LETTER FROM INDIA
Protecting the Internet, but Depriving India's Poor
MANU JOSEPH September 17, 2015
印度來信
Facebook為印度窮人提供免費網絡引爭議
MANU JOSEPH 2015年9月17日
New Delhi — The last time Prime Minister Narendra Modivisited the United States, he stood with Hugh “Wolverine” Jackman and declared, for some reason, “May the force be with you.” This month, when he meets the Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg in Menlo Park, Calif., Indians hope their leader won’t yell, “Don’t be evil.”
But if he does end up shouting Google’s motto in Facebook’s headquarters, some Indians would be pleased. For that is what they wish to tell Facebook.
但如果他最後真的在Facebook總部說出這句谷歌(Google)格言，有一部分印度人會比較高興。因為這正是他們想對Facebook說的。
Mr. Modi wants every Indian to get online, and Mr. Zuckerberg has figured out a way to do this. But the Modi government has been under pressure from the minority of Indians who consume most of the nation’s bandwidth to pass legislation that would deny free Internet access to the poor.
莫迪想讓所有印度人都用上網絡，扎克伯格想到了一個實現的方法。但莫迪政府受到來自少數印度民眾的壓力，這些人享用着印度大部分帶寬，卻想要通過一項不給窮人提供上網途徑的法案。
Jonathan Ernst/Reuters
Facebook首席執行官馬克·扎克伯格。
In February, Facebook and its partners introduced Internet.org in India, a diminished but free Internet for the more than 100 million mobile subscribers of Reliance Communications. More than 75 percent of Indians do not use or have access to the Internet, but almost every Indian has a mobile phone. So, millions of Indians now have access, in seven languages, to dozens of websites and applications, including BBC News, Wikipedia and, of course, Facebook.
今年2月，Facebook及其合作夥伴將Internet.org引入了印度，它可以讓印度信實通信公司(Reliance Communications)的1億手機用戶享受到不完整但卻完全免費的網絡。超過75%印度人不上網或沒有上網途徑，但他們幾乎人手一部手機。所以，現在有數百萬印度人可以瀏覽幾十種網站和應用，包括BBC新聞、Wikipedia，當然還有Facebook，這些服務有七種語言可以選擇。
Internet.org would not have drawn much rage if not for something else that was going on. Weeks after the initiative emerged, an Indian telecom operator tried to introduce a service that would make it free or cheap or faster for people to gain access to some applications that have a commercial agreement with the operator.
如果不是因為還有一些其他的事，Internet.org不會引起太多怨憤。這一計劃推出幾周後，一家印度通信運營商試圖引入一項服務，可以讓人們免費或以更低的價格或更快的速度下載一些與該運營商有商業協議的應用。
There is a global movement against strategies that corrupt the open nature of the Internet, and Indians joined the lament. The movement ended up including Internet for the poor among the offending telecom strategies. This was a flawed, principled stand. And it fit well in the history of the Indian elite deploying ideology to the detriment of the poor — central planning instead of a market economy, a focus on higher education over primary education and rocket science over virology.
目前全球在進行一場運動，反對破壞互聯網開放屬性的策略，印度也加入了控訴的一方。這場運動最終把為窮人提供網絡列為不合理的電信策略。這是一個有缺陷的、堅持原則的立場。它與印度精英階層宣傳對窮人不利的意識形態的歷史一脈相承，這些人強調中央計劃，而非市場經濟；重視高等教育大過基礎教育；重視火箭科學大過病毒研究。
Mr. Zuckerberg has been at pains to tell Indians that his offer of free Internet to the poor does not violate any ethics. Facebook does not charge for any application that wishes to be on Internet.org, and it does not post ads on the Facebook pages of the users. Also, the company does not pay Reliance to provide the free service. Mr. Zuckerberg has said that any telecom operator would be allowed to carry Internet.org. A Facebook spokesman told me, “We are actively in discussions with other mobile phone operators in India.”
扎克伯格一直在竭力讓印度人明白，他給貧窮階層提供的免費網絡服務並不違反任何道德準則。Facebook不向任何希望出現在Internet.org上的應用收費，不在用戶的Facebook頁面上發廣告。而且，Facebook也不為信實通信公司提供的免費網絡服務買單。扎克伯格已經表示，任何通信運營商都可以為其用戶提供Internet.org的免費應用。一位Facebook發言人告訴我，「我正在積極地和印度的其他手機運營商進行商談。」
He said that “more than 40 percent of those coming online via” Internet.org are so intoxicated by the idea of connectivity that they soon pay the telecom operator for data and enjoy the full expanse of online life. So, the telecom operator has commercial rewards in offering an exceptional social service. It is an idea that can transform India.
他表示，通過Internet.org免費應用接觸到網絡後，有「超過40％的人都非常沉醉於聯網的感覺，會很快給通信運營商付費購買流量，以享受完整的網絡樂趣。所以，通信運營商在提供一項傑出的社會服務的同時，也可以獲得商業回報。這是一個可以改變印度面貌的觀念。
The elite Indian condemnation of Internet for the poor is cloaked in righteous objections. For instance, that it is “restrictive,” thereby violating the fundamental spirit of the web. But Internet.org is limited because data is expensive, not because it promotes some websites over others. In fact, it is paid Internet that is restrictive because it denies the web to those who cannot pay.
印度精英階層反對為貧窮階層提供網絡，有一些表面看似正當的理由。比如，他們指責它是「限制性的」，因此違反互聯網的基本精神。但Internet.org之所以有所限制，是因為數據太昂貴，而不是為優先推廣某些網站。事實上，真正有限制的是付費互聯網，因為它們把不能付費的人擋在了門外。
Another objection is that the poor would think Facebook is the Internet as many in other nations do. But then in India “xerox” is a verb that means photocopying, and many think the Internet is an American company. If the whole world were surveyed, it would come across as generally ill informed. Many are ignorant because they never had the opportunities, like being connected, to be informed.
他們反對的另一個理由是，印度貧窮階層會和其他國家的許多人一樣，認為Facebook就代表互聯網。但在印度，「xerox」只是意為「複印」的動詞，不代表施樂公司，還有很多人認為「互聯網」就是一個美國公司。如果在全球進行問卷調查，印度人會給人以孤陋寡聞的印象。很多人那麼無知，是因為他們沒有機會接觸網絡等獲取新知的途徑。
Also, there is a view that free Internet is just a ploy by Facebook to capture new markets. The history of modern India is proof that corporate self-interest is often more useful to society than altruism.
還有一種觀點認為，網絡只是Facebook為了佔領新市場而策劃的陰謀。現代印度發展的歷史證明，企業的自利往往比利他主義對社會更有益。
Mr. Modi, instead of banishing Internet.org, may consider uploading government websites on it. Facebook is discussing that possibility with his team.
莫迪可能會把印度政府網站放在Internet.org上，而不是驅逐它。Facebook正和他的團隊就這一可能進行討論。
本文内容版权归纽约时报公司所有，任何单位及个人未经许可，不得擅自转载或翻译。
沒有留言:
張貼留言