Net-Neutrality to be continued...

Net-neutrality is a principle coined by Tim Wu, Columbia University, which states that the internet service providers should treat the content, application or web services equally, there should not be differential treatment in any way on the basis of content.

‘Free Basics’ an initiative by Facebook, which purports a free internet to reach poor users is banned in India. A similar initiative by Airtel called ‘Airtel Zero’ was also condemned for its differential treatment for the content on internet. Many intellectuals have been at loggerheads on the pros and cons of these marketing strategies by the giants. TRAI even asked the Indians their opinions and people voted for a neutral net. Finally TRAI considered both of them a threat to net-neutrality and imposed a ban on ‘Free Basics’.

‘Airtel Zero’ was a plan to work by asking marketers or application developers to register to them for which they might have to pay an amount and in turn the users or the customers would use the application on internet for free. ‘Free Basics’ a new name for internet.org, was about to work on the similar lines, however the only difference in their way of marketing was keeping ‘Free Basics’ free for application developers and  customers, it seemed a win-win platform for both the sides at prima facie.
 

But there are two sides to every coin, let’s try to understand how it was beneficial for the users and customers. ‘Free Basics’ kept it clean by allowing marketers to register to them for free and also thought of user welfare, making a free content available for a poor mass, who could have not afforded an internet. ‘Airtel Zero’ and ‘Free Basics’ seemed a perfect suit for the ‘Digital India’ initiative, which envisages Indians, even the most unprivileged ones using internet to get exposed to opportunities online. They also appeared to boost the ‘Startup India’ initiative, by turning to be a boon for startups, as startups need publicity the most and could have helped them compete the rivals effectively.

 

But these plans were not beneficial for the marketers not registered to them, these marketers would have faced extreme difficulty in their business and would have finally found refuge in registering to them. In this way it could have overtaken the internet. Though ‘welfare’ is what ‘Free Basics’ proposed, there was huge mass they pointed to, and more publicity for the advertisements they offered.

 

Internet neutrality was a certain threat in this case, it not only could have gulped the market of those not in support but also have had an extra user base on its way. The benefits it offered could also not be neglected and could be contemplated if it proves to be impartial.