Humanitarne informacijske investicije

Danes govorimo o temi, s katero smo zaključili oktobrski Zeitgeist - Fronte spletne nevtralnosti, o digitalnem kolonializmu. Takrat smo obravnavali nevtralnost spleta in predlog Evropske komisije o enotnem telekomunikacijskem trgu. Pokazali smo na gnili kompromis, s katerim so bili soočeni evropski poslanci. Slednji so sočasno odločali o enotnem telekomunikacijskem trgu in o nevtralnosti spleta, ki je na ta račun v EU utrpela škodo v obliki specializiranih storitev.

Na splet je trenutno povezanih slabih 40 odstotkov svetovnega prebivalstva. Ta številka se za Afriko giblje okrog 15-ih odstotkov. Digitalna izključenost je velik svetovni problem, ki se lahko primerja z nepismenostjo.

Multinacionalka Facebook je skupaj s šestimi partnerji ta problem naslovila poslovno, kljub temu da projekt, poimenovan internet.org, smatrajo za humanitaren. Ideja je, da lahko revni do internet.org dostopajo po dostopnih cenah. Telekomunikacijski gigant seveda ne ostane praznih rok. V zameno za zelo okrnjen dostop do spleta si pridobi nove stranke in njihove osebne podatke ter podatke o brskanju. Gre torej za diskriminacijo spletnega prometa glede na vsebino, nad celotnim prometom pa hkrati bdi kot vratar. Prakse ponudnikov dostopa do spleta, ko ti ponudijo neko favorizirano spletno storitev zastonj, se imenujejo zero-rating storitve. Zagotovo Facebook s svojim internet.org ni edino podjetje, ki poizkuša ustvarjati dobiček s takimi modeli, je pa trenutno eno izmed največjih in tudi medijsko najbolj izpostavljenih.

Kaj točno internet je, danes ne ve niti marsikdo na Zahodu, zato ne čudi dejstvo, da v nekaterih državah v razvoju narašča delež ljudi, ki uporabljajo socialna omrežja in hkrati ne vedo, da uporabljajo internet. Dodatno zmedo ustvari tudi zavajajoče poimenovanje projekta, ki trenutno poteka v okoli petnajstih manj razvitih državah po svetu.

Internet.org je v Indiji naletel na veliko nasprotovanje civilne družbe in nevtralnost spleta je bila nekaj časa v medijih precej zastopana tema. Po začetnih protestih je Facebook na zahteve protestnikov med drugim pristal tudi na to, da so projekt preimenovali v Freebasics.

Na kampanjo družbenih gibanj se je Facebook odzval s svojo, ki je bila precej agresivna. Za profitno naravnane namene je uporabil tudi spletno platformo svojega socialnega omrežja. To je odprlo novo plast nevtralnosti spleta, in sicer nevtralnost platforme. Lastnik socialnega omrežja bi le-tega zlahka zlorabil za to, da bi na volitvah podprl stranko, ki mu bo prinesla največ koristi.

Pred kratkim pa je indijska Agencija za telekomunikacije – TRAI – izdala pomembno odločbo. Civilna gibanja so s pritiski uspela doseči prepoved tako imenovanih zero-rating storitev, ki diskriminirajo spletni promet glede na vsebino.

Govorimo s Parminderjem Jeet Singhom in Apurvo Kandicuppo iz indijske nevladne organizacije IT4change. Mnenje poda še Dušan Caf iz Sveta za elektronske komunikacije Republike Slovenije.

We finished the previous broadcast - Fronts of net neutrality - with digital colonialism. At that time we discussed net neutrality and the European Comission's proposal on the single telecommunication market. We pointed out the rotten compromise members of European Pariliament were faced with. Since net neutrality was incorporated in proposal about single telecomunication market it suffered in the form of specialized services.

Currently there is around 40% of world population connected to internet. In developing countries and espacially in Africa this figures are significantly lower. Digital exclusion is a global problem, which could be compared with illiteracy.

Multinational corporation Facebook, together with six partners, adressed the problem from a business perspective, although their rehtorics regarding the project named internet.org, were (quasi)humanitarian. Their idea was that the poor could access internet.org at affordable price. The telecommunication giant would not remain empty-handed, of course. In return for badly mutilated Internet access, they would gain new customers as well as their personal information and browsing data.  It is therefore a discrimination of web traffic based on the content, while Facebook keeps watch on web traffic as a gatekeeper.

Practices when providers of internet access where there are favored online service for free are called zero-rating services. Facebook, with internet.org, is surely not the only company that is trying to make a profit with such models, but it is currently one of the largest and most media-exposed.

Many educated people do not know the answer to the question what the Internet actually is. It is therefore not surprising that in some developing countries, there is a growing portion of people that use social networks but at the same time do not know they are using the Internet. Further confusion is also created by misleading name of the project, which is is currently going on in around fifteen less developed countries in the world.

Internet.org in India encountered a lot of opposition in civil society and net neutrality has been for some time fairly represented theme in the media. After initial protests from Facebook to the requirements of demonstrators, inter alia also agreed that the project was renamed Freebasics. 

Facebook responded with a campaign of its own, which was quite aggressive. For profit-oriented purposes it also used the online platform of their own social network. This has opened up a new layer of Internet neutrality debate, namely platform neutrality. The owner of a social network could, for example, easily abuse it during elections to support a party that would bring him the greatest benefits.

Recently, the Indian Agency for Telecommunications - TRAI - made an important decision. Civil movements pressure succeeded in obtaining a ban on zero-rating services. We are talking with Parminder Jeet Singh and Apurva Kandicuppa from Indian non-governmental organizations IT4change. Dušan Caf from the Council for Electronic Communications of the Republic of Slovenia gives his opinion on recent TRAI decision.