After an avalanche of protest by Indian internet users on the principle of Net Neutrality, Facebook on May 4 kicked off its controversial internet.org for developers.
The same day, Mark Zuckerberg presented himself before the a camera, for the world to watch, as he defended internet.org and to justify his pet project Facebook even came out with an explainer which it called ‘myths and facts’.
MYTH: Facebook pays operators to zero rate the services within Internet.org.
FACT: Facebook does not pay operators for the data that people consume. We partner with operators on the technical side and provide marketing support to help make people aware of the program. If successful, people using the Internet for the first time will begin to experience its benefits and over time will start exploring and paying to use the broader internet.
But questions remain.
For instance, try looking for internet.org. Unless you have a Reliance connection, you cannot access it. Why? Because Facebook and Reliance have an exclusive partnership for rolling out internet.org in India.
So the question is, why can’t Facebook provide internet.org free of cost to all users irrespective of the telecom operator they use?
MYTH: Facebook wants to keep people within a “walled garden” of free content.
FACT: Internet.org is successful only if the newly connected reach the broader Internet. Operators can’t afford to invest in improving their infrastructure if new users never pay for data. This week, Facebook launched the Internet.org Platform, which helps more developers to include their services in Internet.org and gives people greater choice over the services that they want to use.
Facebook claims that it doesn’t want to imprison people within a ‘walled garden’. But why did the company partner with only a few services to launch internet.org?
Only when the bogey of death to Net Neutrality was raised did Facebook open up its platform to all developers.
MYTH: Facebook is picking winners by independently selecting the services included in Internet.org
FACT: In the nine countries where Internet.org has launched, Facebook has worked closely with operators, developers and entrepreneurs to find the right set of local services for each country. Because these services have to be specially built to localized specifications, Facebook started by offering just a few services in each country.
This begets yet another question. If Facebook was so concerned about empowering people with internet for the greater good of all, internet.org should have been a free service for all. But for that Facebook has to pay telecom companies for the data charges incurred by consumers.
The fact is, internet.org in India is just a win-win situation for Reliance and Facebook. In the end, the consumer will bear the brunt.
Tell us in your comments what do you think of internet.org.
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)