War Foot Networks: Why Brazil X and France blocks and arrest the founder of Telegram

“Freedom of expression is to allow someone who hates what you don’t want to hear.” It is the description that Elon Musk makes, and is the maximum that X rules – that Twitter – has acquired the social network since the Tycoon. Musk, Libertarian, defends that the platform is open to all kinds of ideologies, so he recovered defeats that are as controversial as those of Donald Trump -formed after the attack on the Capitol and for which he refuses to interfere in the messages published by his users.

His last controversy comes from Brazil, where this week the Supreme Court has ratified the command of one of his magistrates, Alexandre de Moraes, to block the network throughout the country. The court argues that X does not have a legal representative in the country, a requirement to operate in it, and that the network houses incorrect information and accounts that promote a hate discourse. Musk defends himself by saying that Moraes attacks freedom of expression and demands that users censor. “His actions are incompatible with democracy,” X denounced in a statement.

Something similar happens with Pavel Durov, founder of Telegram. In his messaging application, converted into a social network, the messages are coded and they are published without a filter when the group is private. That is why the authorities from different countries claim that it has become the favorite territory of all types of criminals: from those who act with child pornography, to drug trafficking. Unfortunately, Telegram does not work with judicial investigations to expose them. And that is the legal basis on which French justice holds to justify the arrest of Durav as an accomplice of the crimes committed in her application.

His case is especially special, because the Russian entrepreneur decided to transfer Telegram’s head office to Dubai to escape the pressure that the Russian regime exerted on it. Since then he has maintained tense relationships with both Kremlin and other governments. But he also approached the West, and a sign of this is that the French president himself, Emmanuel Macron, granted him the nationality in 2021. And the proof that Telegram prevails absolute freedom is that the armies of Russia and Ukraine are used.

Impunity disguised as

The lack of cooperation with the judicial estates draws a parallel between the problems of both networks, which are interested in presenting their matters as a struggle between freedom and censorship. But Borja Adsuara, lawyer specialized in digital legislation, underlines major differences. «I am an avid defender of freedom of expression, but what happens to Telegram has nothing to do with that: but with child pornography, drug trafficking and other crimes. An appeal to liberties is an alibi to look for impunity, “he says about Russian’s case.

Carmela Ríos, expert in social networks and information, coincides. “Marseille drug traders, for example, use telegram to show their merchandise to customers, and the network has also become a pedophile nest,” he criticizes. It is not surprising that Zuid -Korea has denounced Telegram because he refused to close groups with a maximum of 200,000 users in which ‘deepfake’ sexual photos with bare bodies and teenagers were shared. In the end Telegram started working with Durav after the arrest of Durav. “It cannot be that the actors of evil house to work with impunity,” says Ríos.

«In Brazil, however, there is hate crimes that are difficult to determine. There are messages that can be hateful, but that are not illegal because there is no risk of encouraging violence, ”Adsuara explains. As an example of something that can be characterized as a crime of hatred, the messages published that Alvise Pérez published after the murder of the Matthw -Kind Mocreb, that unrelatively accused of that unrelatively accused of that unreal.

The lawyer also compares the two measures taken by Brazil and France: «The blockade of X throughout the country is exaggerated and not effective, because you can jump with a VPN; The arrest of a certain person for non -collaboration is much justified ». Ríos expands the focus and appreciates “a collision between traditional power and that of the new networks, which is often larger than that of the states and that tries to impose their rules above the laws.”

Fátima Martínez, a professor in communication and social networks and specialist in Marquetin, agrees and considers that platforms such as X or Telegram ‘are already the fifth power’. And also uses Pérez as an example of this. “He is a person who has reached 800,000 votes thanks to what he publishes in networks, and this makes governments nervous,” he analyzes. And it emphasizes that there is a problem of freedom of expression. «I had it on Twitter. Before Musk arrived, I started talking about politics and my account was ‘Banada’ -because those who have no visibility are even known, even if they are not eliminated. When he bought it, my number of followers shot up, “he says, which implies that the Milmillonario raised the veto that the previous managers had on political law.

Ríos also points out that both Twitter converted into X and has lived Musk’s own account. “It has become a amplifier of the political propaganda of populists such as Donald Trump,” he says, convinced that, contrary to what companies claim, “social networks if they have responsibility for what is published in them.” That is why it is of the opinion that the decision of Brazil is ‘launching a powerful message to the platforms to understand that they are not above the law’.

The geopolitical dimension

In the case of Telegram, Adsuara sees a clear geopolitical component that does not exist in X. «It seems that Durov has made peace with Putin, who in his time asked for information about dissidents communicating in his network, and Russia uses massive, also for military operations. Even Wagner communicates with her in Africa. That is why they are worried about their arrest. Moscow fears that the information circulated on Telegram will end in NATO, “he analyzes.

In the background, the dilemma of cooperation with the authorities always transcends, especially if they are dictatorial regimes. In the case of China, for example, most social networks have followed the steps of Google and left the country, which requires personal data on servers on their territory and compliance with local legislation that guarantees almost full access to everything that is published. «China takes place in these huts, but then the United States does something similar to Tiktok and demand the sale. Musk must now stick to the consequences in Brazil, “he concludes.

An extra problem that the three experts consulted see is that it is more and more social networks and not the law that marks the limits to freedom of expression through their terms and conditions. An example of this is the censorship of nudes and female nipples on Instagram. “Logically, governments also try to influence the content, try to censor what suits them by saying that the company or something else, and the platforms erase content for fear of sanctions that can reach 6% of invoicing in Europe,” says Adsuara.

Martínez also appreciates an attempt by the rulers of “a unique discourse dominates”, but acknowledges that “everything has its dark side” and gives the internet and the ‘dark web’ as an example. “I think that, with the excuse of crime, social networks are being laminated and that the quality of freedom of expression will influence,” he will move forward.