Internet.org: 1 Year On

Taking a look at Facebook’s controversial internet.org project one year after launch.

When Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg unveiled internet.org in 2013, his ambition of bringing internet access to millions of third-world citizens for the first time attracted extensive media coverage. The project’s launch last spring was equally high-profile, albeit laced with deserved criticism of the scheme’s narrow focus and thinly-veiled Facebook marketing; we discussed it ourselves on the UK2 Blog.

So with its first anniversary approaching, has internet.org silenced the critics, and brought the World Wide Web to a new audience as intended?

The original internet.org model saw Facebook-approved content made available for free in collaboration with seven cellular network providers, offering people with no other internet access a glimpse of the information superhighway. The initial launch targeted ten countries with limited digital infrastructures, including Kenya and Colombia. At the time, many critics argued that offering impoverished third-world citizens access to an estimated 0.0000002 per cent of the world’s websites through a Facebook-dominated portal was pretty worthless, even for free. Some went even further and declared it a shameless attempt to boost Facebook user numbers in countries where Google has no presence – handy for augmenting Facebook’s flatlining first-world user numbers, but of little value to the end users.

Such criticism stemmed from the internet.org template, where Facebook became a gatekeeper for a very limited number of non-competing content providers like the BBC and Wikipedia. Anything Google-related was blocked, and so were any educational, retail, governmental or communication sites. There was no facility for encrypting data, while Java and Flash-based content couldn’t be viewed; users couldn’t engage in voice chat, watch video content or send high-res images. While the idea of universally-accessible free internet access is a principle everyone would support, internet.org’s censorious nature seemed antithetical to that concept.

Twelve months on, the first important thing to note is an unexpected name change. Internet.org has been rebranded Free Basics by Facebook in an attempt to differentiate the user interface from the overarching initiative. Free Basics is now available in almost 40 countries throughout Asia, South America and Africa, while https sites can be viewed for added security, and services can be searched for via a user-friendly menu. Developers can create their own content, although Facebook can reject their efforts with no power of appeal.

This is the reason why India’s Telecom Regulatory Authority decided last month to ban Free Basics, citing concerns about the violation of net neutrality principles. Although Zuckerberg has refused to admit defeat, it seems that India’s 1.3 billion residents will have to find their way online via alternative channels. Other countries are also rumoured to be considering similar bans on the basis that internet access should be universal and unrestricted, or not available at all. There has seemingly been no research among people whose only internet access comes via Free Basics to find out whether or not they agree with this philosophy.

In response to widespread criticism of his third-world endeavours, Zuckerberg has attempted to rebrand Free Basics as the online equivalent of a library – stocking a curated selection of materials without claiming to host everything. He has promised to fight for “digital equality” in India, declaring that it “is always better to have some access than none at all”. However, it’s already evident that the mercurial CEO is directing his energies in new directions – such as providing internet access via drones and satellites rather than through cellular-powered portals like Free Basics. Although extricating itself from Free Basics may be difficult, it seems unlikely that Facebook will invest significant resources in this scheme going forwards.

What are your thoughts on the project one year on? Leave us a comment below or get in touch on Twitter @UK2.