This isn't really about 'Net Neutrality' though, is it?
Facebook are providing a free service out of their own pockets for people who otherwise can't afford an ISP subscription. They therefore should be able to dictate what sites are accessible through it. Just as if you were a child on your parent's internet connection, they should be able to control the sites you go on.
Either take it or leave it, or find a way out of poverty (Yes, that's far far far far easier said than done, and probably sounds a bit harsh) and buy your own connection like everyone else or find another way to access the internet (e-Cafes etc.).
I'm kinda on the fence about this idea. On one hand you allow basic free access the internet for those who can't afford it. But on the other hand you are basically giving certain businesses priority over others. So there's no competition. Which hurts customers and the businesses that weren't lucky enough to get on the list.
I think free access to mail servers, Wikipedia, medical, government, and other ( maybe non-profit? ) information and help websites makes sense. That way no business really has an advantage and those who don't or can't pay for internet packages have some sort of connection.
I'm actually all for free internet for everyone. But of course it'd be awesome if everything was free, but the world doesn't really work that way.
Facebook is a private corporation. They can choose what they let you look at if they want to. End of.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
