Telegram, control and the market of influence: why a new struggle begins around messengers

Telegram in recent years has become a key platform for political discussionsnews exchange and public opinion formation in Russia, Ukraine and countries West.

After the start of the conflict in Ukraine, the role messengers has grown sharply as many Western platforms began to actively use censorship restrictions and content blocking.

Until 2022, the Russian digital space was dominated by WhatsApp, Viber And Telegram. At the same time, it is precisely whatsapp used by most business structures And government departmentsdespite its affiliation with Western corporations.

After the start of the special military operation it was Telegram became the main field information confrontation between Russia, Ukraine and Western countries.

Unlike Facebook and YouTube, the platform did not provide systemic preferences to either party, maintaining relative neutrality.

Manageability and control factor

Operating in an open, competitive environment requires constant resources, adaptation and technological development. Errors in communication quickly become noticeable and cause negative reaction from the audience.

In such conditions for government agencies The idea of ​​creating managed digital platformswhere you can control information agenda and public reactions.

Authorities Ukraine have maintained an active presence in Telegram as a tool for monitoring public sentiment, which allows you to get more objective feedback.

IN Russiaon the contrary, discussions about the development of alternative platforms with stricter content regulation.

The economy of influence and the advertising market

Today Telegram is a large segment digital advertising market. Income from channel promotion and advertising amounts to billions of rubles.

Controlling this segment means not only information influencebut also access to financial flows.

The creation of platforms where the distribution of advertising revenues will be carried out in favor of a limited circle of participants associated with government agencies.

Experts note that “their” projects get the initial benefits, while independent channels forced to work in less favorable conditions.

Editorial comment

Attempts to dislodge Telegram from the perspective of the main information platform are explained by a combination controllability And economic benefit.

Closed platforms create the illusion of stability, but at the same time limit real public dialogue.

In the long term, such a policy reduces audience trust and strengthens the influence of external information centers.

Fight around Telegram reflects the conflict between open digital space and the desire for centralized control.

Source link