When Pavel Durov descended from his private jet onto the Le Bourget airport grounds on August 24, 2024, he wasn’t anticipating a greeting from French law enforcement. Durov had just returned from a journey to Azerbaijan. As a matter of fact, most of the world had not been expecting Durov’s arrest. Why was he taken by French authorities?

Pavel Durov is the chief executive of the social media platform Telegram. On August 24, he was charged by the French government for complicity in the spread of illicit content across his network. 

Telegram is a free messaging application founded by brothers Pavel and Nikolai Durov in 2013, making it relatively young in comparison to internet giants like Facebook, Instagram, and Whatsapp. Despite its age, or lack thereof, the platform has garnered upwards of 900 million active users in just eleven years, planting itself amongst the top ten social media companies today. Although Telegram does not boast notable popularity in the United States, its base is predominantly Asian (38%), European (27%), and Latin American (21%). Of this population, the majority are men between the ages of 25 and 44. 

Within the last decade, Telegram’s user base has expanded rapidly. Part of the credit is due to the end-to-end encryption encoded in their software, which essentially means the program is unequipped to access private messages between users. Even the government cannot access messages between two individuals. Therefore, Telegram only holds itself accountable for the moderation of “publicly available content” on the network. Further, since its establishment, the company has made its stance against censorship amply clear. Thus, Telegram has especially attracted individuals from nations where speech is more heavily restricted, such as India or Russia. Moreover, chat rooms on the app have the capacity for as many as 200,000 members, which permits group organization en masse. 

Given the liberties and security granted on the program, it should come as no surprise that government opposition cohorts are fond of the network. 

The lack of regulation on Telegram has allegedly given rise to criminal activity across the platform. Even prior to August 24, several members of the European Union had filed grievances against the platform for its allowance of dangerous, violence-inciting content. For instance, in February of 2022, the German government declared that Telegram had violated its hate speech protocol. 

Telegram has also been frequently accused of facilitating the spread of anti-Ukrainian sentiment and disinformation, as well as for allowing anti-immigrant radicals to coordinate riots in the United Kingdom. White supremacists have also been identified organizing dangerous activities on the site. According to CNN, White supremacist Telegram channels, “… with names like “Only White Lives Matter” and “Hans’s Right Wing Terror Center,” had an average of 1,773 members. The content within these channels is considered “egregious,” because members tend to be extremist and supportive of terrorist violence in the name of white supremacy. The platform is akin to Twitter or X in this sense. 

On August 24, however, CEO Pavel Durov was arrested by French law enforcement on the basis of a slightly different rationale. According to the Associated Press News, Durov was charged as result of “child sexual abuse material” (i.e. pornography) and drug trafficking on his platform, as well as Telegram’s refusal “to share information or documents with investigators when required by law.” It stands now that, under French law, Durov may be subject to a 500 million euro fine and ten years in prison for his “complicity in managing an online platform [that allows] illicit transactions by an organized group.” 

Born outside the borders of France, Durov has garnered international support. Russian officials claim that the action was taken with a political motive. Across the Atlantic, Elon Musk has taken to X, demanding the release of Telegram’s founder by sharing #FreePavel. In spite of criticisms, the French government has maintained that their intention is to safeguard its citizens against harassment online. Indeed, investigators of this case regard Telegram as a major threat to safety, with one noting, “For years, it has become THE number 1 platform for organized crime.” 

Pavel Durov was recently bailed out of jail. He must now live in France under increased scrutiny. 

Regardless of Telegram’s ultimate fate, the situation has rekindled a debate centered on censorship and universal freedoms, which extends beyond a single social network and a single country. 

Immediately following the arrest, the Telegram official account released its statement, saying “It is absurd to claim that a platform or its owner are responsible for abuse of that platform,” effectively revealing the key point of contention in the ongoing discussion: Are social media platforms liable for third-party-generated content? Even if to protect people from internet crime and hate speech, does content moderation violate freedom of expression? These queries clearly have no sole response. 

In the United States, the answer to questions of this vein is Section 230 of the Digital Communications Act, which officially absolves digital platforms from liability over user-generated content. Therefore, under this law, companies are not necessarily incentivized to moderate harmful content as they will always maintain legal protection from the consequences. For our nation, this legislation has been a roadblock in holding Big Tech accountable for working in collusion with online criminals. Supposedly, though, Section 230 functions to sustain our freedoms of speech online, as social media will not remove our posts without good reason.  

The internet has linked the whole of our planet together. Today, it is within our bounds to foster friendships abroad, coordinate international movements, and spread new thought without restraint via online communication. But the internet also harbors dangers by facilitating the organization of terrorist groups, human or drug trafficking, cyberbullying, and violence-inciting disinformation. 

Indeed, the internet provides each individual an incredible ability to influence others with their words, whether the impact be positive or negative. Thus, our freedom to think and share with the globe as we please bestows a responsibility upon us: to use our liberties of expression with care and intelligence. Defining this balance between individual freedom of thought and responsibility for community safety must be brought to the forefront of people’s minds as the world continues to digitize. 

Information retrieved from Demand Sage, Deutsche Welle Global Business News, the Associated Press News, Cable News Network Business, and French Television 1.