Net Neutrality: Battle against information monopoly

I am bemused by the huge outcry over “Net Neutrality”. India lost its net neutrality more than two months ago when Reliance Jio introduced “free” Internet access to selected websites through Facebook’s Internet.org initiative. So why this delayed response? It is the power of “free”.

When Reliance Jio offered “free” access, people accepted it as another freebie. Google is free, email is free so why can’t Internet access be free too? However, when Airtel announced that users of video website YouTube and messaging app WhatsApp would be charged extra, people suddenly woke up to net neutrality.

What is net neutrality? The pioneers of Internet technology showed great wisdom and foresight in ensuring that it was a network to which any device could connect as long as it followed a set of universal rules or “Internet Protocol”. Therefore, for the first time, diverse technologies such as IBM mainframes and Apple PCs could speak to each other. Furthermore, any device, be it smartphones, Internet-enabled TVs, home appliances and wristwatches could also interconnect, leading to today’s Internet of Things or IoT. This was possible because it was configured to only provide a connection between two compatible devices without favouring any particular industry, technology or service provider. This was the essence of neutrality of the Internet.

To understand why Net Neutrality was the single most important contributor to the explosive development of the Internet, consider the case of Windows Operating System (OS) used in almost all PCs versus mobile OS such as Android and Apple iOS. Whereas, only a limited number of software applications run on Windows, there are literally millions of apps that run on smartphones. When technology is open to all, the vast and unhindered collective creativity of the public at large comes into play instead of the limited creativity of an individual entity guided solely by commercial interests.

Technology is a double-edged sword. The Internet Protocol that ensured Net Neutrality also provided a platform for generating monopolies by creating a “winner takes all” environment. Therefore, while it took almost a century for landline phones to reach saturation and 20 years for mobile phones, it took just five years for Facebook to dominate the world of social media and for Amazon to reach $1 billion revenue.

Today four companies with a market value of about $2 trillion rule four sectors of Internet marketing – Google in online advertising, Amazon in online retailing, and Facebook in social engagement; while Apple has become “the remote that controls many people’s digital lives.” These companies keep snapping up small innovative companies to consolidate their dominance (for example, Facebook – WhatsApp; Google – DoubleClick; Amazon – Zappos and Kiva).

Tinkering with Net Neutrality creates the threat of monopolisation by favouring some companies over others. This has the general narrative in the Net Neutrality debate in the media and online community, but this is only part of the picture. The main threat is that it provides an opportunity to a Google or an Amazon, with formidable resources, to muscle its way in and perpetuate its dominance in India. Facebook has already made the first move with their tie-up with Reliance Jio, offering free access to their own or sponsored websites through Internet.org.

Dominance of US giants

It is important to remember that all the giants that rule the Internet are US corporations. Since US laws are heavily skewed towards big business, FCC decisions and guidelines cited by the mobile operators cannot be used as a benchmark. Furthermore, the US economy is mature enough to tolerate dominant companies, but in developing countries such as India, they can cause tremendous harm. The major push by Facebook to offer free Internet connectivity is a prime example. The Internet is not just a passive network of wires and computer chips. It is an information exchange, and information is the lifeline of any economy.

“Free” is not truly free because anyone offering free Internet would quickly edge out other players and gain complete control not only over the Internet but also over information flow. Therefore, in return for a “free” Internet Facebook is able to collect a vast and exquisitely detailed database (dossier) of users, their likes, dislikes and even their habits and moods. Powerful analytics use this data to construct astonishingly detailed profiles. This data is a marketer’s dream and a valuable source of income for Facebook. 

Once this database is available, focussed and individually tailored advertising, information and news can be directed at the user. The phenomenon has been vividly depicted by Pariser in his book “The Internet Bubble”. He contends that the information being fed to us is increasingly being tailored to suit our likes while, other information is being filtered out so that we are becoming engulfed in an Internet bubble excluded from contrarian views. For example, there are several studies that show that Google tinkers with its search results to favour some types of information over others. This creates a distorted view of the environment we live in, and indeed festers extreme views, as any netizen will confirm.

I have not even raised the data privacy issue emanating from this corporate dominance, because that battle is already lost. We have forfeited one of our most cherished freedoms – the right to privacy. Let us not lose the battle for Net Neutrality, because it is not just about favouring one website over another. It is about losing the freedom to acquire our most valuable possession – information. Worse still, losing that freedom to a foreign multinational.

(The writer specialises in cyberspace and holds a doctorate on the subject from the National Law School of India University, Bengaluru)