Arrest of Telegram founder: Who is to blame for crime on social media platforms?

The founders, governments or users?

Warm and welcoming are not the words one usually uses to describe the French – if you have scrolled enough on Instagram and seen Emily in Parisyou know (although, to digress a little, the problems in Emily in Paris could be the protagonist herself). Nevertheless: beautiful architecture, great food and bulldogs – that's French.

When you travel to France, your itinerary includes the usual suspects: the Eiffel Tower, bakeries, the Arc de Triomphe, and maybe even the Seine—the opening waters of the 2024 Olympic Games. For one traveler, however, the trip was less conventional.

Pavel Durov, the founder of the online messaging app Telegram, was arrested when he landed in France on his private jet. Instead of a delicious baguette, he was greeted with an arrest warrant for failing to curb criminal activity on his platform (he should take more vacations, they said).

Here we look at why Durov was arrested, what the case for free speech is, and what the future of Telegram looks like.

Why was Durov arrested?

Durov's arrest came as part of a preliminary police investigation. He is accused of facilitating crimes on Telegram due to inadequate moderation and lack of cooperation with law enforcement. French President Emmanuel Macron said the arrest was not politically motivated, although some suspect the opposite.

Authorities are investigating a wide range of crimes carried out on the platform, from drug trafficking, child pornography and cyberbullying to terrorism and organized crime. For a platform with 950 million users, this is a major problem. But it is nothing new. For years, Telegram has been something of a version of the “dark web” because it does not advocate for censorship of content – a double-edged sword.

It is also worth noting that this is not Durov's first clash with the authorities. After refusing to close opposition groups on his platform VKontakte (VK), Durov founded Telegram from Dubai. He sold VK in January 2014 and left Russia the same year.

His recent arrest brings debates about online content regulation back into focus. How much free speech is too much? Who gets to decide that, and should it even be up for debate? X CEO Elon Musk, whose stance on content moderation is very similar, chimed in with a tweet: “#FreePavel,” adding: “In Europe, it's 2030 and you're going to be executed for liking a meme.”

Who is to blame for crimes committed on a platform?

As the founder of a social platform, you take on certain responsibilities. One of them is the unpredictable behavior of your platform's users. For example, you might find out that one of your users is a mafia boss. But there are few ways to find out in advance. Imagine asking every new Pinterest user, “Have you engaged in any criminal activity recently?” Few would take that question seriously, and even fewer would answer it honestly.

In response to the arrest of its founder, Telegram released a statement saying, “Telegram's CEO Pavel Durov has nothing to hide and frequently travels to Europe. It is absurd to claim that a platform or its owner is responsible for the misuse of that platform.” Leonid Volkov, formerly a top adviser to Russian opposition leader Alexei A. Navalny, echoed this sentiment, noting that while Telegram is popular with criminals, “Durov is not an 'accomplice' to the crimes committed by Telegram users.”

This situation underscores the complex role that governments and users themselves must play in monitoring online activity. However, this does not mean that the founders are absolved of any responsibility.

When you release a social media app, you become bound to societal expectations. Critics, including security experts, argue that Telegram's encryption is inadequate. Disinformation analysts also claim that the platform's minimal moderation has made it a breeding ground for terrorist propaganda and right-wing extremism.

Natalia Krapiva, a lawyer at the digital human rights group Access Now, summed up both sides of the argument: “We have defended Telegram against attempts by authoritarian regimes to block the platform and force it to hand over encryption keys, but we have also raised the alarm because Telegram has no human rights policy, no reliable communication channels, and no legal recourse available to its users.”

This is not an isolated case. Not long ago, Meta fought a similar battle in court when it was accused of not doing enough to keep children safe. But even then, a similar mindset emerged: Was Zuckerberg solely to blame? Maybe not.

Many are wondering if Durov's arrest will finally prompt Telegram to change its policies. But with Durov taking a very hands-on approach to leadership in the short term, executives have expressed concerns about how to move forward – a question Durov may also be grappling with.

Read also:

Header image from Wikimedia Commons