Борьба за свободу: Telegram против цензуры в России и Иране
Russia is restricting access to Telegram in an attempt to force its citizens to switch to a state-controlled app built for surveillance and political censorship.
8 years ago, Iran tried the same strategy — and failed. It banned Telegram on made-up pretexts, trying to force people onto a state-run alternative.
Despite the ban, most Iranians still use Telegram (bypassing censorship) and prefer it to surveilled apps.
Restricting citizens’ freedom is never the right answer. Telegram stands for freedom of speech and privacy, no matter the pressure.
Russia is restricting access to Telegram in an attempt to force its citizens to switch to a state-controlled app built for surveillance and political censorship. This move, mirroring tactics employed by authoritarian regimes worldwide, underscores a troubling trend of governments seeking to control the digital landscape and limit citizens’ access to information. The Kremlin’s strategy, masked under the guise of national security, aims to stifle dissent and monitor the online activities of its populace, effectively creating a digital iron curtain. The implications of such actions extend far beyond the realm of social media, impacting freedom of expression, access to independent news sources, and the ability of citizens to organize and mobilize. The stated reasons often involve combating terrorism or extremism, but the true objective is invariably the suppression of critical voices and the maintenance of power. The Russian government’s actions against Telegram are not an isolated incident; they are part of a broader pattern of online censorship and control, including the blocking of websites, the introduction of restrictive internet laws, and the prosecution of individuals for online activities.
8 years ago, Iran tried the same strategy — and failed. It banned Telegram on made-up pretexts, trying to force people onto a state-run alternative. The Iranian government, facing similar challenges of dissent and online activism, implemented a ban on Telegram in 2018, citing national security concerns and the platform’s alleged failure to cooperate with authorities on content moderation. This move was intended to drive users towards Soroush and other domestically-developed messaging apps, which were designed with built-in surveillance features and a greater capacity for government control. However, the Iranian experience provides a crucial lesson in the futility of such efforts. The ban was met with widespread resistance and ultimately proved ineffective in achieving its goals.
Despite the ban, most Iranians still use Telegram (bypassing censorship) and prefer it to surveilled apps. The resilience of Iranian Telegram users is a testament to the enduring human desire for free and uncensored communication. They employed various methods to circumvent the ban, including the use of VPNs (Virtual Private Networks) and proxy servers, which allow users to mask their IP addresses and access the platform through encrypted connections. This demonstrated the ineffectiveness of government attempts to control the flow of information in the digital age. Research has shown that despite the ban, Telegram remained a vital platform for Iranians, used for everything from personal communication to news dissemination and political organization. The preference for Telegram over state-controlled alternatives stemmed from a combination of factors, including its superior features, established user base, and, crucially, the perception that it offered greater privacy and security. The surveillance capabilities of the government-controlled apps, coupled with concerns about data security and potential censorship, made them less desirable for many users. The Iranian experience highlights the inherent challenges of controlling information in an era of readily available technological solutions.
Restricting citizens’ freedom is never the right answer. Telegram stands for freedom of speech and privacy, no matter the pressure. The core principles that govern Telegram’s operations, emphasizing user privacy and freedom of expression, are now more crucial than ever. This stance places Telegram in direct opposition to the authoritarian regimes that seek to control the digital space. The company’s commitment to end-to-end encryption, which ensures that messages are only readable by the sender and recipient, is a fundamental aspect of this commitment. This encryption protects user data from government surveillance and ensures that individuals can communicate securely without fear of being monitored. Furthermore, Telegram’s stance on content moderation, while not without its critics, generally prioritizes freedom of expression, allowing for a wide range of opinions and viewpoints to be shared, even those that may be considered controversial or critical of the government. The company’s refusal to comply with government demands for user data and its unwavering commitment to protecting user privacy are testaments to its dedication to these core values. The ongoing battle for control of the digital landscape requires a steadfast defense of these principles. The attempts to censor and control platforms like Telegram are not merely technical challenges; they are a fundamental assault on the rights and freedoms of individuals. The fight for online freedom is a fight for the future of democracy. The ability to communicate freely, access information without censorship, and engage in open dialogue are essential for a healthy and vibrant society. Telegram’s continued commitment to these values is a beacon of hope in a world where governments are increasingly seeking to control the flow of information and silence dissent. It serves as a reminder that the pursuit of freedom and privacy is an ongoing struggle that requires constant vigilance and unwavering commitment. The future of online freedom depends on the continued resilience of platforms like Telegram and the collective efforts of individuals who value these fundamental rights.
About the Author
