Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Projecting Power
Search
Search
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Speech
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Special pages
Page information
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
Telegram's stance on free speech and content removal has been a subject of debate among its users and critics alike. As a popular messaging app with over 1.9 billion active users, Telegram has had to navigate a delicate balance between allowing users the freedom to express themselves and complying with government regulations that often require it to remove certain content.<br><br><br><br>On the one hand, Telegram's founder, Pavel Durov, has long been an champion for expression of ideas and has claimed that the app is committed to protecting users' freedom of expression. In a statement to the media, Durov has said that Telegram "will not comply with content removal demands" and that the app's goal is to "give people the freedom to communicate without fear without fear of persecution."<br><br><br><br>However, this stance has put Telegram at contradiction with governments around the world that have demanded it to remove certain content from its platform. For example, in 2020, the Indian government asked Telegram to remove over 1,500 channels that were spreading disinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic. Telecom regulator TRAI sent a notification to Telegram stating that failure to comply would result in suspending the app's services.<br><br><br><br>In response, Telegram stated that it has a robust system in place to identify and [https://hi-telegram.org/Windows/ ็ตๆฅๅฎ็ฝ] remove objectionable content, but that it would not comply with blanket requests to remove channels or accounts. This stance ultimately led to a confrontation between Telegram and the Indian government, with Telegram ultimately deciding to resist some of the requests.<br><br><br><br>Similarly, in countries such as Russia and Iran, Telegram has been criticized for failing to comply with government requests to remove opposition groups from its platform. In Russia, Telegram has been labeled as a "terrorist" organization and a tool for spreading disinformation, leading to repeated attempts by the government to shut down the app's services.<br><br><br><br>Despite these disagreements, Telegram's commitment to public discourse remains a key part of its brand identity. In fact, Telegram has taken steps to further protect users' freedom of thought, such as introducing new tools to help users identify and avoid disinformation and propaganda.<br><br><br><br>Ultimately, the tension between allowing users the freedom to express themselves and complying with government requests is a difficult one for any messaging app to navigate. While Telegram's stance on public discourse is admirable, its response to government regulatory pressures has often been inconsistent. Only time will tell whether Telegram can find a way to balance its commitment to expression of ideas with the demands of governments around the world.<br><br>
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Projecting Power may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
Projecting Power:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Toggle limited content width