Why Airtel’s Priority Postpaid Plan Triggered A Net Neutrality Debate

Airtel finds itself into a familiar battleground – the net neutrality debate. India’s second largest telecom operator stirred up the hornet’s nest once again earlier this week after it rolled out its “Priority Postpaid” plans. 

Powered by 5G network slicing capabilities, the priority service promises premium subscribers high-speed data lanes even in heavily congested urban zones. The plan starts at ₹449 a month (excluding GST) and goes all the way to ₹1,749 per month.

Almost immediately, what appeared to be a routine product launch for high-paying customers transformed into a flashpoint. On social media platform X, one user called the service a “private VIP lounge”, while another termed it a “calculated legal heist of India’s open internet”.

This launch also triggered a fierce debate among consumer advocates and digital rights activists, with many raising questions about whether the service undermines India’s net neutrality. 

As if the online outrage was not enough, the telecom department and the Parliamentary standing committee on communications and information technology also swiftly stepped in to examine the “priority” architecture. 

While Airtel claims that the offering is fully compliant with net-neutrality rules, critics argue otherwise.

However, this isn’t Airtel’s first brush with net neutrality. In 2015, the telecom giant faced nationwide backlash over Airtel Zero, a platform that allowed internet companies to pay to the telco so their users could access their apps or websites for free. The platform was eventually shelved after public outcry. 

Now, with 5G network slicing, is Airtel testing the boundaries of net-neutrality once again? Before we delve into that, let’s take a look at what this slicing technology actually is?

The Controversial Slicing Tech

Airtel’s Priority Postpaid service leverages 5G standalone network slicing, a capability that divides a single physical network into multiple virtual “slices,” each tailored to specific user needs or performance requirements. 

Unlike previous 5G deployments, standalone architecture allows operators to carve out dedicated bandwidth with guaranteed quality of service (QoS), low latency, and stable connectivity, particularly valuable during network congestion or major events. 

Airtel has deployed this technology exclusively for “priority” postpaid subscribers, promising them consistent speeds even when the network is crowded.

The controversy stems from what this means for net neutrality’s core principle – all internet traffic should be treated equally, regardless of who sends it, who receives it, and how much they pay. 

What’s The Bone Of Contention?

A decade ago, the central concern was that telecom operators (read Airtel Zero) might favour certain platforms over others. As a result, Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) instituted net neutrality rules in 2017 to ensure that every website and app had equal access to users, regardless of commercial arrangements of telcos.

Airtel’s Priority Postpaid plan does not violate those principles in a direct sense. Instead, it introduces a different layer of differentiation: network quality. Through 5G slicing, Airtel can allocate dedicated capacity to a subset of users, ensuring they face less congestion and more stable speeds during peak demand.

This is where the debate becomes more nuanced. Supporters argue that this is simply an evolution of network management as telcos have always differentiated between users in some way, whether through plan tiers or usage policies. From this perspective, network slicing may seem like a way of delivering differentiated quality for a higher price.

“Whatever is being offered right now is not a net neutrality violation. It is only pri­or­it­isa­tion with respect of speech alloc­a­tion to cer­tain sub­scribers,” Inter­net Free­dom Found­a­tion founder Apar Gupta told a publication.

“As per my understanding of current net neutrality regulations, creating plans with higher speeds does not violate net neutrality, as long as you don’t prioritise speeds for specific apps, services or sectors, or price access to different apps, services or sectors differently… Just because 5G technology is capable of network slicing, doesn’t mean that network slicing is used to discriminate between apps, services or sectors either on speed or data pricing,” said MediaNama founder Nikhil Pahwa. 

In the same breath, he noted that it was “important” for TRAI to look into the rollout of the priority plan, saying that the service should not lead to the degradation of experience for other customers of Airtel. 

Critics claim that Airtel’s service creates user-based discrimination rather than content-based discrimination, potentially creating a “fast lane” for premium postpaid customers while relegating the prepaid majority to a “second-class service”.

Telecom expert Parag Kar argues that prepaid users could potentially face congestion if priority postpaid users consume a large part of the capacity. He further contends that Airtel’s priority offering could assume a case of net neutrality violation as TRAI rules mandate that specialised services must not hurt internet services.

He further notes that if telcos are allowed to create premium lanes for higher-paying users, this could shift the internet from neutral access to tiered-quality access. This, he claims, could undermine the spirit of net neutrality, even if rules aren’t explicitly broken.

This concern is amplified by India’s demographic reality. Over 95% of India’s mobile subscribers are prepaid, meaning that the vast majority could face inferior internet experiences during peak hours or in congested areas compared to the affluent minority on postpaid plans. 

Amid a flood of criticism, Airtel stuck to its guns and told a telecom department (DoT) panel that its priority Postpaid service is fully compliant with net-neutrality rules. 

Airtel Mounts A Defence

Arguing before the committee, Airtel reportedly claimed that its Priority Postpaid plan did not involve blocking, throttling or app-specific prioritisation. 

Making its case, the company also reportedly informed the panel that postpaid traffic is only about 4% of its current mobile traffic and would rise to roughly 6% after the rollout, which it argued is too small to degrade overall service quality. 

Airtel also pointed out that carriers in the US, UK, and Singapore already offered similar tiered services without violating net neutrality. 

The telecom giant also reportedly positioned the plan as a necessary step to unlock the full monetisation value of 5G, arguing that restricting network slicing could hamper development and adoption of advanced technologies like 6G, autonomous vehicles, and industrial IoT.

Meanwhile, industry reactions have been mixed. Rival Vi jumped into the controversy and launched a digital campaign, mocking Airtel with slogans like “No more, no less but equal network to all” and “Strong Network. Sabka Haq”.

However, India’s biggest telecom operator Reliance Jio lent its support to Airtel. Right after the controversy broke out, the Akash Ambani-led company, in a submission dated May 25, told the Parliamentary standing committee that 5G network slicing is compatible with India’s net neutrality framework provided there’s no degradation of regular internet services. 

That said, the telecom department and the Parliamentary panel are now expected to deliberate the matter over coming weeks, before drawing conclusions. So, will Airtel take a step back or will the debate around net-neurality rage on? Only time will tell.

The post Why Airtel’s Priority Postpaid Plan Triggered A Net Neutrality Debate appeared first on Inc42 Media.