Facebook Freebasics
The fundamental flaw with Facebook Freebasics is that it voilates net neutrality. Free basics doesn't give complete internet access to the users, only select services. Therefore users have to use paid data packs to access services or view content that are not tied up with free basics. Net neutrality forbids charging differentially based on content, and therefore, free basics violates net neutrality.
Although Facebook claims that it doesn't select the services to provide in free basics and it is up to the developers of the website/app to decide whether or not to join free basics, the terms and conditions doesn't allow every service, website or app to join free basics. This pretty much makes Facebook decide what services should be provided under free basics. As per their technical and participation guidelines, these are the restrictions:
- Services should not use VoIP, video, file transfer, or photos larger than 200 KB.
- Websites must be built to be optimized for browsing on both feature and smartphones and in limited bandwidth scenarios.
- In addition, websites must be properly integrated with Internet.org to allow zero rating and must meet technical guidelines.
- ...your URLs may be rewritten and embedded content (like javascript and content originating from another domain) removed. In addition, secure content is not supported and may not load.
- mobile websites should work in the absence of JavaScript, SVG images and WOFF font types, iframes, video and large images, flash and Java applets. If websites are found to contain any of the above post-implementation, we will block them until we can confirm that the content has been removed.
These terms and conditions leave the control of the content with Facebook rather than the developers/owners. Free basics is not a platform for websites/services to exist as it was made, and this will discourage most website and services to join free basics. Hence, free basics provide only select content.
Facebook plays safe by claiming that anyone can join Free basics, and at the same time taking control of the way the content is displayed, which in turn is an inhibition for developers and website owners not to join free basics. This will minimize Facebook's competitors in free basics and will give Facebook the edge in monopolising the market.
When a service is provided free of cost, people tend to choose it over another. Instant messenger start ups cannot survive if Facebook messenger is allowed to be used without any data pack. Facebook will also be chosen over other social media platforms like Twitter and Google Plus, thus giving Facebook and the partnered services a competitive edge over their competitors.
Why is free basics free? Mark claims that the motive behind free basics is to connect the non users to internet. Sure it connects those who can't afford data charges, but that's not why free basics exist. The true motive of free basics is user acquisition.
The money Facebook and the telecom companies spend on providing free basics is an investment to acquire more users. On the long run, both parties benefit monetarily. People like to use free services, so when Facebook or other services are provided free of cost by a telecom company, it can acquire a large section of users from other telecom companies. More users means more calls and messages being made, and therefore more profit to that telecom company.
Facebook will also benefit as it's available without the need to buy internet packs. This will ensure that users will stick on the Facebook as their social platform as it is free and non users will open accounts with the social media giant. It's a win-win deal by hijacking the basic fundamentals of net neutrality.
Here's what Mark and telecom companies can do if they care so much about connecting India and uplifting the poor - provide free data packs to the poor, which will ensure that they have access to the entire internet, hence satisfying the true meaning of connecting the poor to the internet.
Free basics is a for-profit campaign, period. It does not connect the poor to the internet, but rather, it connects them only to a select part of internet, through which the companies will benefit monetarily in the long run.
I can't stop wondering why were they were so confident about their plan that they spent millions for full page ads and hoardings at premium spots. Perhaps because, when it comes to domain expertise such as Internet and cyber security, the general masses are not so well equipped.
But people are genreally very collaborative in knowledge sharing. That is why I am confident that with the conversations in the public domain people will get educated and say no to such packages. I am quite confident that Facebook freebasics will not see a single sunrise in India."