Book extract: How Facebook played ‘dirty’ to push Free Basics down India’s throat

medium119529006An insider account of a former Facebook (now Meta) employee reveals how the company’s Free Basics campaign in India spiralled into a desperate, multi-million dollar effort to sway public opinion, pressure politicians, and silence critics — with tactics that shocked even its own leadership. Originally pitched as a philanthropic initiative to connect the unconnected, Free Basics was soon criticised for violating net neutrality and offering a stripped-down, Facebook-controlled internet experience. While India became the primary battleground, similar backlash brewed in Brazil. medium119528953The problems in Brazil are bad, but the problems in India are worse. Facebook launched Internet.org in India in February 2015. At that time, of the four billion people in the world who weren’t connected to the internet, one billion lived in India (although that changed rapidly in years to come). India was always a top priority for Internet.org. But after a promising start, things quickly unravelled.The government’s Telecom Regulatory Authority (TRAI) started to flex its significant power and announced it was going to look into programmes like Internet.org and get the public to weigh in on whether they should be banned. Some of our Indian partners on Internet.org — like Flipkart (India’s Amazon) and NDTV (India’s CNN) — knew this meant we were probably doomed, and hurriedly pulled out of the app.Sheryl [Sandberg served as chief operating officer of Facebook, from 2008 to 2022] tried to reassure the Facebook leadership: Our policy team is directly engaged with the government, include [sic] Prime Minister Modi’s office. We’re lucky this is happening in a place where we have very deep senior relationships in the government, but it’s still going to be hard. If we lose this in India it will send all the wrong signals in Latin America. Angry at losing on the name change to Free Basics, Mark [Zuckerberg] keeps instructing the team to “go on the offensive” against governments.No one really understands what he means, but I have a sinking feeling that it’s not going to be good. On August 21, 2015, Mark assembles all the senior men working on what’s now called Free Basics and me in his conference room named the Aquarium. The guys are pretty tense and Mark addresses the group like a general addressing his troops — one who is displeased with their performance. Mark opens the meeting by talking admiringly about what he calls “street fighter tactics” that Uber is employing against politicians around the world and how successful they’ve been. I’d thought there was a general agreement that Facebook didn’t use these underhand tactics and we certainly didn’t admire them.Uber weaponizes their drivers and riders, creating strikes, protests, and transportation chaos, forcing authorities to the table. They’re sponsoring the football teams of the children of key Brazilian senators responsible for decisions that impact their business, insisting on having Uber plastered across their kids’ uniforms. They propose compiling opposition research on journalists. It’s dirty. But what becomes clear the more Mark speaks is that not only does he not judge what Uber is doing, he’s judging us for not doing it. medium119529237Mark believes Facebook could have a lot more leverage with politicians than Uber ever could, and we’re failing him by not using these tactics. He launches into a spiel about Emperor Augustus, his favourite emperor, who led the transformation of Rome from a republic to an empire. He talks about “offense.” He wants to mobilize Facebook users. He wants pro-Facebook activists. He wants protests.Then he talks “defense.” He wants lists of adversaries, whether they’re companies, individuals, organizations, or governments. He wants to know how we can use the platform and tools we have to win against these adversaries. He doesn’t want us to constrain ourselves to our usual Internet.org tools. He wants us to leverage all of Facebook to find the right things to offer our enemies in order to pull them over to our side.He wants us to invent ways to use the platform and the algorithm to pressure them. He wants to establish a team within Facebook to figure out how to build the tools that will use the algorithm and platform to pressure adversaries, including politicians who oppose us, to bolster the policy team. I try to catch Joel’s eye to see if he’s also shocked by what he’s hearing. He won’t look at me. He looks chastened, not surprised. [Joel Kaplan is chief global affairs officer at Meta].As if he’s heard all this before. “When you say ‘adversary,’ who do you mean?” I raise my hand and ask tentatively, a little concerned about what will happen to anyone on one of these lists. “Anyone who opposes us is an adversary,” Mark responds firmly. Not acknowledging that when it comes to Free Basics, that’s basically everyone.All I can think is how horrified politicians would be if they knew Facebook was harnessing the platform and its power to put the screws to their thumbs. He’s angered nearly every human rights group we work with, they’re now on the list of adversaries, and he’s about to torch all the trust we’ve spent years building with politicians and leaders around the world. And he doesn’t care. In fact, he’s doubling down and compiling an enemies list, going after anyone who raises reasonable concerns about Internet.org.After years at the company, I’d never seen him go on the offense like this, with such ferocity and hostility. There’s no idealism there at all, not about Facebook or Free Basics or anything. This isn’t the revolution I signed up for. This isn’t who I thought Mark would become, when I first tried to coax him into international politics. I don’t want to be part of any of that. But I’m pregnant and showing and it’s no time to start looking for a job. So I make a decision. medium nocaptionhttp://youtu.be/IfTq4jV7rqU?si=dRWEuTGkGJZD376yUp till now, I’ve done everything I could to help Facebook grow. But now is a turning point. For the first time since I pitched this job to Facebook, I won’t exhaust everything I have to deliver what my bosses want. I won’t do all I can to develop creative strategies to advocate and convince governments and civil society that they’re wrong because I don’t think they are. Instead, I’ll focus my efforts on Facebook’s leadership, keep raising objections in meetings and emails at Facebook. I’ll execute Mark’s orders half heartedly — focusing on the ones I agree with and not putting particular effort into the others. I’ll no longer try to do the impossible to make things happen for Facebook.When civil society groups and the Brazilian government point out problems with Free Basics, I won’t try to buy them off with “thoughtful partnerships.” I will keep bringing their issues — that there’s no encryption, no privacy policy, and no moderation of content on Free Basics — to the teams responsible for them at Facebook, knowing they probably won’t fix them. And they don’t. This feels so weird to me. I know how much Mark wants Internet.org and believes in it. But I tell myself I joined Facebook because I believed the platform was a force for good that would change the world. I didn’t join for Mark. It doesn’t take long for an actual “war room” to be established.But just for India, because I refuse to do it for Brazil. Soon they’re cranking out advertising campaigns across TV, newspapers, cinemas, radio, and billboards in India. Spending tens of millions of dollars, not including the dark-post (targeted non-public posts for specific users that only they would see) advertising on Facebook itself, which is aiming to reach over 50 per cent of adult users in India. There are separate SMS campaigns. Their strategy — laid out in an “India Action Plan” — calls for them to “galvanize actual (or at least the appearance of) public support,” the italics give the game away somewhat here. So there are op-eds. User stories. They organize protests — or riots, as some in the marketing team joke — in support of Free Basics.When I ask that team how they managed to get people there, why on earth Indians would feel so strongly about a poorly designed Facebook product with many flaws that they would march in the streets for Internet.org, one of them tells me it was by promising free T-shirts. I don’t know if he’s joking.They activate the megaphone that Mark wouldn’t let Sheryl use for organ donation. It warns, “Free Basic Services are at risk in India,” and tells users to show their support by liking the page. Mark writes to Prime Minister Modi trying to arrange a meeting. Sheryl calls the minister in charge of the internet; Joel and the India team organize outreach to other politicians. There’s lots of travel back and forth to India.Excerpted with permission from Careless People: A Cautionary Tale of Power, Greed, and Lost Idealism (published by Pan Macmillan)Lead illustration: Chad Crowe