India Doesn't Want Whatsapp To Become More Like Telegram: Meta Told To Pause Rollout for 850M Users

The Indian government has urged WhatsApp to explain the rollout of a new feature, citing privacy concerns, days after temporarily banning the messaging platform Telegram.

Meta Platforms' WhatsApp recently announced the phased rollout of the username feature, allowing people to reserve a unique username and text directly without sharing phone numbers. However, India has asked to freeze the rollout in WhatsApp's biggest market of over 853 million users.

The move comes after Telegram was banned following claims that threat actors leveraged the platform's anonymity to leak question papers for the National Eligibility cum Entrance examination conducted by the National Testing Agency, which is mandatory for students aspiring to become doctors.

The paper leak ignited a massive rout across the subcontinent, as masses questioned the future of the countless students affected by the botched examination. The government swiftly moved to ban the Telegram platform until re-examination was conducted, which wasn't taken well by tech communities, who questioned the basis of the ban and why efforts were not focused on nabbing the perpetrators instead.

Telegram CEO's Blame on Meta Falls Short

Telegram CEO Pavel Durov had claimed in a series of X posts following the ban mid-June that much darker events are at play. He blamed Reliance for sabotaging access to Telegram via BGP hijacking, and believed it to be part of a combined lobbying effort by Meta, which he claimed partly owns Reliance, to ban Telegram in India.

Durov also highlighted that banning Telegram would just shift those paper leaks to other apps, and unnecessarily affect millions of users. The company has been proactively working to remove countless channels related to leaked exam materials, but claimed the banning social media puts everyone in danger because people would be forced to switch to VPNs and 'unlock far worse content.'

However, the freeze on Meta's WhatsApp username feature might ease any speculation about the Indian government's bias towards any particular social media platform. The concerns around the administration's tendency to secure more control over privacy features remain. Note that Telegram had lost a legal challenge against the ban last month.

India's Top Concerns About New WhatsApp Feature

The government's letter to WhatsApp's chief compliance officer in India mentioned that the feature could lead to more online fraud, phishing, and identity theft attacks, as threat actors can simply contact victims without sharing phone numbers.

The government also framed its order based on an IT law, under which platforms become liable for user content if they don't comply with the administration's due diligence regulations.

The 1st July letter gave WhatsApp three days to respond and banned the feature launch until ongoing consultations between the parties ​concluded.

Why is India WhatsApp's Biggest Market?

WhatsApp arrived in India more than 15 years ago, around the same time smartphones flooded markets. Today, more than half of the country uses the app for day-to-day communications, business payments, marketing their brands, as well as to coordinate meetings.

Many are now using WhatsApp for banking updates, public communications, news monitoring, and even delivery tracking.

For millions of first-time internet users in India, the smartphone was their first and only computing device. Over the years, WhatsApp benefited from this trend, given its lightweight app that seamlessly worked on low-cost smartphones and slower mobile networks. It is also easy to set up an account using a phone number, unlike other social networks that require users to create profiles.

A freeze on a new feature that can have profound effects on small businesses could limit the ability to unlock the full potential of local economies in India. The Internet Freedom Foundation said no provision allows the government to block a feature before its release, describing the latest freeze move as an attempt by the government to decide 'what a company may build and ship.'