Will Meta Force the UK to Do a Kremlin Telegram Play?
March 18, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
The US big tech outfits may be annoying some countries. Examples include Switzerland and its interactions with Palantir Technologies, Google and its jousting with EU regulators, and Amazon AWS’ chats with customers about “dependence.” One set of interactions caught my attention because it has the potential to trigger a quite dramatic governmental reaction. Remember: This is a dinobaby’s interpretation and extrapolation of a “what if” scenario.
A wealthy Silicon Valley professional drives his RV into a British home owners’ garden. The home owner is distressed. The RV driver toots ignores the outraged home owner. Thanks, Venice.ai. Good enough.
The trigger for my thinking is a write up titled “Exclusive: Meta Vowed to Stop Illegal Financial Ads in Britain. It Failed 1,000 Times in a Week.” Please, read the original Reuters’ story. I will boil it down and then focus on what I call the Kremlin Telegram Play.
The cited story from the trust outfit reports that Meta said one thing, then did another…. just a 1,000 times in a week. I will quote one sentence from the exclusive report:
… 56% of those ads were ?from an unspecified number of unauthorized advertisers the FCA had already flagged to Meta, according to the results of the review seen by Reuters and reported here for the first time.
Now let’s think about this alleged action by Meta. The British government made a reasonable request. Meta agreed. Then Meta did what it has been doing for many years. The company just followed its “we do what we want” approach to its core philosophy of moving fast and breaking things.
No surprise here. Sarah Wynn-Williams’ "Careless People: A Cautionary Tale of Power, Greed, and Lost Idealism" documents a number of examples of how the Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp owner deals with political, financial, and ethical decisions. The Meta outfit does what it has decided to do just as it allegedly is doing with illegal financial ads.
Some might call Meta’s approach good business. Others, like some other countries, view the behavior as either inappropriate, unethical, or illegal. That divide is what makes some American high technology companies deeply problematic. Users love the services; elected officials are troubled. Meta’s failure to block illegal financial advertisements in the UK may raise an interesting question; that is, “Will the UK block Meta’s services just as the Kremlin is blocking access to Telegram’s services.
If the UK takes this decision, the impact of US corporate behavior could trigger a set of similar actions in other countries. The damage would not be confined to companies exhibiting Telegram-type behavior. The US companies would lose some percentage of their customer base. But the knock on effects are interesting to consider; for example:
- Data service providers (ISPs and others) would find themselves having to make a decision. Do these firms follow the law of the country in which the data center is located and the law of a country like Russia or Britain? Do these firms roll over or do they defy regulators?
- Suppliers. Companies and consultants working for a blocked company could be subject to fines, loss of government contracts, or the arrest of the senior executives. Will these supply chain entities comply or will they adopt the US approach and say, “Sure. Whatever.” And then continue to work for the US big technology firms. That may fly in some countries, but in other countries, that might be a problem.
- Employees of US companies who live and work in a country which has taken action to block their employer’s services could face arrest, imprisonment, and in some countries, extreme punishment. (I won’t define “extreme,” but you can look it up on one of those big tech smart software services. Note: You may be blocked from viewing the content. Why not give it a whirl?)
- Users would find themselves looking for ways to evade blocks by data centers and other firms in order to access the US services. In Iran, there are rumors on social media that the government is looking for individuals with Elon Musk Starlink systems and people who use virtual private networks. Breaking the law raises some interesting questions about user push back or kinetic response.
- Lawyers and consultants. Still billing no matter what.
Now let’s look at the question in the title of this essay, “Will Meta force the UK to do a Kremlin Telegram play?”
Accommodation. If the UK just accommodates Meta, the firm may continue to run the plays in its game plan. This signals other companies to ignore British laws, rules, and regulations. If a fine is levied, pay the fine and keep on running what’s in the play book.
Negotiate. Yeah, that works. “Great to meet you and your team. My team is here and ready to work out an understanding.” Look at the agreement getting settled in its little coffin.
Do nothing but talk. If the UK does nothing, big US high technology firms are likely to expand and become more aggressive in their methods for generating revenue from users and advertisers in that country. The “do nothing” approach has been, from my point of view, the path the EU has followed. How much money have US big technology companies paid in fines? Answer: Not much.
Block Meta’s services. If the UK requires UK data centers and related firms to block access to Meta’s services, the UK has adopted the Kremlin approach to managing information. I am not sure how that will fly in Britain or if it would fly in Ireland, Scotland, or Wales. It would, however, be interesting to watch the different political entities respond to this Putinesque approach. The Ivory Tower thinkers at Oxbridge would produce some fascinating essays and books about the decision.
Net net: The Reuters’ story, if accurate, is important. The consequences for the UK may be significant. Meta will just adapt because of the Silicon Valley, big technology, tech bro thing.
Stephen E Arnold, March 18, 2026
Comments
Got something to say?

