Critics, including high-profile activists and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) , argued that Free Basics created a "walled garden." By making only certain sites free, Facebook was effectively acting as a gatekeeper of the internet, choosing winners and losers in the digital economy. They argued this violated the core principle of , which states all internet traffic should be treated equally. The Turning Point: The India Ban
In the early days of the mobile internet, the barrier to entry for millions of people around the world wasn’t just the price of a smartphone, but the ongoing cost of data. To address this, Meta (then Facebook) launched an ambitious and often controversial initiative known as Free Basics, often accessed via the shortcut . fb.com free
While the goal of "connecting the next billion" sounded noble, the fb.com/free initiative faced significant backlash, most notably in India. The Pro-Connectivity Argument To address this, Meta (then Facebook) launched an
By partnering with local mobile network operators, Facebook was able to "zero-rate" these specific sites. This meant that even if a user had zero balance on their prepaid SIM card, they could still visit Free Basics to stay connected. How It Works: The Tech Behind the "Free" This meant that even if a user had
The most significant blow to the program came in 2016. After a massive public debate and a grassroots campaign by net neutrality advocates, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) ruled against zero-rating services. TRAI argued that service providers should not be allowed to charge different prices for data based on content.