Facebook.org: Which side of the argument are you on?

Facebook.org: to stay or to go?

Update 09-Feb-16: India stands by net neutrality! Prohibits service providers from charging discriminatory prices for Internet services even if it is free, effectively banning Facebook internet.org.

It's one of those arguments I just love listening to. You really can't help but to see sense in both sides' arguments.

Background

August 20 2013, Facebook announced it's Internet.org project. The goal was/is simple: to connect the world (through the internet of course!). First step was to provide the world's poorest with free access to a collection of websites and applications through partnerships with telecommunications companies.
Noble, right? I mean who would oppose free access to the internet?

The issues

Well, basically, the opposing argument is that if you control access to the internet, if you are the internet's gatekeeper, then you wield great power. Imagine Facebook and its telecommunications partners controlling what websites and mobile applications you have access to, imagine not being able to read this blog because it is not included in Internet.org's bouquet! Such power is what some are against.

The opposing side is also of the view that this negates net neutrality principles. The unwritten (or maybe now written somewhere) principle that all internet data should be treated the same not discriminating or charging differentially by user, content, site, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or mode of communication.

There is also the allegation of economic discrimination. Put simply, if limited internet access is not good enough for the western countries, why should it pass for poorer countries?

Well, Facebook's CEO, Mark had his response. Internet.org is meant to be basic, just like you have a library which contains a basic set of books, and basic healthcare services. These are not meant to be all there is, but a good start. In fact, Facebook argues that providing basic access to the internet will help bridge the digital divide and reduce poverty. Mark argues in his response "We know that when people have access to the internet they also get access to jobs, education, healthcare, communication. We know that for every 10 people connected to the internet, roughly one is lifted out of poverty. We know that for India to make progress, more than 1 billion people need to be connected to the internet".

Strong arguments on both sides, aye?

My opinion

India is expected to give a ruling on whether to pull the plug on internet.org later this week. There are also media reports that the services has been pulled in Egypt.

We seem to forget that tech giants exist for one purpose only - to make profit! I was pretty impressed by Facebook trying to put a philanthropic spin on the whole internet.org thingy (not doubting their intentions). While I understand that the nature of their core product, Facebook, means that they have to keep public "love" in order to stay relevant, i really see Facebook as a company in the free world enterprise.

Lets put strong anti-trust (competition) measures in place and let internet.org have it's way! Let innovation not be stifled!