Charges against Telegram CEO sparks debate over balance of free speech and responsibility

The arrest of Telegram’s CEO and founder has reignited concerns about the balance of free speech and responsibility that comes with running social platforms. Telegram has more than 900 million users, making it among the most popular messaging services in the world. The arrest of Pavel Durov has far-reaching implications for the industry at large. Stephanie Sy discussed more with Pranshu Verma.

Read the Full Transcript

Amna Nawaz: The arrest of Telegram’s CEO and founder this week has reignited concerns about the balance of free speech and the responsibility that comes with running social platforms.

Telegram, founded in 2013, now has more than 900 million users, making it among the most popular messaging services in the world.

Stephanie Sy has the latest.

Stephanie Sy: French authorities have charged Telegram founder Pavel Durov with several offenses related to his messaging app. The charges include complicity in the distribution of child abuse images, drug trafficking and failure to comply with law enforcement requests.

Durov, who operates Telegram from Dubai, was apprehended over the weekend and was ordered to pay five million euros for bail. The arrest of the Russian-born tech billionaire has sparked a free speech rallying cry in some circles and has raised questions about how other social media executives may be held accountable for their platforms.

Joining me to discuss the implications of this arrest is Pranshu Verma, technology reporter for The Washington Post.

Pranshu, thank you so much for joining the “News Hour.”

Before we get into the ramifications of this arrest, tell us why Telegram is in law enforcement’s bullseye and what brought about this unprecedented arrest of the company’s founder?

Pranshu Verma, The Washington Post: So Telegram is a wildly popular messaging app, mostly in places like Russia, the Middle East, and South Asia.

About 950 million people use it. And it’s a way to send private chats or public broadcasting messages to large — hundreds of thousands of people. And it’s also a way to send individual kind of encrypted chats as well. So it melds two types of messaging into one app.

And now this kind of app is pretty good in some ways, for example, if you’re a dissident and you want to organize a protest against an authoritarian government. But it’s also become an app where some of the worst activity online kind of has become a haven for it, such as the sharing of child sexual abuse imagery.

And so that’s kind of what’s made Telegram into the bullseyes of the French authorities now, is that they are basically saying that the owner of Telegram, Pavel Durov, is complicit in making Telegram spread child sex abuse imagery, kind of spread organized crime, and also not complying with law enforcement when law enforcement wants user data about criminal activity.

And so, as you saw this weekend, this all culminated into a head when Pavel Durov landed in France outside of a Paris airport and was arrested and has now been issued charges around these types of activities.

Stephanie Sy: But the other platforms, as you know, including platforms like Facebook and Instagram, have also been accused of having nefarious activities, including sexual abuse imagery of children, extremism, scammers.

How is this different? How does Durov differ from his peers when it comes to that? Do the other platforms, for example, cooperate much more with governments and law enforcement?

Pranshu Verma: There’s no doubt that platforms like Meta and Twitter do host similar types of content.

But what Telegram is very specifically known for, it actually boasts about is its reluctance and often complete noncompliance with law enforcement in sharing user data. So even if a law enforcement official comes to Telegram, it is their policy as they boast about even on their own site to not share zero bytes of data with government to date.

And that’s what makes it really different from all the other tech companies is that kind of strong noncompliance.

Stephanie Sy: Elon Musk and other tech giants have posted their support of Mr. Pavel on X. Musk did. And a lot of people are asking what his arrest means for the heads of other similar platforms.

Should folks like Mark Zuckerberg, for example, be concerned about facing similar accusations? And could you see him being arrested if he travels to Europe? And do you see these charges being levied against a tech executive in the United States?

Pranshu Verma: Yes, this is the big question here. It’s opened up a can of worms.

Are the people who own the tech companies liable for the content that is on their platforms? Now, in the United States, there’s a rule in law that shields companies from being held liable for the content that they have put on their sites.

But in Europe, there is a little bit more of a strength around holding tech companies accountable. And you have seen now, in this case, kind of the most muscular act to date of a government official — of a government holding a private official of a company to account. And it is unlikely that we would see it in the United States where somebody like a Mark Zuckerberg or Elon Musk is detained for what is on Facebook or on Twitter.

But now the question becomes, what happens if that activity happens in Europe or elsewhere, and will governments kind of respond in kind? And we don’t know the answer yet.

Stephanie Sy: That is The Washington Post’s Pranshu Verma joining us.

Thank you so much.

Pranshu Verma: Thank you.