Telegram enables users to report private conversations to its moderators, as stated on its FAQ page, in light of the recent arrest of founder Pavel Durov in France last month for “crimes committed by third parties” on the platform.
The messaging application, boasting nearly 1 billion monthly active users, has consistently upheld a reputation for limited oversight of user interactions. The FAQ page previously stated that moderation requests would not affect private chats. All Telegram chats and group chats maintain privacy among their participants. The FAQ page previously stated, “We do not process any requests related to them.”
On Thursday evening, Telegram updated its FAQ page. The company notes on its updated FAQ page that all Telegram applications feature ‘Report’ buttons, enabling users to flag illegal content for moderators with just a few taps.
The platform has made available an email address specifically for automated takedown requests, guiding users to include links to the content that needs moderator review.
The implications of this change on Telegram’s capacity to address requests from law enforcement agencies remain uncertain. The company has a history of complying with court orders to disclose certain information regarding its users.
According to Remi Vaughn, a spokesperson for Telegram, users have the ability to “report messages from any group to moderators,” which functions similarly to forwarding. The update to the FAQ enhances clarity regarding the process for reporting content on Telegram, particularly in relation to the DSA.
The recent policy changes come in the wake of Durov’s arrest by French authorities, who are conducting an investigation into offences involving child sexual abuse images, drug trafficking, and fraudulent transactions.
The founder of Telegram’s reaction to his arrest
In response to his arrest, Durov took to his Telegram channel to express his discontent, stating: ‘Charging a CEO with crimes committed by third parties on the platform he oversees, while relying on laws from the pre-smartphone era, is a fundamentally flawed approach.’.
He contended that the conventional approach for nations unhappy with an internet service is to pursue legal action against the service provider rather than targeting its management.
Durov warned that if entrepreneurs are held accountable for the potential misuse of their products, “no innovator will ever create new tools.”
