eSafety has fined Telegram nearly $1 million for missing a transparency reporting deadline by over five months.
The delay withheld critical information on the platform’s efforts to combat extremist and child exploitation material. In March last year, eSafety gave Telegram, Meta, WhatsApp, Google, Reddit and X legally enforceable transparency reporting notices under Australia’s Online Safety Act, requiring each to answer questions about their compliance with the Basic Online Safety Expectations, including measures they had in place to tackle terrorist and violent extremist material on their services.
Telegram and Reddit were also specifically asked about the measures they were taking to combat child sexual abuse material on their services, a topic the other services had already been asked about in previous reporting notices.
Questions included what the messaging service is doing to detect terrorist and violent extremist content, child sexual exploitation material and measures it has in place to prevent the live streaming of this content.
While other platforms engaged by the 6 May 2024 deadline set by eSafety, Telegram chose not to provide answers to questions required by the Notice until 13 October. eSafety considered Telegram to be non-compliant with the transparency notice and has given it an infringement notice for $957,780.
Read also: Enhancing connections for Autistic women through community programs
eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant said that giving Telegram this infringement notice sends an important message to industry that timely transparency is not a voluntary requirement in Australia and that this action reinforces the importance of all companies complying with Australian law.
“If we want accountability from the tech industry we need much greater transparency. These powers give us a look under the hood at just how these platforms are dealing, or not dealing, with a range of serious and egregious online harms which affect Australians,” Inman Grant said.
“Telegram took 160 days to provide information that was asked in the reporting notice and providing this information so late has obstructed eSafety from delivering its functions under the Online Safety Act for almost half a year.
“It was open to eSafety to give an infringement notice of a higher amount, but we think this amount reflects the significant delay in Telegram providing eSafety with transparency information while also taking into account the subsequent improvement in Telegram’s engagement after the Notice period had ended.”
Inman Grant said the threat posed by terrorist and extremist material shared and promoted online remains very real and poses a growing risk to the community which is why industry must live up to their responsibilities to be transparent and put in place measures to prevent their services being misused.
“The Australian Security and Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) recently raised Australia’s terror threat level to “probable” and has cited the online radicalisation of young people as a key factor driving this heightened threat,” she said.
“Research and observation have shown us that this material can normalise, desensitise and sometimes radicalise – especially the young who are viewing harmful material online that they cannot unsee.
“Surfacing how and where some of these platforms might be failing – and also succeeding – in tackling this content is vital to protect the community and raise safety standards across the industry, especially where this most abhorrent of content is concerned.”
Telegram has 28 days to request the withdrawal of the infringement notice, pay the infringement notice, or seek an extension to pay the infringement notice. If Telegram chooses not to pay the infringement notice, it is open to the Commissioner to take other action, including seeking a civil penalty in the Federal Court of Australia.
The information provided by Telegram, along with responses to the notices received from Meta, WhatsApp, Google and Reddit, will be summarised in a transparency report to be released shortly.
Public relations considerations have also come into play, as X sought review of eSafety’s decision to give it the notice in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, now the Administrative Review Tribunal (ART). As a result, the report will not feature responses from X pending the outcome of the ART review.
Adrianne Saplagio is a Content Producer at Comms Room, where she combines her passion for storytelling with her expertise in multimedia content creation. With a keen eye for detail and a knack for engaging audiences, Adrianne has been instrumental in crafting compelling narratives that resonate across various digital platforms.
