Photo Credit: Getty Images
Telegram, a messaging app once hailed for its commitment to privacy and freedom of speech, has increasingly come under fire for its role in facilitating criminal activities. The recent arrest of its CEO, Pavel Durov, in France has spotlighted the platform’s dark side, triggering a global debate about the responsibilities of tech companies in content moderation.
Durov was detained in Paris in August 2024, facing charges of complicity in facilitating criminal activities through Telegram, including drug trafficking, fraud, and the distribution of child sexual abuse material (CSAM). This arrest marks a significant moment in the ongoing struggle between privacy advocates and law enforcement, as Telegram has been accused of not doing enough to prevent its platform from being used for illegal purposes.
My own experience on Telegram mirrors the concerns raised by cybersecurity experts. While researching a story, I was added to var different Telegram channels, that all focused on illicit activities ranging from the sale of drugs to stolen credit cards. This happened without any action on my part, highlighting how easily users can be drawn into illegal networks on the platform. Despite Telegram’s claims of proactive moderation, these groups continue to thrive, often with thousands of active members.
Telegram’s appeal to criminals lies in its privacy features and the ability to host large, unencrypted group chats that can include up to 200,000 members. Unlike competitors like WhatsApp, Telegram’s encryption is not on by default and does not apply to group chats, making it easier for illegal activities to go undetected. Telegram’s own terms state that they do not monitor private group chats, a policy that has drawn sharp criticism from law enforcement and digital safety advocates .
In response to Durov’s arrest, defenders of free speech, including Elon Musk, have argued that holding a platform or its owner responsible for user activity sets a dangerous precedent. However, critics argue that Telegram’s laissez-faire approach to content moderation is not just about protecting privacy but about enabling criminal activity to flourish.
As the debate continues, Telegram finds itself at a crossroads, facing increased scrutiny from governments worldwide. The outcome of Durov’s case could have profound implications for the future of digital privacy and the responsibilities of tech platforms in combating online crime.
