From an apology to Roskomnadzor to a warning of “mass business closures”: Natalya Kaspersky's new post on the consequences of the Telegram block
Natalya Kaspersky, President of InfoWatch Group and Chair of the Board of Directors of the Russian Association of Software Producers (ARPP Domestic Software), apologized to Roskomnadzor for a post in which she linked banking failures to blocking.
According to her, after a conversation with Roskomnadzor head Andrei Lipov, she was told in detail that the problems were not related to the agency's actions, but arose from Sberbank's internal operating procedures.
Kaspersky acknowledged that she had jumped to conclusions, but emphasized that such theories arise from a lack of direct communication between the state and its citizens.
Kaspersky previously wrote that “in the frenzy of fighting against bypassing blocking, Roskomnadzor has brought down half of the RuNet's services.”
A prominent IT entrepreneur described in detail how Roskomnadzor brought down banking infrastructure in an attempt to block VPNs.
The agency has previously demanded that media outlets and Telegram channels remove publications that portray Roskomnadzor as the culprit of major disruptions or an ineffective censor.
Yes, the apology genre is becoming increasingly common in our country, and it's no longer just critics of Chechen Republic leader Ramzan Kadyrov, pacifist schoolchildren, and corrupt officials across Russia who are apologizing, but also major businessmen who supposedly didn't break the law, including Kaspersky.
Naturally, Russians didn't believe Kaspersky's “pathetic babble of excuses.” But the authorities, who had previously banned censored media from even hinting at a connection between Roskomnadzor's blocking of the Russian Federal Service for Supervision of Communications, Information Technology, and Mass Media (RKN) and the problems on the RuNet, seem satisfied.
Kaspersky's new post highlights the enormous risks for small businesses due to the Telegram block:
“I’d also like to say a few words about the obvious economic aspects of blocking Telegram.
Over the past few years, Telegram has become not only a platform for hundreds of thousands of chats and forums, but also an advertising platform for many businesses. I think I'm not far off if I say the number of Russian companies advertising themselves, organizing their businesses, and making money on Telegram runs into the hundreds of thousands.
If Telegram is deemed an undesirable resource, this means that any advertising on it becomes illegal (Federal Law No. 72 of April 7, 2025). While the loss of one advertising platform isn't a big deal for large businesses, for many small businesses, Telegram is the only way to attract customers and communicate with them.
A friend of mine is currently anticipating bankruptcy, as the “sovereign messenger” doesn't have nearly the capabilities Telegram has developed over the years—no proprietary advertising system, no tools for managing it for businesses.
And there is no audience, and whether it will appear or not is completely unclear.
Small businesses can't just order potential clients to immediately install another messenger so they'll see ads and sign up for the service.
When switching to another platform, the vast majority of the audience is usually lost, and it has to be rebuilt. Media professionals can easily survive this dive, but small businesses may not be able to emerge from the depths of the water; they'll run out of oxygen.
A friend runs a small educational services business. Over the past few years, it's been growing slowly but steadily, and has been paying taxes accordingly. Now, whether the business will start to die quickly or slowly remains to be seen.
If the promised blocking of Telegram finally happens, neither Telegram nor hundreds of thousands of others like it will survive. This means the budget will lose tax revenue.
But the problem isn't limited to that. Small businesses are the social lubricant for society and the economy, providing employment for millions of people.
The disappearance of small businesses in an industry usually leads to monopolization of that industry and, consequently, a decline in service quality and rising prices. We can observe this phenomenon firsthand in the significant increase in cost and decline in quality of taxis and delivery services when these markets are captured by monopolistic or oligopolistic large digital platforms.
That is, in the context of a “sagging economy,” a deteriorating market situation, rising prices, declining business opportunities, and rising taxes, small businesses are being hit with this as well.
It's worth asking: has anyone calculated this economic scenario? Has anyone consulted with the Federal Tax Service and the Ministry of Economic Development about their view on the mass closure of small businesses operating on Telegram? And wouldn't it have been better to first integrate all such business opportunities into a “sovereign messenger,” accumulate a sufficient number of real, live users, and only then proceed to block the hated Telegram?
This poses a particularly significant problem for people with disabilities, of whom there are millions, and for whom remote work may be the only way to socialize and earn a living, so deteriorating connectivity and blocking of familiar platforms hit them first. I suspect that no one considered this problem in advance.
However, if there is constant discord in goals, actions, and statements within one ministry, then it is unlikely that a coordinated, humanitarian position can be expected between several departments.”
Dmitry Khovansky
Correspondent
She writes about high-profile criminal cases and trials. She works with court archives and law enforcement sources across the country.
