On a muggy, late spring evening, Tuan Pham awoke to the police storming his house in Hanoi, Vietnam. They marched him to a police station and demanded that he hand over his Facebook password. Tuan, a computer engineer, had recently written a poem on the social network criticising how the communist country was run.
Tuan’s arrest came just weeks after Facebook offered a major olive branch to Vietnam’s government. Facebook’s head of global policy management, Monika Bickert, met with a top Vietnamese official in April and pledged to remove information from the social network that violated the country’s laws.
While Facebook said its policies in Vietnam have not changed, and it has a consistent process for governments to report illegal content, the Vietnamese government was specific. The social network, they have said, had agreed to help create a new communications channel with the government to prioritise Hanoi’s requests and remove what the regime considered inaccurate posts about senior leaders.
Populous, developing countries like Vietnam are where the company is looking to add its next billion customers — and to bolster its ad business. Facebook’s promise to Vietnam helped the social media giant placate a government that had called on local companies not to advertise on foreign sites like Facebook, and it remains a major marketing channel for businesses there.
The internet is Balkanising, and the world’s largest tech companies have had to dispatch envoys to, in effect, contain the damage such divisions pose to their ambitions.
The internet has long had a reputation of being an anything-goes place that only a few nations have tried to tame — China in particular. But in recent years, events, as varied as the Arab Spring, elections in France and confusion in Indonesia over the religion of the country’s president, have awakened governments to how they have lost some control over online speech, commerce and politics on their home turf.
As nations try to grab back power online, a clash is brewing between governments and companies. Some of the biggest companies in the world — Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon and Alibaba among them — are finding they need to play by a new set of rules.
Facebook encapsulates the reasons for the internet’s fragmentation — and increasingly, its consequences. The company has become so far-reaching that more than 2 billion people use Facebook each month. And Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s chief executive, wants that dominance to grow.
But politicians have struck back. China, which blocked Facebook in 2009, has resisted Zuckerberg’s efforts to get the social network back into the country. In Europe, officials have repudiated Facebook’s attempts to gather data from its messaging apps and third-party websites.
The Silicon Valley giant’s tussle with the fracturing internet is poised to escalate. Facebook has reached almost everyone who has some form of internet access, excluding China. Capturing those last users — including in Asian nations like Vietnam and African countries like Kenya — may involve more government roadblocks.
“We understand that and accept that our ideals are not everyone’s,” said Elliot Schrage, Facebook’s vice president of communications and public policy. “But when you look at the data and truly listen to the people around the world who rely on our service, it’s clear that we do a much better job of bringing people together than polarising them.”
Even if Facebook found a way to enter China now, it would not guarantee financial success. The overwhelming majority of Chinese citizens use local online services like Qihoo 360 and Sina Weibo. No US-made apps rank among China’s 50 most popular services, according to SAMPi, a market research firm.
In 2016, Facebook took tentative steps toward embracing China’s censorship policies. That summer, Facebook developed a tool that could suppress posts in certain geographic areas, The Times reported last year. The idea was that it would help the company get into China by enabling Facebook or a local partner to censor content according to Beijing’s demands. The tool was not deployed.
For all the courtship, things never quite worked out. “There’s an interest on both sides of the dance, so some kind of product can be introduced,” said Kai-Fu Lee, former head of Google in China who now runs a venture-capital firm in Beijing. “But what Facebook wants is impossible, and what they can have may not be very meaningful.”
Last summer, emails winged back and forth between members of Facebook’s global policy team. They were finalising plans, more than two years in the making, for WhatsApp, the messaging app Facebook bought in 2014, to start sharing data on its 1 billion users with its new parent company. The company planned to use the data to tailor ads on Facebook’s other services and to stop spam on WhatsApp.
Despite all its planning, Facebook was hit by a major backlash. A month after the data-sharing deal started in August 2016, German privacy officials ordered WhatsApp to stop passing data on its 36 million local users to Facebook, claiming people did not have enough say over how it would be used. The British privacy watchdog soon followed.
By late October, all 28 of Europe’s national data-protection authorities jointly called on Facebook to stop the practice. Facebook quietly mothballed its plans in Europe. It has continued to collect people’s information elsewhere, including the United States. “There’s a growing awareness that people’s data is controlled by large American actors,” said Isabelle Falque-Pierrotin, France’s privacy regulator. “These actors now know that times have changed.”
History of surveillance
As a tech company whose ad business requires harvesting digital information, Facebook has often underestimated the deep emotions European officials and citizens have tied into the collection of such details. That dates back to the time of the Cold War, when many Europeans were routinely monitored by secret police.
In interviews, Facebook denied it has played fast and loose with users’ online information and said it complies with national rules wherever it operates. It questioned whether Europe’s position has been effective in protecting individuals’ privacy at a time when the region continues to fall behind the US and China in all things digital.
Still, the company said it respected Europe’s stance on data protection, particularly in Germany, where many citizens have long memories of government surveillance. “There’s no doubt the German government is a strong voice inside the European Community,” said Richard Allen, Facebook’s head of public policy in Europe. “We find their directness pretty helpful.”
Potentially more worrying for Facebook is how Europe’s view of privacy is being exported. Countries from Brazil to Malaysia, which are crucial to Facebook’s growth, have incorporated many of Europe’s tough privacy rules into their legislation.
Blocked in China and troubled by regulators in Europe, Facebook is trying to become “the internet” in Africa. Helping get people online, subsidising access, and trying to launch satellites to beam the internet down to the markets it covets, Facebook has become a dominant force on a continent rapidly getting online.
But that has given it a power that has made some in Africa uncomfortable. Some countries have blocked access, and outsiders have complained Facebook could squelch rival online business initiatives. Its competition with other internet companies from the US and China has drawn comparisons to a bygone era of colonialism.
“We want to bring connectivity to the world,” said Jay Parikh, a Facebook vice president for engineering who oversees the company’s plans to use drones, satellites and other technology to connect the developing world.
By Paul Mozur, Mark Scott and Mike Isaac
International New York Times