The recent arrest of Telegram founder and CEO Pavel Durov at Le Bourget airport near Paris has sent shock waves through the tech world. Business magnate Elon Musk called on France to “free Pavel” to avert a threat to democracy, while Paul Graham, the cofounder of leading Silicon Valley accelerator Y Combinator, suggested it would hurt the country’s chances of being “a major start-up hub.” However, although some are citing a French-led assault on free speech and innovation, the reality is more nuanced.
Durov’s detention is not a shocking act of government overreach, but the culmination of years of tension between his ultra-lax approach to oversight and growing concern about Telegram’s role in enabling criminal activity. The charges are extensive and serious, covering Telegram’s complicity in the distribution of child sexual-abuse material, drug trafficking and money laundering. While the likes of Meta, TikTok and Alphabet’s YouTube have much stricter bans on such activities, 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.
Telegram is one of the world’s biggest social media platforms, with an estimated 900 million monthly users, many of whom follow popular channels that broadcast content to thousands of people. It is also unique in its approach to overseeing all that activity: It does not. 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. Durov once told the Financial Times that each Telegram user cost the company just US$0.70 a year to support.
His platform has been linked to the spread of conspiracy theory groups, child sexual-abuse material and terrorism, with the Islamic State group having reportedly used the app as a communication hub for nearly a decade. Such groups do not just use the app for alleged secrecy, but for its “anything goes” approach to moderation. During the recent UK riots, calls to violence proliferated on the platform even though they broke the app’s rules. One such post was only taken down after I contacted the app about it. Despite all this, Telegram has proudly maintained a stance of non-cooperation. In its frequently asked questions section, 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 is “absurd to claim that a platform or its owner are responsible for abuse of that platform. Telegram abides by EU laws, including the Digital Services Act — its moderation is within industry standards and constantly improving.”
However, it is far from “absurd” for a company to be held accountable for criminal activity on its platform. Telegram is in this position, because of its choice to avoid content moderation — and not because of an encroaching effort by a government to conduct surveillance on its supposedly secret chats. Cryptography experts have long said that Telegram is not fully end-to-end encrypted. Most chats on the app use client-server encryption, meaning Telegram could access message contents if it chose to (and much of the content on the platform is on public channels anyway). The company’s “Secret Chats” feature does offer end-to-end encryption, but that is not the default and it is not always used for regular communication. In essence, Telegram has created an illusion of total privacy while retaining the technical means to monitor content — a capability it chooses not to use.
France’s move against Durov marks a reckoning for that choice, and the involvement of specialized units such as the country’s Centre for the Fight against Cybercrime and the Anti-Fraud National Office highlight the gravity of his app’s alleged offenses. Musk and other critics might say that his arrest threatens free speech, but Telegram’s hands-off approach to much of the activity on its platform does not 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 is not a defense of liberty, but a dereliction of duty.
One lesson the tech industry can glean from this week’s developments is that social media giants can no longer expect to keep operating in a regulatory vacuum. Europe is on track to take a harsher line on harms that occur on social media with laws such as the Digital Services Act and the Online Safety Act coming into force in the next year or so. The charges brought by the French prosecutors are not connected to the new EU law, but they are part of a broader shift in aggression. Tech’s leading players are not as untouchable as they thought they were.
Parmy Olson is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering technology. A former reporter for the Wall Street Journal and Forbes, she is author of We Are Anonymous. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
Former Taipei mayor and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) founding chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) was sentenced to 17 years in prison on Thursday, making headlines across major media. However, another case linked to the TPP — the indictment of Chinese immigrant Xu Chunying (徐春鶯) for alleged violations of the Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法) on Tuesday — has also stirred up heated discussions. Born in Shanghai, Xu became a resident of Taiwan through marriage in 1993. Currently the director of the Taiwan New Immigrant Development Association, she was elected to serve as legislator-at-large for the TPP in 2023, but was later charged with involvement
Out of 64 participating universities in this year’s Stars Program — through which schools directly recommend their top students to universities for admission — only 19 filled their admissions quotas. There were 922 vacancies, down more than 200 from last year; top universities had 37 unfilled places, 40 fewer than last year. The original purpose of the Stars Program was to expand admissions to a wider range of students. However, certain departments at elite universities that failed to meet their admissions quotas are not improving. Vacancies at top universities are linked to students’ program preferences on their applications, but inappropriate admission
RSS