Net Neutrality on the internet and sponsored data in general.
Are these two the same? Well, they both have something in common: the data provider is paying for the data as opposed to the user. Is there any major difference? Yes, and the difference makes all the difference.
One way to look at it is from the users practical perspective, that is, from the point where he logs on. Lets not look at it just now from the ethical perspective, after all, it would seem that giving something important for free to the poor, is an open/close case of a moral good. But that is in dispute apparently, and ethics is a tricky issue, so lets leave that for later. Besides, most of the opponents of sponsored data have their own vested interests, and those who don't are nothing more than post modernist moralizers who would like to script the world to their own ideological 'standards,' as opposed to letting the users decide for themselves.
When someone uses Freeway, they already have access to the full internet, unlike Facebook's Free Basics that only enables you access according to Facebook's special gateway. Quite a difference; in fact, it is quite the opposite.
So, a Freeway user with his full net access on his smart phone, decides he wants to use his personal liberty to chose to use Freeway, a free app like so many others; after all, he has paid handsomely for his smart phone and in general, data is expensive, and Freeway is going to allow him to use it a little cheaper. Is it denying him access to the open internet like Free Basics does? No. Quite a difference. Do you think that Syntonic is bringing back colonialism like the advocates of Net Neutrality suggest? Well, I would let the Indonesian, Malaysian and all other potential customers answer that. I know what their answer will be. But lets leave the download numbers talk for themselves.
Net Neutrality and sponsored data are two different things, just like motor cars and motor cycles are, even though they both have transport in common.
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?