Connect with us

Censorship Industrial Complex

Telegram CEO Pavel Durov’s Arrest Is Part of a Global War on Free Speech

Published

9 minute read

From The Rattler 

By J.D. Tuccille

Governments around the world seek to suppress ideas and control communications channels

It’s appropriate that, days after the French government arrested Pavel Durov, CEO of the encrypted messaging app Telegram, for failing to monitor and restrict communications as demanded by officials in Paris, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg confirmed that his company, which owns Facebook, was subjected to censorship pressures by U.S. officials. Durov’s arrest, then, stands as less of a one-off than as part of a concerted effort by governments, including those of nominally free countries, to control speech.

“Telegram chief executive Pavel Durov is expected to appear in court Sunday after being arrested by French police at an airport near Paris for alleged offences related to his popular messaging app,” reported France24.

separate story noted claims by Paris prosecutors that he was detained for “running an online platform that allows illicit transactions, child pornography, drug trafficking and fraud, as well as the refusal to communicate information to authorities, money laundering and providing cryptographic services to criminals.”

Freedom for Everybody or for Nobody

Durov’s alleged crime is offering encrypted communications services to everybody, including those who engage in illegality or just anger the powers that be. But secure communications are a feature, not a bug, for most people who live in a world in which “global freedom declined for the 18th consecutive year in 2023,” according to Freedom House. Fighting authoritarian regimes requires means of exchanging information that are resistant to penetration by various repressive police agencies.

“Telegram, and other encrypted messaging services, are crucial for those intending to organize protests in countries where there is a severe crackdown on free speech. Myanmar, Belarus and Hong Kong have all seen people relying on the services,” Index on Censorship noted in 2021.

And if bad people occasionally use encrypted apps such as Telegram, they use phones and postal services, too. The qualities that make communications systems useful to those battling authoritarianism are also helpful to those with less benign intentions. There’s no way to offer security to one group without offering it to everybody.

Durov’s Second Clash With an Authoritarian Government

A CNN report on the case (I watch so you don’t have to) weirdly linked Durov to Russian President Vladimir Putin, insinuating the two are conspiring. But as Reuters helpfully points out, “Telegram, based in Dubai, was founded by Durov, who left Russia in 2014 after he refused to comply with demands to shut down opposition communities on his VK social media platform, which he has sold.”

The Internet Archive contains links to 2014 posts by Durov boasting, in Russian, that he refused to surrender information about Ukrainian users of VKontakte to the Putin regime and balked at barring the late Alexei Navalny’s opposition group from the service.

“I’m afraid there is no going back,” Durov told TechCrunch after leaving Russia to build Telegram. “Not after I publicly refused to cooperate with the authorities. They can’t stand me.”

Telegram was initially blocked in Russia, but the ban was unpopular and unsuccessful, and soon dropped. The service is now widely used by both Russians and Ukrainians as a digital battleground in their war.

Given that Telegram was founded by a free speech champion who fled his home country after refusing to monitor and censor speech for the authorities, it’s very easy to suspect that Pavel Durov has run afoul of authoritarians operating under a different flag, no matter the protestations of French President Emmanuel Macron that the arrest “is in no way a political decision” and that France “is deeply committed to freedom of expression and communication.”

This is the same Macron, after all, who last year, after riots he insisted were coordinated online, huffed “We have to think about the social networks, about the bans we’ll have to put in place. When things get out of control, we might need to be able to regulate or cut them off.”

More recently, free speech groups objected to European Union threats to censor political content on X—specifically, an interview with Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump.

The U.S. Has Its Own Free Speech Concerns

Matters are better in the United States, but not so much (as we have every right to demand). The Twitter Files and the Facebook Files revealed serious pressure brought to bear by the U.S. government on social media companies to stifle dissenting views and inconvenient (to the political class) news stories. If any further confirmation was needed, Zuckerberg sent a letter to the House Judiciary Committee on August 26 regretting the company’s role in succumbing to pressure to censor content.

“In 2021, senior officials from the Biden administration, including the White House, repeatedly pressured our teams for months to censor certain COVID-19 content, including humor and satire,” Zuckerberg wrote to Chairman Jim Jordan (R–Ohio). “I believe the government pressure was wrong, and I regret that we were not more outspoken about it.”

Zuckerberg also admitted to suppressing reports about the incriminating contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop at the FBI’s behest. “We’re ready to push back if something like this happens again,” he promised.

Fighting a Free Speech Recession

Durov’s arrest isn’t an isolated incident. It comes amid what Jacob Mchangama, (founder of the Danish think tank Justitia and executive director of The Future of Free Speech) calls “a free speech recession.” He warns that “liberal democracies, rather than constituting a counterweight to the authoritarian onslaught, are themselves contributing to the free-speech recession.”

“Recession” might be too soft a word to describe a phenomenon that has governments attempting to suppress ideas and arresting entrepreneurs who operate neutral communications channels. These are harsh policies with real costs in terms of human freedom.

Telegram didn’t respond to a request for comment, but in a public statement said, “it is absurd to claim that a platform or its owner are responsible for abuse of that platform.”

In a post from March, Pavel Durov himself commented, “All large social media apps are easy targets for criticism due to the content they host.” He vowed, “we shall solve any potential challenges the same way we do everything else — with efficiency, innovation and respect for privacy and freedom of speech.”

Durov’s arrest shows that he, like all champions of free expression, must wage their battles for liberty against the active opposition of government officials even in nominally free countries. Free speech is as important as ever, but more besieged than it has been in a long time.

Here are a few more good articles about liberty:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Business

PayPal Admits Freezing Account Over Covid Mandate Criticism

Published on

logo

By

PayPal’s internal documents reveal a politically charged decision-making process behind Covid-era account closures.

It seemed pretty obvious as it was happening – but now there appears to be proof that PayPal was punishing users for their Covid-era speech that didn’t align with official narratives.

One of the critics of pandemic mandates that got “debanked” is UsForThem founder Molly Kingsley, who has been told by PayPal that her account got frozen because it was used to receive donations, and that was found to be outside the payment giant’s “acceptable use” rules.

The parent campaign group and Kingsley were vocal critics of obligatory Covid vaccination of children, forcing them to wear face masks, as well as school closures.

And now PayPal has spelled it out. The Telegraph reported the account was terminated because of “content published by UsForThem relating to mandatory Covid-19 vaccinations and school closures.”

PayPal had to reinstate the account less than a month after it was shut down in September 2022 because UK’s financial regulator FCA intervened. This was not the only account targeted, that belonged to groups and individuals opposed to Covid restrictions, but when they got shut down, PayPal chose not to officially explain why.

Among those affected was Toby Young, a free speech advocate who’s Daily Skeptic blog was critical of Covid mandates, as well as lawyers gathered in the Law or Fiction group who shared similar views, and said that depriving them of access to their money on PayPal was a China-style “blatant assault on free speech.”

The information PayPal has come out with now regarding UsForThem and Kingsley was revealed in (legal) pre-action phase documents, which also show that the company spent four months leading up to the September 2022 account freeze putting together “a dossier of information about Kingsley.”

That dossier included quotes from her book, The Children’s Inquiry. Around the same time, the UK’s Counter Disinformation Unit – known for trying to suppress speech about lockdowns that was skeptical of the official line – was carrying out surveillance of Kingsley’s social media activity.

PayPal is now refusing to comment on what it calls “individual customer accounts” but the company claims its approach is objective and not politics-driven.

However, Kingsley believes that PayPal “appears to have admitted what we had suspected all along: that it was engaged in politically motivated debankings of those of us who criticized the government’s response to Covid, and the lockdown narrative in particular.”

“For more than two years, PayPal has resisted my efforts to uncover what happened,” the campaigner added.

If you’re tired of censorship and surveillance, subscribe to Reclaim The Net.

You subscribe to Reclaim The Net because you value free speech and privacy. Each issue we publish is a commitment to defend these critical rights, providing insights and actionable information to protect and promote liberty in the digital age.

Despite our wide readership, less than 0.2% of our readers contribute financially. With your support, we can do more than just continue; we can amplify voices that are often suppressed and spread the word about the urgent issues of censorship and surveillance.

Consider making a modest donation — just $5, or whatever amount you can afford. Your contribution will empower us to reach more people, educate them about these pressing issues, and engage them in our collective cause.

Thank you for considering a contribution. Each donation not only supports our operations but also strengthens our efforts to challenge injustices and advocate for those who cannot speak out.


Thank you.
Continue Reading

Censorship Industrial Complex

WEF Pushes Public-Private Collaboration to Accelerate Digital ID and Censorship

Published on

logo

By

World Economic Forum pushes private funding for UN-led agendas under the guise of resilience and collaboration.

The World Economic Forum (WEF) has prepared a white paper – titled, Resilience Pulse Check: Harnessing Collaboration to Navigate a Volatile World – to go with its ongoing annual meeting taking place this week in Davos.

Yet again reiterating the main theme of the gathering – “collaboration” – the document seeks to promote it among private and public sector entities in order to speed up the process of reaching UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

This collection of 17 interconnected goals is criticized by opponents of the spread of digital ID and censorship, since the first is openly, and the second indirectly pushed via the initiative – when it deals with “hate speech,” “misinformation,” and “disinformation” that the UN wants to be treated as threats to information integrity, which negatively impact the ability to achieve the SDGs.

The WEF white paper states that its own goal was to find out how businesses are tackling “today’s challenges,” opting once again for some doom-mongering by revealing that responses from 250 (highly likely hand-picked) participants, leaders from the public sector, showed that “84% of companies feel underprepared for future disruptions.”

And among the ways to achieve greater “resilience” in this context, the WEF endorses the SDGs, as well as the Paris Agreement (on climate change), and the “societal shifts” they aim for.

The white paper invites businesses to “work collectively” and promotes public-private collaboration as “essential” – as it turns out, mainly to find efficient ways to bankroll SDGs with private sector money.

The WEF wants to see “determined (and coordinated) action across both the public and private sectors” to get there. This informal group with a massive influence on elites in a large number of countries also pushes a pro-SDG entity, the Global Investors for Sustainable Development (GISD) Alliance, and singles it out as a positive example.

The white paper’s authors explain that the GISD Alliance is led by the UN and gathers major financial institutions and corporations who are coming up with coordinated strategies to “channel private investment towards SDGs.”

That, however, is not enough – besides the UN-led alliance, the WEF sees other “still untapped opportunities to deepen public-private collaboration.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X