The Cost of Meta’s Free Basics

Author: Kaira Ray Villanueva

September 4, 2026

[Image credit: Gilles Lambert/Unsplash]

Introduction

Mark Zuckerberg released a whitepaper that reads like a manifesto declaring that connectivity should be a human right. The paper concluded with a proposal to expand internet access, especially in remote areas, through Free Basics, one of Meta’s standalone applications originally launched in 2013. Access to Free Basics is region-dependent. More than fifty-five countries across Africa, Central Asia, South Asia, Southeast Asia, Latin America, West Asia, and North Africa are included, with the goal of increasing global “connectivity” in these targeted regions, which allegedly have little to no internet foot traffic. The core functionality provides limited internet access rather than open internet access. As such, the zero-rating application curates and narrows a set of media and services for the clients (O’Maley & Kak, 2018). Free Basics was never meant to be free. Mark Zuckerberg's hope was to eventually bring people to upgrade their services and pay for data, or to use their data to augment advertising technology.

As part of Zuckerberg’s whitepaper, he lightly touches on the subject of on-ramping users, hoping that “[giving] people the ability to link their Facebook or other accounts [via Free Basics] [so] operators could [create more targeted advertisements and make it easier to sell post-paid models].” The core issue is that Free Basics mainly serves operators and investors, not the target audience, those without internet access, who have more immediate necessities than reading BCC headlines for free (Yeboah, 2017). Also, since Free Basics was deployed, there’s no substantial data to support the claim that the platform has significantly improved the lives of people in the deployed regions. Some parts of the internet have now reached more people, leaving some users confused about what content is free and what is behind a paywall (Romanosky and Chetty, 2018). Several countries have actually banned Free Basics, including India, Bolivia, Papua New Guinea, Trinidad and Tobago, El Salvador, Saint Lucia, and the Republic of Congo (Singh, 2018). Even the marketing for Free Basics had to be recalibrated because “Internet.og” was too forward, especially after India’s pushback (Hempel, 2018). Rather than supporting the sovereignty of all nations, Free Basics paves the way for digital colonization. The actual cost is diverting money from local development to foreign investors, providing backdoor access to free data from untapped markets and regions, and creating a walled garden that breaks net neutrality and, at the same time, becomes a slippery slope toward echo chambers.

Partisan Market Exposure and Differentiated Pricing

According to UNESCO, zero-rating is a telecommunications practice in which certain internet traffic does not count against a person's data allowance, providing free access to specific services. Various forms of zero-rated programs exist, such as Free Basics, an application meant to help “businesses drive internet access by developing a new model to get people online” (Zuckerberg, 2013). Meta partners with telecommunications operators to provide a certain amount of free data consumed on Free Basics. However, this service heavily features products from Meta’s partnered companies rather than locally developed applications and services. This practice may create an unfair market advantage, threatening already vulnerable economies, and allowing Meta to establish marketplace supremacy (O’Maley & Kak, 2018). All of a sudden, the cost of Free Basics becomes more transparent when framed in terms of who will reach first-time or low-usage internet customers.

Created to represent the service journey of Free Basics from creating contracts with telecommunication providers to using Free Basics on a person’s phone. (Bonilla et al., 2020).

Another outcome of zero-rating is differentiated pricing, a strategy in which companies offer varying prices for the same product based on who is buying, where, when, or in what quantity to undercut competitors and maximize profit. Market research on demographics and purchasing behavior informs pricing, including customers' price thresholds and willingness to pay. India saw through the differentiated pricing and found Free Basics unfairly competing with smaller data providers. India’s Telecom Regulatory Authority (TRAI) passed a regulation banning differential pricing across data services to make economic competition more open and fair (Soni, 2016).  India was previously colonized by the British Empire and has been recovering and rebuilding their sovereignty ever since. The ban imposed by the TRAI comes as no surprise, given their understanding of colonial practices, especially after Meta board member Marc Andreessen tweeted "[anti-colonialism] has been economically catastrophic for the Indian people for decades" as a comment to India’s resistance to adopting Free Basics. The ban prohibited telecom operators, such as Reliance Communications, from unfairly favoring certain online services over others through Free Basics, thereby breaching the principle of net neutrality upheld by internet service providers. As part of the digital rights activism in India, the nickname “poor internet for poor people” caught on to describe Free Basics (Doctorow, 2016). Though India has been exempt, Free Basics has continued to expand into more countries since launching in 2013.

Zuckerberg also mentions that the new “knowledge economy” is no longer a resource-based zero-sum model. Instead, in this era, if “you know something, that doesn’t stop me from knowing it too. In fact, the more things we all know, the better ideas, products, and services we can all offer and the better all of our lives will be.” Though the statement does not mention that the new economic force Meta relies on is now personal attention and data to achieve a zero-sum outcome. Meta profits from advertisers willing to spend billions to sustain their competition and capture new markets in areas that are already economically struggling, echoing the zero-sum behavior of industrial oil tycoons. He allegedly said these practices were different from what he is creating (Fool, 2025). 

Free Data for Market Research and Third-Party Partners

Created to reference the present structure of Meta’s proxy server connected to Free Basics, which is referencing the same proxy layer principle used in Meta’s Discover application (Blackstein et al., 2020).

The way Meta’s Free Basics works is that the user opens the application and connects to the internet with the data allocated by the telecommunications operator. Imagine Free Basics as a web browser or, similarly, as a single sign-on platform for school computers, with built-in security layers, where each website and feature is filtered through the installed protocol and approved by the school administrator to ensure the safety of the students viewing. With Free Basics, the administrator is akin to Meta. The individual on Free Basics does not have direct access to the open web. Rather, their access is limited to the services Meta approves for their region (Sen et al, 2017). In Kenya, the main page of Free Basics presents United States-based websites, such as AccuWeather, BabyCenter (funded by Johnson & Johnson), BBC News, BrighterMonday (sponsored by Mastercard), ESPN, and more (Yeboah, 2017). According to research by the GlobalVoice team in 2017, with the exception of the Philippines, the availability of local applications within Free Basics is minimal.

Once the individual selects a service, for example, BBC News, their request passes through a proxy layer created by Meta. Then, the request continues to the actual server for BBC News. Once the request is accepted, the same path is followed: the data sent from BBC News passes through Meta’s proxy layer and ultimately reaches the individual's interface (Sen et al, 2017). Usually, in the browser, cookies and cache can be cleared. However, with Free Basics, these are stored directly on Meta's server, made possible by their proxy layer. According to Meta’s justification, they store cookies on the server side because many low-end mobile browsers have limited cookie support. However, this feels contrary to the concept of Free Basics, where software services are supposed to not accrue as much data (Blackstein, 2020). 

Default main page of Free Basics in Kenya with selected applications curated by Meta and the respective telecommunication operator (Bonilla et al., 2017).

Meta needs as much contextual data as possible to keep refining their product-matching algorithm, from profiles to advertisements, to drive revenue. They do not necessarily sell data directly, but they do provide third-party partners whose profiles will likely match their end-goal targets. Third parties asking for more specific audience data pay more (Anderson & Jesdanun, 2017). Meta has also stated in its 2025 updated privacy policy that it has the right to share data with unspecified third parties. The third parties rent profiles based on the objectives they set out to achieve. Not only that, but Meta encourages businesses to send them data about clients’ spending habits through its Conversion API (Meta, 2020). The proxy server that Meta runs to present Free Basic services is not free from data surveillance either (Meta, 2015a). On Facebook, all types of data variations of interactions available to an input are collected, including those that stem from content created, ad viewing, content interaction, and products provided across their services. Whilst for Free Basics, they collect your browsing habits, “the type of device or browser and operating system you use, your app version, app ID and device ID, the time and date of your connection, your mobile operator, IP address, phone number, battery and signal strength, country, language setting, and the Third-Party Services you search for or use in Free Basics” (Meta, 2015a). Then, the data they use is shared with vendors, service providers, partners, and other undisclosed third parties, either for research, advertisements, or external research collaborations that could help with advancing their vision.

Take, for example, a person who logs in to Free Basics for the first time. Mildly surprised, they see the front page listing the Tier 1 services (Bonilla et al., 2017). Jane, the hypothetical user, sees BabyCenter, a Johnson & Johnson product, in Tier 1. Meanwhile, BabyCenter, available on the open internet, will show richer media content. The Free Basics version will only provide text and light educational information on tracking a healthy pregnancy and infant care (Meta, 2015b). Given the architecture of Free Basics, some cookies have already been stored on Meta’s server regarding Jane’s digital habits. The content may load faster the next time she views the page, but Meta is also tracking whether this is, so far, her “Most Used” service (Meta, 2015a). The icing on the cake is that Free Basics keeps asking Jane to log in to Facebook. Confused and slightly annoyed by the friction, she eventually signs up for a Facebook account (Bonilla et al., 2017). Now that she is a newly minted Facebook and Free Basics user, she has signed away her data rights under two privacy policies. She visits BabyCenter a few more times, specifically the information for the healthy baby guide for around months four to six. Meta tags her as part of a pool of users who are into this type of content. Now, her profile is available for rent to advertisers whose products match her most recent and frequent activity. In this case, BabyCenter presents her with a Stonyfield yogurt advertisement marketed as safe for babies at least 5 months old (Digiday, 2015). Unfortunately for Jane, Stonyfield yogurt is not available near her, but she will remember that this is a product a 5-month-old can eat. With enhanced algorithms and Meta’s recent billion-dollar investments in artificial intelligence, the example above with Jane is light work (Marchese, 2026). Free Basics is not as stripped down as Meta advertises their platform to be.

Walled Garden Breaking Net Neutrality and Impact on Cognitive Functioning 

The digital divide refers to the gap between people who have meaningful access to digital technology, including high-speed internet and digital literacy, and those who lack these resources. The divide arises because access to technology operates in tiers, with certain groups gaining access to more resources due to parameters that vary based on privately funded internet service providers, infrastructure funding, internet usage volume in an area, regional location, and more. Digital rights activists focus on the right to access information that provides a neutral, unbiased space independent of any private or government-sanctioned platform. The activists who fought to ban Free Basics in India argued that Zuckerberg was violating net neutrality. They warned India that Meta’s proxy layer between client and host is a gatekeeper for creating and curating tiered services, a walled garden. An example can be found with a North Korean’s mobile phone, as explained in one of Arun Maini’s technology reviews. He secured a Samtaesung and conducted a contextual interface study confirming that all parts are biasedly curated to serve the state's opinion, from the bare hardware to the list of available applications for download and use (2025). If Meta were to impose Free Basics in India, a subversive walled garden could entrench the Indian market share through what Meta deems strategic services. India is a massive country with a rapidly expanding technological infrastructure, which Meta understands, and that is why they fought so hard to push Free Basics. Though Free Basics was not fully adopted in India, other countries partnered with Meta to scale their data reach, which naturally pushed for the adoption of Facebook as well. Worst-case scenarios of Free Basics have already occurred. In Myanmar, the accelerated adoption facilitated echo chambers and exacerbated bias into hate speech with reflective real-time movements, which is what contributed to the genocide of the Rohingya people in Myanmar in 2017 (Amnesty International, 2022).

The walled garden on Free Basics uses a two-tier system. Tier one services appear on the default home page, and tier two services hide under a meatball menu (Bonilla et al., 2017). Local developers who want to submit to the Free Basics platform must go through Meta's approval process, but there is no guarantee their services will appear on the home page. The telecommunications operator for the given region and Meta have the final say on which services will be offered on the home page, likely breaking net neutrality through paid prioritization of certain services. The irony about Free Basics is that the walled garden touting free services could also malfunction and start charging people. A report from The Wall Street Journal in 2022 uncovered that internal documents from Facebook employees showed that this error in Free Basics had been happening for months. People who were using the “free” version were receiving unexpected charges from their mobile plans (Scheck et al., 2022). After a year of this ongoing software error or “leakage,” the total monthly charges to people who were supposed to be on a free plan rose from $1.3 million to about $7.8 million (Scheck et al., 2022). The tiered services offered on Free Basics may have been a prototype for Meta’s new subscription tiers across Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp (Lacoma, 2026). The era of free social media may be coming to an end sooner than expected.

Zuckerberg, more or less in his plea for Free Basics, positions connectivity as a human right. There is truth to some parts of that intention, meaning that human beings have an active DNA that primes us for cooperative living by hardwiring pathways for empathy, trust, and altruism. Gene variants that regulate oxytocin and dopamine systems encourage human beings to form social networks, naturally seeking connectivity, and thus building complex social structures (Ebstein et al, 2010). But what Zuckerberg built with Facebook may actually isolate humans more than his original intention to connect them. Most of the “connectivity” available in Free Basics subsists off of information consumption. In a study done by Yim and his colleagues, they compared two sociological measures: the degrees of self and the forms of social capital to describe the behavioral characteristics associated with Facebook inputs (2017). The majority of Facebook inputs are consumption-oriented, event-oriented, contact-oriented, and surveillance-oriented, all falling at the lowest level within the degrees of self (functional) and the forms of social capital (bridging). An individual who mostly engages in activities at a functional level would have a harder time reaching a level of self-awareness. At the same time, if most social relationships also remain in the bridging state and never evolve, trust would rarely thrive, which is especially needed to build communities (Yim et al, 2017). Free Basics would feel more like a one-way channel than an individual actively participating in an exchange that can chemically deepen the pathway to empathy and trust, a real human connection.

Categorizing Facebook inputs using sociological structures for degrees of self against forms of social capital (Yim et al., 2017).

A non-partisan survey was conducted by The Survey Center on American Life in 2024. They discovered that those who used social media passively, meaning those who rarely or never interact with close friends, were more likely to be lonely and less trusting than those who actively engaged in using the platform as a communication tool with close friends. Among the Americans who participated in the survey, more than half are actually passively using social media (Cox et al., 2025). Sometimes, the social media platform even transforms a person, dehumanizing them into a brand, a product of themselves, which favors Meta’s product design because the space is not devised for organic and mutual responsiveness. Advertisers want revenue, and as such, the core architecture of Free Basics and many others comes down to selling content and closing a sale. Unfortunately, the price of these sales is sometimes the users’ sanity (Hunt et al., 2023). 

Conclusion

Free Basics still runs in over fifty-five countries today. Since the inception of Free Basics, Meta has launched research and products to gain control over global communication connectivity. The Connectivity Lab in California hosts most of these projects (Meta, 2014). Shortly after the launch of Free Basics in 2013, Meta began Project Aquila in 2014, seeking to launch solar-powered internet-beaming drones into space. In a separate collaboration, Meta and SpaceX failed a satellite launch, expecting the satellite to extend internet coverage in Africa (Wong, 2016). Project Aquila did not last. Meta tapped Airbus on the shoulder and handed them the rest of Project Aquila. With more engineering resources, Airbus successfully created high-altitude platform stations (HAPS) or stratospheric unmanned aerial vehicles (Lee, 2018). As for Free Basics, the platform still exists, but parts of the project transformed into a web-based proxy service, Discover (Tobin, 2021). Due to the recent rise in artificial intelligence investment, the focus has shifted to ground-based connectivity. They are building one of the longest globe-spanning subsea internet cables, along with securing 200 billion dollars to build an almost Manhattan-size data center in Louisiana (McMahon, 2025; Griffin, 2026). In recent months, investors have poured into Meta’s roadmap for creating a super artificial intelligence. The scale and impact of what Free Basics executed merely scratches the surface of Meta’s capacity for influence and power in today’s digital age. Rohingyas from Myanmar are still seeking reparations from Meta.

---

Glossary

• Cache: a fast and temporary storage layer used for storing instructions or frequently used data.

• Cookies: a small text file that software such as a website stores on the client side’s platform (e.g. computer, phone, tablet, etc.)

• Data allowance: also known as a data cap; the maximum amount of internet data allocated to a person to send and receive over a cellular or broadband network during a specific billing cycle, without incurring extra fees or having their internet speed reduced.

• Digital divide: the gap between groups of people who have greater access to a variety of modern developments in digital technology and those who do not, resulting in social inequalities.

• Digital rights activists: someone who actively participates in advocating for equal access to digital technology across different societal subgroups.

• Differentiated pricing: a price discrimination strategy in which a business charges different prices for the exact same good or service based on who is buying, where, when, or in what quantity. The goal is to capture different market segments. For example, a shoe that comes from the same factory can be marketed as different, priced differently, and sold in different areas.

• Echo chamber: a space, either physical or digital, culminating and exchanging information that only serves a specific subject matter, immediately flagging data that may challenge or skew the views of the given space.

• Home page: on digital products, the default primary screen. Acts as the central navigation hub and usually greets users after login or entry.

• Low-end mobile browser: A browser that maximizes the limited amount of data available for internet bandwidth in order to still provide an internet experience, also known as lightweight web browsers, low-data web browsers, or downlevel mobile browser (e.g., Firefox Focus, Opera Mini).

• Meatball menu: a common user interface component consisting of three dots, either vertical or horizontal, that when clicked, shows more options for navigating the screen.

• Meta Conversion API: a set of protocols Meta developed to connect directly to third-party servers (e.g. advertisers) to retrieve their data.

• Net neutrality: a guiding principle for internet service providers (ISPs) to maintain an unbiased presentation across all available services as a host, which means treating all data equally without blocking, throttling, or offering paid prioritization.

• On-ramping: process for guiding or “onboarding” new customers from the initial use of the product (e.g., cellphone, application, etc.) to eventually regularly using and paying for the product.

• Product matching algorithm: In the context of Meta, a product-matching algorithm is the set of computational processes that allows more in-depth and highly specified advertisements based on the user’s available data Meta has access to.

• Proxy-layer: An intermediary server that sits between the client hardware and the destination server, where the data travels to the intermediary first, and vice versa.

• User: a person receiving the promised services from a given product.

• Walled garden: a closed environment, either digital or physical, that monitors which information can be seen by those within, restricting movement outside the curation.

• Zero-rating: a telecommunications practice in which specific internet traffic doesn't count against a user's data allowance, enabling free access to certain websites, services, or applications.

---

References

1. Amnesty International. (2022). Myanmar: Facebook’s systems promoted violence against rohingya; meta owes reparations. In Amnesty International. Amnesty International. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/09/myanmar-facebooks-systems-promoted-violence-against-rohingya-meta-owes-reparations-new-report/

2. Anderson, M., & Jesdanun, A. (2018). AP FACT check: Facebook does not sell data but profits off it. In AP News. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/6f5156879a3a48218b509c97fcc28e39

3. Andreessen, M. (2016, February 16). Anti-colonialism has been economically catastrophic for the Indian people for decades. Why stop now? Twitter. https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-35542497

4. Blackstein, S., Duvdevani, I., & Renfro, S. (2020). Implementing a secure web-based proxy service for Discover. In Engineering at Meta. https://engineering.fb.com/2020/05/05/connectivity/discover/

5. Bonilla, M., Yeboah, K., Wanjohi, N. W., Salazar, G., Kapadia, F., Jalil, M., & Palatino, M. (2017). Free Basics in Real Life: Six case studies on Facebook’s internet “On Ramp” initiative from Africa, Asia and Latin America [Review of Free Basics in Real Life: Six case studies on Facebook’s internet “On Ramp” initiative from Africa, Asia and Latin America]. Global Voices, 2–35. https://advox.globalvoices.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/FreeBasicsinRealLife_FINALJuly27.pdf

6. Cox, D. A., Hammond, K. E., & Grace, J. (2025). How social media made us less social. In The Survey Center on American Life. The Survey Center on American Life. https://www.americansurveycenter.org/newsletter/how-social-media-made-us-less-social/

7. Digiday. (2015). BabyCenter blues: A massive millennial publisher with growing pains. In Digiday. Digiday. https://digiday.com/media/babycenter-blues-massive-millennial-publisher-growing-pains/

8. Doctorow, C. (2016). “Poor internet for poor people”: India’s activists fight Facebook connection plan. In The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/15/india-net-neutrality-activists-facebook-free-basics

9. Ebstein, R. P., Israel, S., Chew, S. H., Zhong, S., & Knafo, A. (2010). Genetics of Human social behavior. Neuron, 65(6), 831–844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2010.02.020

10. Fool, M. (2025). How Does Meta Make Money? In The Globe and Mail. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/investing/markets/markets-news/Motley%20Fool/36073866/how-does-meta-make-money/

11. Griffin, R. (2026). Meta’s giant AI data center is reshaping rural Louisiana. In Bloomberg. Bloomberg. https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2026-meta-facebook-ai-data-center-louisiana/

12. Hempel, J. (2018). What happened to Internet.org, Facebook’s grand plan to wire the world? In WIRED. WIRED. https://www.wired.com/story/what-happened-to-facebooks-grand-plan-to-wire-the-world/

13. Hunt, M. G., Xu, E., Fogelson, A., & Rubens, J. (2023). Follow friends one hour a day: Limiting time on social media and muting strangers improves Well-Being. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 42(3), 187–213. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2023.42.3.187

14. Lacoma, T. (2026, May 28). Meta puts perks behind paywalls: New subscription tiers across facebook, instagram, WhatsApp. CNET. https://www.cnet.com/news/social-media/meta-new-subscription-tiers-facebook-instagram-whatsapp/

15. Lee, D. (2018, June 27). Facebook abandons its project aquila flying internet plan. BBC. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-44624702

16. Maini, A. (2025, November 21). Testing North Korea’s illegal smartphones. YouTube; YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3olqrqtjpfc&t=225s

17. Marchese, A. (2026, January 27). Meta enters up to $6 billion Data-Center Fiber-Optic cable deal with corning. The Wall Street Journal; The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/tech/meta-enters-up-to-6-billion-data-center-fiber-optic-cable-deal-with-corning-4a085f73

18. McMahon, L. (2025, February 17). Meta plans globe-spanning sub-sea internet cable. BBC. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckgrgz8271go

19. Meta. (2014). Announcing the connectivity lab at Facebook. In Meta. Meta. https://about.fb.com/news/2014/03/announcing-the-connectivity-lab-at-facebook/

20. Meta. (2015a, September 24). Facebook: Privacy on Free Basics. Facebook; Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/legal/internet.org_fbsterms

21. Meta. (2015b, September 24). Update to internet.org free basic services. Meta Newsroom; Meta. https://about.fb.com/news/2015/09/update-to-internet-org-free-basic-services/

22. Meta. (2020). Conversions API: Optimize & improve ad performance. Meta for Business; Meta. https://www.facebook.com/business/tools/conversions-api

23. Meta. (2025). Meta privacy policy - how meta collects and uses user data. In www.facebook.com. Meta. https://www.facebook.com/privacy/policy/

24. O’Maley, D., & Kak, A. (2018). “Free internet” and the costs to Media pluralism: The hazards of Zero-Rating the news. In Center for International Media Assistance. Center for International Media Assistance. https://www.cima.ned.org/publication/zero-rating-the-news/

25. Romanosky, J., & Chetty, M. (2018). Understanding the use and impact of the Zero-Rated free basics platform in South Africa. 1–13. https://bpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/voices.uchicago.edu/dist/1/2826/files/2020/12/romanosky.pdf

26. Scheck, J., McGinty, T., & Purnell, N. (2022). Facebook promised poor countries free internet. People got charged anyway. In WSJ. The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/tech/facebook-free-india-data-charges-11643035284

27. Sen, R., Ahmad, S., Phokeer, A., Farooq, Z. A., Qazi, I. A., Choffnes, D., & Gummadi, K. P. (2017). Inside the walled garden. ACM Sigcomm Computer Communication Review, 47(5), 12–24. https://doi.org/10.1145/3155055.3155058

28. Singh, M. (2018, May 1). After harsh criticism, facebook quietly pulls services from Developing countries. The Outline; The Outline. https://theoutline.com/post/4383/facebook-quietly-ended-free-basics-in-myanmar-and-other-countries

29. Soni, A. (2016, February 8). India deals blow to Facebook in people-powered “net neutrality” row. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/08/india-facebook-free-basics-net-neutrality-row

30. Tobin, M. (2021). How facebook discover replicated many of Free basics’ mistakes. In Rest of World. Rest of World. https://restofworld.org/2021/facebook-connectivity-discover/

31. Wong, J. C. (2016). SpaceX rocket explosion: Mark zuckerberg laments loss of Internet.org satellite. In The Guardian. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/sep/01/mark-zuckerberg-spacex-explosion-africa-internet

32. Yeboah, K. (2017). Is free basics really bringing more africans online? A case study from Ghana. In Global Voices. Global Voices. https://globalvoices.org/2017/07/27/is-free-basics-really-bringing-more-africans-online-a-case-study-from-ghana/

33. Yim, M., Gomez, R., & Carter, M. (2017). Facebook’s “Free Basics” and Implications for Development: IT Identity and Social Capital. Aisnet.Org, 2590–2599. https://aisel.aisnet.org/hicss-50/eg/ict4d/3/

34. Zeevi, Y. (2020, May 5). Discover: Exploring new ways to support connectivity. Tech at Meta. https://tech.facebook.com/engineering/2020/5/discover/

35. Zuckerberg, M. (2013). Is connectivity a human right? In Facebook. https://about.fb.com/news/2013/08/mark-zuckerberg-is-connectivity-a-human-right/