Stricter constraints on Internet than on narcotics
As of September 1, 2025, the Russian Federation is set to replace WhatsApp and Telegram with its homegrown “Max” app, and citizens who access banned “extremist materials” on the internet will be subject to fines. The list of banned materials is constantly growing with no clear boundaries, engendering an atmosphere of fear and self-censorship.
Subsequent to his May meeting with business leaders, on July 16 Putin released a list of presidential orders, including Pr-1608, p. 1b)-2, calling for “the introduction of additional restrictions on the use in the Russian Federation of software (including communications services) produced in unfriendly foreign countries”. On July 18 the Duma discussed legislation that will make it illegal to look at items on the Federal list of extremist materials, currently comprised of over 5,500 texts, websites, and works of art. Together these measures are designed to radically change the browsing and communication behavior of the populace.
Both WhatsApp and Telegram qualify as “communications services produced in unfriendly countries”. WhatsApp (a division of Meta, deemed an “extremist organization” by the Kremlin in 2022), with over 90 million users in Russia, is the most popular messaging app in the country. The Telegram social network (headquartered in the British Virgin Islands and operated in Dubai) also has 90 million users and is the primary source of independent information. Putin’s spokesman Dmitrij Peskov states that internet services have “certain obligations in accordance with the laws of the Russian Federation”. In other words, they must collect and share user data with Russian authorities. The solution, according to Putin’s order of June 12, is to replace both services with a new national multifunctional service dubbed “Max” (a division of VK). Max, launched in June and promoted by bots and influencers, has at this time 2 million users, and will come pre-installed on all telephones sold in Russia from September 1. The first organization to adopt Max for official business use is St. Petersburg State University.
In principle it is possible to circumvent the state’s plan by using a VPN. But only 50% of Russian internet users have a VPN; the remainder mostly lack the knowledge and/or the financial resources to install a VPN. Furthermore, VPNs are being blocked and pressured with large fines in Russia, so the future of VPN use is uncertain.
Perhaps more worrisome is the opportunity to use Max, alongside VK and Yandex, to spy on Russia’s own citizens by collecting and reporting information on those who have accessed “extremist materials”. The official government list is a moving target of a diverse set of items, ranging from religious tracts (for Scientology, Jehova’s Witnesses, Islam, and Falun Gong), to nazi and fascist screeds, as well as antisemitic songs. This list is continuously growing and can potentially cover anything justifying a wide range of evils, such as racial supremacy and war crimes. The most shocking part of this legislation is that mere contact with banned content is illegal: just looking at it is a crime.
Political scientist Ekaterina Shul’man points out that, not only does this legislation directly contradict Article 49 of the Russian Constitution, which prevents censorship and guarantees that everyone can freely search for and use information, it sets stronger strictures on the use of the internet than on the use of narcotics. In Russia, only possession and sale of narcotics are punished. It is not illegal to use narcotics, but it will soon be illegal to use information. In the eyes of the state, intoxicating chemicals are less dangerous than uncensored information.
At present the punishment for viewing banned material is rather mild, between 3000 and 5500 rubles (€33 – 60). But there is nothing in the way of increasing these fines and adding jail terms.
Highly problematic is the lack of certainty surrounding how this legislation will be implemented. It is not reasonable to expect citizens to memorize and keep abreast of changes in the long list of banned materials. State Duma deputy Sergey Boyarskiy claims that the law will apply only to a very narrow segment of people who intentionally seek materials in order to carry out nefarious plans. But how can one tell the difference between evil intent and mere curiosity? Even propagandists like Margarita Simon’yan (as reported by Mikhail Fishman) are scratching their heads over how they can report “criminals” to the authorities without running afoul of the law while investigating the materials they have accessed. Will police be stopping people on the streets to check their browser histories (as is already happening in Belarus according to journalist Dmitriy Navosha)? Or will the internet services filter personal data to hand over to prosecutors? Or both?
Mikhail Fishman predicts that these measures will cultivate an atmosphere of fear, making people afraid to use VPNs and indeed to look at anything, instilling an instinct of self-preservation that promotes the ultimate form of censorship: self-censorship.
