> and in some ways telegram have just shown that the market has not settled and the current leader can be dethroned quite rapidly.
There were a number of things that led to Telegram's (relative) success. One of them is the owner itself - Whatsapp has suffered in reputation with the sell-out to Facebook, especially when they announced to combine the data stores of both companies. From then on, it was widely seen as "yet another thing of Facebook where they want all your data" despite Whatsapp actually offering better encryption than Telegram. Telegram in contrast is seen as "independent" from any major political power - Durov's fight with the Russian government is well known, as is its opposition to Western demands.
Another issue was cross-device compatibility. Whatsapp used to be completely immovable between Android and iOS, and its web UI for a long time was tethered to the phone, meaning it would drain your battery. That has only changed recently, but (IMO) too late.
And the final thing were the mass-fanout capabilities. Telegram groups allowed quick dissemination and discussion of information, for open groups even without requiring a Telegram account. Whatsapp had neither. Then add to that the resistance of Telegram towards any kind of moderation, especially from Western governments... and suddenly a bunch of conspiracy theorists, vaccine deniers and outright Nazis had the perfect platform. No moderation from the platform side, no content requirements other than "please don't spread CSAM", and effective management tools for group admins to yeet off counterspeech attempts. These days, you have QAnon groups numbering six-digit subscribers [1], and the same for German copycats [2].
Telegram's success is mostly based on outright ignorance and defiance of the rules everyone else (including Facebook) plays by.
Agree to everything here. Telegram feels almost like a return to the old web where you have a ton of small groups which each have total control over the content. There is no global telegram news feed and no global admins or rules (other than removing spam and illegal stuff).
It’s almost refreshing in a way. There is certainly unsavoury content being shared around but it doesn’t affect the average telegram user in any way because they don’t see it if they don’t subscribe to it.
> Then add to that the resistance of Telegram towards any kind of moderation, especially from Western governments... and suddenly a bunch of conspiracy theorists, vaccine deniers and outright Nazis had the perfect platform. No moderation from the platform side, no content requirements other than "please don't spread CSAM", and effective management tools for group admins to yeet off counterspeech attempts. These days, you have QAnon groups numbering six-digit subscribers [1], and the same for German copycats [2].
How is that any different to WhatsApp? WhatsApp is used by neo-nazi groups[0], used to organise literal genocide[1] and is the main source of covid/vaccine conspiracy nonsense around the world (except for the U.S.)
The thing is, the scale of Whatsapp is completely different. WA can have 256 members in a group or broadcast, Telegram 200.000 - three orders of magnitude more.
Yeah Telegram is great for hate speech and other shady stuff. Wouldn't be surprised if it gets secret support from Russia to destabilize Western societies.
Telegram's founder was forced to sell his business to Putin's cronies and leave Russia after he publicly refused to cooperate with Russian secret services during anti-Putin protests back when he was still running VK (Russia's Facebook). A few years later, Kremlin banned Telegram in Russia. I find the idea that Telegram is funded by Russia ridiculous. He is as anti-Putin as you can get.
There were a number of things that led to Telegram's (relative) success. One of them is the owner itself - Whatsapp has suffered in reputation with the sell-out to Facebook, especially when they announced to combine the data stores of both companies. From then on, it was widely seen as "yet another thing of Facebook where they want all your data" despite Whatsapp actually offering better encryption than Telegram. Telegram in contrast is seen as "independent" from any major political power - Durov's fight with the Russian government is well known, as is its opposition to Western demands.
Another issue was cross-device compatibility. Whatsapp used to be completely immovable between Android and iOS, and its web UI for a long time was tethered to the phone, meaning it would drain your battery. That has only changed recently, but (IMO) too late.
And the final thing were the mass-fanout capabilities. Telegram groups allowed quick dissemination and discussion of information, for open groups even without requiring a Telegram account. Whatsapp had neither. Then add to that the resistance of Telegram towards any kind of moderation, especially from Western governments... and suddenly a bunch of conspiracy theorists, vaccine deniers and outright Nazis had the perfect platform. No moderation from the platform side, no content requirements other than "please don't spread CSAM", and effective management tools for group admins to yeet off counterspeech attempts. These days, you have QAnon groups numbering six-digit subscribers [1], and the same for German copycats [2].
Telegram's success is mostly based on outright ignorance and defiance of the rules everyone else (including Facebook) plays by.
[1]: https://www.logically.ai/articles/new-telegram-research-show...
[2]: https://www.tagesschau.de/investigativ/kontraste/querdenken-...