The history of the Indian NN battle has been-
1) old TRAI head releases an implicitly anti neutrality set of consultation questions, very close to the end of the consultation period. (The underlying plan was to have the new rules passed without scrutiny, and the new head of the regulator would assume office in a month or two. All decisions would be blamed on the old head - SOP)
2) Nikhil Pahwa among many other individuals, including people on Reddit india start being vocal about it, (including an MP who brings it up in parliament)
3) these individuals coalesce into a rough group and using Twitter and in particular AIB's you tube video (Indian comedy group), get the message out. Millions of emails specifically answering the questions get sent to the regulator
4) what was assumed to be a slam dunk for telcos, turns into an actual consultation process, especially with the arrival of the new TRAI head.
5) committee is formed and consultation paper answers/counter comments are being taken into consideration for policy
---interlude---
Now comes a new paper - months after the previous NN movement. The topic is on differential pricing.
This time Facebook learns from the NN movement and opens with a rebranded Internet.org. Freebasics
Freebasics ostensibly is using the Facebook network to promote itself. Practically it's the same as Facebook using its network to promote a policy which it thinks is good for its users.
FBasics follows a huge online campaign with a marketing blitzkreig. (Not even kidding. There were more ads for Facebook than there were for popular movies at the time. Multiple hoardings and news paper ads)
In essence, Facebook learnt from the NN movement, and tried to create the same basic groundswell of support for its plans. It included utterly unethical onlir surveys which essentially asked "do you agree with saving people: yes/maybe later".
In sharp contrast - while FB Started strong, the save the Internet coalition had to do a cold start - they were/are never meant/intend to be a permanent NGO/movement. Nor are any members activists or professionals lobbyists.
So they didn't have things like opt in mailing lists to reach out for people. Nor had they anticipated the need to ask people if they could be contacted for future updates or requests.
Still, people once again coordinated, got the work done and got the message out - but a much smaller number than before (more arcane discussion topic than NN) and far less than Facebook managed to pump out.
-----
The ability of Freebasics to leverage Facebook is hugely worrisome.
If it were not for a technicality - that some marketing honcho misunderstood the actual message that had to be sent - all of those messages sent to TRAI would be considered valid, and TRAI would have taken it into account.
A TRAI functionary said it directly day before yesterday - TRAI regrets that Facebook handled the issue the way it did because it was a great opportunity for people to let TRAI know what they really wanted. There's a sense of regret and disappointment at the regulator.
Facebook, learns. As will anyone who paid attention to this.
The next time Facebook, or reliance need to have hell with a consultation paper, and it moves into the theater of public opinion - they will act correctly.
They will answer the correct questions. They will message more people. They will improve.
In contrast, the volunteers who decided to take this issue up, won't exist for other issues or have the necessary ability and man power to match the big players.
This isn't a win. It's a warning.
------
Note/ Details have been subsumed into larger points, so specific dates and sequences may be out of order (such as conversion of Internet.org to FBasics)