Telegram’s hands-off approach to content faces a reckoning
Mr Durov’s arrest should also be taken as a sign that the “no consequences” era for social media is fading as governments push to make companies more accountable for what happens on their apps.
While its peers invest heavily in content moderation and cooperate with law enforcement, Telegram has a minimal-intervention policy that has contributed to its low operational costs. Mr Durov once told the Financial Times that each Telegram user cost the company just 70 US cents a year to support.
Telegram has proudly maintained a stance of non-cooperation. In its FAQs, the company states “to this day, we have disclosed 0 bytes of user data to third parties, including governments”. Now, in response to the arrest, Telegram has said it’s “absurd to claim that a platform or its owner are responsible for abuse of that platform.
Mr Musk and other critics may argue that his arrest threatens free speech, but Telegram’s hands-off approach to much of the activity on its platform doesn’t grant it freedom from consequences. The digital world requires as much governance as the physical one, and when a platform becomes a tool for widespread criminal activity, turning a blind eye isn’t a defence of liberty but a dereliction of duty.