striking a sanctimonious tone, Zuckerberg compared critics of Free Basics to opponents of "free, basic health care," libraries, and public education. "The data is clear. Free Basics is a bridge to the full internet and digital equality," Zuckerberg wrote. "If we accept that everyone deserves access to the internet, then we must surely support free basic internet services."
"In the ultimate Orwellian doublespeak, 'free' for Zuckerberg means 'privatized,' a far cry from privacy -- a word Zuckerberg does not believe in."
--Vandana Shiva, philosopher, environmental activist, eco-feminist
"Surprisingly, over the last year, there's been a big debate about this in India," the Facebook CEO continued. "What reason is there for denying people free access to vital services for communication, education, healthcare, employment, farming, and women's rights?"
But activists, regulators, and ordinary people across India say there are plenty of reasons to be skeptical of the program--which partners with mobile service providers to allow access to some websites without payment for data, but only through the Facebook system.
Nikhil Pahwa, an organizer with Save the Internet-India, raised the question earlier this week in the Times of India: "Why has Facebook chosen the current model for Free Basics, which gives users a selection of around a hundred sites (including a personal blog and a real estate company homepage), while rejecting the option of giving the poor free access to the open, plural and diverse web?"
According to Save the Internet, the program allows Facebook to capture India's market, which is already Facebook's second-largest worldwide. "Facebook doesn't pay for Free Basics; telecom operators do," the advocacy group wrote earlier this week. Where do they make money from? From users who pay."
But according to Vandana Shiva--a philosopher, environmental activist, and eco-feminist--the reality is even more sinister. Reliance Communications, the Indian company partnering with Facebook on the program, "obtained land for its rural cell phone towers from the government of India and grabbed land from farmers for [special economic zones] through violence and deceit," Shiva wrote earlier this week. "As a result and at no cost, Reliance has a huge rural, semi-urban, and suburban user base -- especially farmers."
"In the ultimate Orwellian doublespeak, 'free' for Zuckerberg means 'privatized,' a far cry from privacy -- a word Zuckerberg does not believe in," Shiva continued. "And like corporate-written 'free' trade agreements, Free Basics is anything but free for citizens. It is an enclosure of the commons, which are 'commons' because they guarantee access to the commoner, whether it be seed, water, information or internet."
According to Save the Internet, "Free Basics isn't about bringing people online. It's about keeping Facebook and its partners free while everything else remains paid. Users who pay for Internet access can still access Free Basics for free, giving Facebook and its partners an advantage. Free Basics is a violation of net neutrality."
In a country where hundreds of thousands of people have mobilized to protect net neutrality, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) recently ordered Reliance to halt services. At the same time, the body is investigating potential net neutrality violations. The regulator is nearing the end of a public consultation period that began in March.
"Why has Facebook chosen the current model for Free Basics, which gives users a selection of around a hundred sites (including a personal blog and a real estate company homepage), while rejecting the option of giving the poor free access to the open, plural and diverse web?"
--Nikhil Pahwa, Save the Internet-India
In his op-ed, Zuckerberg directly appealed to Indians to pressure the TRAI to abandon its concerns.
Criticism, however, will not be easy to quell as it spans the globe. As Jeremy Gillula of the U.S.-based Electronic Frontier Foundation recently pointed out, this set-up puts Facebook "in a privileged position to monitor its users' traffic, and allows it to act as gatekeeper (or, depending on the situation, censor)."
While Facebook has taken small steps to address concerns over privacy and application criteria for websites to participate, Gillula argues that, effectively, Free Basics is "still a walled garden."
Zuckerberg, who has visited India twice and was recently photographed embracing Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, appears poised to continue his fight to promote--and spread--Free Basics.
The outcome of the coming battle has global implications, as the Facebook moves to spread the program--initially dubbed Internet.org--across the globe despite widespread concerns. According to Zuckerberg, Facebook has already partnered on the program with over 35 mobile operators in more than 30 countries.
"India is expected to have 500 million Internet users by the end of 2017, and what kind of Internet they get access to is important for our country," wrote Pahwa of Save the Internet. "The battle for Net Neutrality, with the last and current TRAI consultations included, is the battle for our internet freedom."
People across India are crying foul at Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg's scheme to bring internet "Free Basics" to the South Asian country, and the multi-billionaire is unhappy about it.
In an op-ed published Monday in the Times of India, Zuckerberg lashed out at those raising the alarm over an initiative they say violates the principles of net neutrality and allows the social networking giant to capture India's internet.
Striking a sanctimonious tone, Zuckerberg compared critics of Free Basics to opponents of "free, basic health care," libraries, and public education. "The data is clear. Free Basics is a bridge to the full internet and digital equality," Zuckerberg wrote. "If we accept that everyone deserves access to the internet, then we must surely support free basic internet services."
"In the ultimate Orwellian doublespeak, 'free' for Zuckerberg means 'privatized,' a far cry from privacy -- a word Zuckerberg does not believe in."
--Vandana Shiva, philosopher, environmental activist, eco-feminist
"Surprisingly, over the last year, there's been a big debate about this in India," the Facebook CEO continued. "What reason is there for denying people free access to vital services for communication, education, healthcare, employment, farming, and women's rights?"
But activists, regulators, and ordinary people across India say there are plenty of reasons to be skeptical of the program--which partners with mobile service providers to allow access to some websites without payment for data, but only through the Facebook system.
Nikhil Pahwa, an organizer with Save the Internet-India, raised the question earlier this week in the Times of India: "Why has Facebook chosen the current model for Free Basics, which gives users a selection of around a hundred sites (including a personal blog and a real estate company homepage), while rejecting the option of giving the poor free access to the open, plural and diverse web?"
According to Save the Internet, the program allows Facebook to capture India's market, which is already Facebook's second-largest worldwide. "Facebook doesn't pay for Free Basics; telecom operators do," the advocacy group wrote earlier this week. Where do they make money from? From users who pay."
But according to Vandana Shiva--a philosopher, environmental activist, and eco-feminist--the reality is even more sinister. Reliance Communications, the Indian company partnering with Facebook on the program, "obtained land for its rural cell phone towers from the government of India and grabbed land from farmers for [special economic zones] through violence and deceit," Shiva wrote earlier this week. "As a result and at no cost, Reliance has a huge rural, semi-urban, and suburban user base -- especially farmers."
"In the ultimate Orwellian doublespeak, 'free' for Zuckerberg means 'privatized,' a far cry from privacy -- a word Zuckerberg does not believe in," Shiva continued. "And like corporate-written 'free' trade agreements, Free Basics is anything but free for citizens. It is an enclosure of the commons, which are 'commons' because they guarantee access to the commoner, whether it be seed, water, information or internet."
According to Save the Internet, "Free Basics isn't about bringing people online. It's about keeping Facebook and its partners free while everything else remains paid. Users who pay for Internet access can still access Free Basics for free, giving Facebook and its partners an advantage. Free Basics is a violation of net neutrality."
In a country where hundreds of thousands of people have mobilized to protect net neutrality, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) recently ordered Reliance to halt services. At the same time, the body is investigating potential net neutrality violations. The regulator is nearing the end of a public consultation period that began in March.
"Why has Facebook chosen the current model for Free Basics, which gives users a selection of around a hundred sites (including a personal blog and a real estate company homepage), while rejecting the option of giving the poor free access to the open, plural and diverse web?"
--Nikhil Pahwa, Save the Internet-India
In his op-ed, Zuckerberg directly appealed to Indians to pressure the TRAI to abandon its concerns.
Criticism, however, will not be easy to quell as it spans the globe. As Jeremy Gillula of the U.S.-based Electronic Frontier Foundation recently pointed out, this set-up puts Facebook "in a privileged position to monitor its users' traffic, and allows it to act as gatekeeper (or, depending on the situation, censor)."
While Facebook has taken small steps to address concerns over privacy and application criteria for websites to participate, Gillula argues that, effectively, Free Basics is "still a walled garden."
Zuckerberg, who has visited India twice and was recently photographed embracing Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, appears poised to continue his fight to promote--and spread--Free Basics.
The outcome of the coming battle has global implications, as the Facebook moves to spread the program--initially dubbed Internet.org--across the globe despite widespread concerns. According to Zuckerberg, Facebook has already partnered on the program with over 35 mobile operators in more than 30 countries.
"India is expected to have 500 million Internet users by the end of 2017, and what kind of Internet they get access to is important for our country," wrote Pahwa of Save the Internet. "The battle for Net Neutrality, with the last and current TRAI consultations included, is the battle for our internet freedom."