“Privacy is dead, and social media holds the smoking gun,” wrote Pete Cashmore, an influential internet entrepreneur and thinker, in 2009. Even so, in the 2010s, social media companies were harbingers for change. A decade later, these ubiquitous, versatile and essential tools became threats to national security. X (Twitter), Telegram, TikTok and Facebook are villainized in Western democracies and Eastern autocracies alike. The right to encrypted communication is no longer synonymous with free speech, be it in France or Brazil. The taxonomy of social media platforms is changing from that of technology companies to a more complex one. There is also a tug-of-war between these tech-media giants and governments over taxation, legal confines and national security hazards. Autocratic rulers want them to fall in line or risk losing advertising revenue and democratic republics prioritize security concerns over freedom of speech.
In a world marred by contradictions, Pavel Durov of Telegram and Elon Musk of X claim to be free-speech absolutists and libertarians. Both have little regard for dissent and routinely override their teams’ advice. Mark Zuckerberg of Meta, Facebook and Instagram is singularly focused on tech and internet entrepreneurship.
Cluttered Digital and Regulatory Landscape
Soon after buying X for $44 billion, Musk applied his laissez-faire approach to content moderation and lowering, if not eliminating, any guardrails in place against fake news, hate speech and extremism. For half a billion subscribers, the Tesla founder started delivering what he had pledged at the outset. In a sweeping and far-reaching decision, Musk granted verification status for prominent users (over 800,000) and opened the floodgates for blue ticks for whoever could pay a monthly subscription fee. Ironically, X started verifying prominent users, and soon Google+ followed suit in 2011, Facebook in 2012 and Instagram in 2014. Impersonators bought the blue tick which undermined these platforms.
X became a literal flamethrower when the UK was embroiled in communal riots after the stabbing of three children on July 30 in Southport. As if relaxed content moderation standards and reinstating banned extremists like Tommy Robinson and Andrew Tate were not enough, Musk tweeted, “civil war is inevitable.” Earlier, Musk openly expressed support for the German far-right party AFD. The German Foreign Ministry objected to one of his tweets on funding NGOs rescuing migrants in the Mediterranean, “Yes. And it’s called saving lives.” The man with a worth of $250 billion has banned journalists critical of Israel.
Then there is Telegram with a billion subscribers. Often tagged as the new dark web, the social media and messaging service is not only popular amongst politicians, civil servants and the public at large but also criminal gangs and sleuths of every ilk. Currently detained in France on $550 million bail, its CEO and owner Pavel Durov is facing charges for lack of cooperation in criminal cases also involving child sex traffickers and risks a 10-year jail term if found guilty. Durov was also charged with ignoring law enforcement requests, a common, longtime grudge held by law enforcement agencies around the world.
Mistrust of Telegram is deep-rooted in France as the 2015 terror attacks in Paris were coordinated using this platform. French President Emmanuel Macron frequently uses the platform to communicate with his followers despite heightened security concerns.
The anti-authority platform allegedly shared the identities of Russian opposition activists with the Kremlin. Prior to landing in Paris, the Telegram CEO is thought to have met the Russian president in Baku, Azerbaijan. Russian media reports suggest that Durov has visited Russia over 50 times while publicly claiming to be persona non grata in Moscow. However, this does not deter Ukrainians, including President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, from using the platform ever more frequently. Since Telegram has two streams of activities: unencrypted open social networks such as group chats and one-on-one messages, and, encryption-enabled secret chats, the Russian military has long relied on Telegram for cheap, safe and easy communication. Durov’s arrest risks Telegram’s encryption being compromised, forcing the Russian military to revert to secure military networks amidst an invasion. Unlike Signal, Telegram’s encryption is not available for public review, and it remains to be seen whether one or more foreign agencies or hackers gain access to the messaging platform. As for encrypted content, Telegram pays marginal attention because it employs just 30 to 40 people for monitoring and regulation compared to Meta, which employs over 40,000 people.
While the British debate over whether Musk instigated violence continues, Durov is now counted among high-ranking tech entrepreneurs Ross Ulbricht of the Silk Road online black market and Chang Pang Zhao of Binance crypto exchange, who were also indicted for crimes committed by users through their services.
Russia and Iran are the most notable in criticizing France for detaining Durov and curbing free speech. On how many occasions have Tehran and Moscow advocated for freedom of expression?
The Devil is in the Details
Brazil’s Supreme Court may not reverse the ban on X. The EU may make an example out of Telegram for its unruly practices. Social media platforms may even set up national representative offices worldwide, as Turkey and Pakistan have sought. The predicament of operating under widely varying laws around the world seems as complex as 200-odd nations striving to meet zero-emissions goals.
The roots of social media censorship and monitoring can be traced back to COVID-19 vaccine controversies and disinformation. The pandemic flagged the dire challenge that social media platforms would continue to pose. The abuse of messaging services, some of which are encrypted, by violent extremist outfits and fraudsters rattled national intelligence and security agencies. When Musk decided to undo the verification tag, the FBI was so alarmed that a team visited the X headquarters. “Just because a guy has a lot of money doesn’t mean he can disrespect [the law],” said Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva after the country’s premier court suspended X. The era of digital exceptionalism has set in, he meant.
Macron had dinner with Durov and offered him French citizenship, which he later accepted alongside the UAE in 2021. Abu Dhabi even invested $75 million in Telegram after Durov agreed to shift his head office to the country. Why invite a diplomatic crisis of global proportions when it could be avoided? Why should a tech entrepreneur invest in another country if it will not come to its rescue?
Conversely, the United States may not succeed in its divest-or-be-banned legislation for TikTok. What appears to be a politically-motivated law, Beijing-based ByteDance calls it “unconstitutional” and divestment “not possible.” Owing to First Amendment rights, the US Supreme Court is likely to overturn the legislation. Durov may also leave France unindicted. Yet, it will not work as usual for unrepentant tech bosses, their mighty digital platforms and tech-savvy criminals. In today’s polarized world, arbitrary, opaque and retaliatory legislation is set to result in a bewildering game of digital hide-and-seek with the techno-utopians or anarchists.
