WhatsApp and Telegram resist in Russia but their days could be numbered

Unlike some of the world’s major social networks, messaging systems such as WhatsApp and Telegram escaped Russia’s blockade, in a subtle tolerance that experts warn might end abruptly.

After the invasion of Ukraine on February 24, years of friction between Moscow and American Facebook and Twitter came to a head, with the platforms targeting state-linked Russian media, prompting Russia to impose restrictions in reaction.

On Friday, YouTube faced a direct threat of being stopped when Russian media regulator Roskomnadzor accused the Google-owned site of having “anti-Russian” behavior. YouTube has also removed Kremlin-linked media channels from its global platform.

If anything, messaging applications have remained unbeaten so far, in part because WhatsApp, which is owned by Meta, is less adapted to mass communication, whereas Telegram’s ability to disseminate material to large groups was valuable to both the media and the Kremlin.

“I don’t think Russia would prohibit Telegram since they don’t have enough platforms to operate on,” said Sergei Sanovich, a postdoctoral researcher at Princeton University, who recalls that authorities tried to restrict the service in 2020 but were unsuccessful.

Telegram is the most divisive of the messaging apps.

Telegram also includes information channels for the general public. Photo courtesy of AFP

Telegram, which has been chastised for its loose content restrictions, provides a platform for Russian authorities to spread narratives about their globally condemned military operation.

Despite the blockage of domestic service, Russia maintains accounts on social media sites such as Facebook; nevertheless, the Silicon Valley giant erased posts from Moscow pages that carried inaccurate information on the Ukrainian offensive.

Telegram, in his opinion, has become a crucial tool for exchanging battle news, with its rapid development fueled by the Kremlin’s attack on alternative media and the blockage of social media apps like Facebook and Instagram.

In the last three weeks, Telegram added an average of 2.5 million new members per day, up nearly 25% from previous weeks, according to the firm.

Experts, on the other hand, emphasized the danger to Telegram and its users posed by the lack of end-to-end encryption, which might expose the firm to government pressure to distort information.

WhatsApp has established containment barriers that give insulation against that kind of demand, according to Alp Toker, director of the web monitoring group NetBlocks.

“By improving your security and implementing end-to-end encryption technology, they effectively shielded their own platform from legal risks and any litigation arising from content access requests,” Toker stated.

WhatsApp, as well as the use of private messaging

For the time being, the use of WhatsApp between two users or in group discussions makes it a less attractive target for Russian authorities, but that might change if it becomes a vital venue for anti-war rallies.

“Primarily, Roskomnadzor was concerned about channels and news and ways of spreading information to huge numbers of people,” says Eva Galperin, head of cybersecurity at the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Toker, on the other hand, points out that the situation has not yet reached a crisis point for authorities, in part because social media platforms, many of which are now prohibited, played an important role in collective organization.

“As these (platforms) fade away, the dynamics may shift, with messaging apps becoming the next target,” he warned.

According to estimates from the specialized firm eMarketer, WhatsApp was one of the most popular applications in Russia in 2021, with approximately 67 million users, or roughly 65 percent of internet users in the country – far outnumbering TikTok, the Russian social platform VK, and even Telegram.

With 76 million visitors in 2021, YouTube attracted more Russians than any other medium on the list.

Its popularity stemmed in part from the daily entertainment it provided for Russians, who also served as an audience for politicians and the government wanting their attention. According to Sanovich, a Princeton academic, the site simply irritated law enforcement.

“They had a terrible time regulating YouTube in terms of censorship,” he added, “and YouTube’s current steps made the platform less desirable because it’s a venue for foreign propaganda.”

The government’s decision on what to do with YouTube was further complicated by the lack of a domestic alternative of acceptable quality. Blocking YouTube, according to Toker of NetBlocks, involves fighting Google and its services, such as Gmail. He stated, “Declaring war on YouTube automatically means declaring war on the rest of the firm.”

“Google is a tremendous corporate power and a significant link to the outside world,” he remarked.

By Editor

Leave a Reply