Russia escalates censorship war, targets over 200 VPN apps amid Google resistance

In a clear escalation of efforts to curb online dissent and control information, Russia’s internet regulator Roskomnadzor has issued 214 takedown demands targeting over 212 virtual private network (VPN) apps on Google Play between March 12 and April 1, 2025. Despite the broad crackdown, Google has resisted removing all but six of the affected apps, signalling a muted response to Moscow’s escalating censorship campaign. The move aligns with a broader legal framework, including a 2024 law criminalizing the promotion of tools to bypass state internet restrictions. These actions follow years of tightening digital control under Vladimir Putin’s regime, with the Kremlin now seeking to eradicate anonymity and limit access to foreign communication platforms by the end of 2025.

Over 200 app takedown demands signal intensifying crackdown

The surge in censorship has spotlighted Russia’s push to dismantle online privacy tools. According to data from GreatFire, an organization tracking global digital restrictions, 214 takedown requests were filed by Roskomnadzor against Google Play Store listings between March and April – a 90% share of app removal demands during the period. Though only six apps, including ExpressVPN, were successfully removed from Russia’s Play Store, the total number of unavailable apps there has risen to 53 since 2024.

GreatFire’s “App Censorship Project” found that 87% of analysed VPN apps remained accessible, underscoring limited compliance with Russia’s orders. However, the regulator’s insistence on pursuing even trace amounts of dissent echoes previous actions. In 2024 alone, Apple complied with Roskomnadzor’s demands to remove 60 VPN apps, a stark contrast to Google’s relative resistance.

“The Russian government is waging an all-out war on VPNs and all other tools enabling Russian citizens to bypass censorship and surveillance,” said Benjamin Ismail, Campaign and Advocacy Director at GreatFire, highlighting the systemic nature of the crackdown.

Broader censorship extends beyond apps to content

While the focus has been on mobile apps, Roskomnadzor’s push extends to silencing critical content. In March 2025, the regulator issued two massive URL takedown orders through Google Search, demanding the removal of over 83,000 URLs – many unrelated to VPNs. Examples include websites discussing the Ukraine conflict, social activism, poetry and music. This expansion underscores the Kremlin’s tactic of broadly interpreting its censorship mandate to stifle dissent.

The “VPN law” of 2024 bans promoting tools to evade online restrictions but does not criminalize using them – a technicality critics argue stifles freedom without direct criminality. Aiding the campaign, some developers have voluntarily withdrawn apps from Russian markets, citing the war in Ukraine or self-censorship pressures. For instance, Avast exited in 2022, while others remain ambiguous about their motivations.

“The self-censorship is still censorship,” Ismail emphasized. “It creates a chilling effect on developers globally, forcing them to comply with authoritarian demands.”

A decade of digital erosion

Russia’s path to digital authoritarianism began in 2012 with the creation of Roskomnadzor, tasked with monitoring online content. Over years, it has blocklisted tens of thousands of sites, including virtual communication platforms like Facebook and YouTube. The 2024 law marked a milestone, empowering regulators to penalize anyone distributing technical guides on bypassing filters.

The current crackdown aligns with a broader societal strategy: by mid-2025, Russia plans to ban foreign email providers like Gmail and Apple’s iCloud, pushing users to use services like Yandex.Mail. This “digital sovereignty” move aims to consolidate control over domestic data – each step eroding the ability of citizens to access independent journalism, organize protests, or criticize the state.

Google’s ad tech monopoly ruled ILLEGAL in historic ruling

On the other hand, in the U.S.A., a federal judge has ruled that Google illegally dominates critical segments of the online advertising market, marking another major legal defeat for the tech giant and signalling that the Big Tech era of unchecked corporate power may be waning.

U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema determined that Google unlawfully maintained monopolies in two key ad tech markets, empowering the Department of Justice to pursue remedies that could fundamentally reshape the digital economy.

Judge Brinkema found that Google’s publisher ad servers and ad exchanges – the infrastructure connecting websites with advertisers – “substantially harmed” competition by “depriving rivals of the ability to compete.” The ruling highlights how Google’s integration of these tools into its Ad Manager platform locked out competitors, ensuring its dominance. For conservatives who have long criticized Silicon Valley’s consolidation of power, this ruling represents a significant milestone in the fight against Big Tech overreach.

Threats to free speech and small publishers

The decision underscores concerns that Google’s control over ad tech stifles innovation, raises costs, and particularly harms smaller businesses and content creators. Small websites rely on ad revenue to survive, but Google’s monopoly allows it to extract disproportionate profits, creating a “winner-takes-all” digital economy. Publishers of niche or conservative content – which often struggle to monetize their audiences – are especially vulnerable to algorithms favouring dominant platforms.

“For years, Google wielded unchecked monopoly power over the digital advertising market – using it to suffocate the media industry and force middleman taxes on everything we buy online,” said Sacha Haworth of the Tech Oversight Project, who characterized the ruling as positive for Americans.

Google disputed the findings, arguing its tools are “simple, affordable and effective” and that publishers choose them willingly.

Lee-Anne Mulholland, the company’s vice president of regulatory affairs, announced plans to appeal, calling the ruling a partial victory since the court found that Google’s advertiser tools and acquisitions don’t harm competition. However, experts rejected Google’s arguments, citing how the company’s market power creates insurmountable barriers to entry.

The case builds on a bipartisan antitrust push spanning multiple administrations. Judge Brinkema’s decision echoes prior rulings against Google’s search engine monopoly and app store dominance, signalling growing judicial consensus that Big Tech’s power can no longer go unchecked. “This could increase regulatory risk premiums across major tech stocks, especially those like Amazon and Meta that operate similarly integrated ecosystems” noted investment expert Michael Ashley Schulman.

While historic, the ruling is just the first step. A subsequent hearing will determine what remedies Google must implement – potentially including the sale of its Ad Manager or restrictions on its ad exchange. “The Department of Justice will continue taking bold legal action to protect the American people from encroachments on free speech and free markets by tech companies,” declared Attorney General Pamela Bondi.

Google has begun preparing for the legal battle ahead, hinting at restructuring plans and highlighting that the court rejected one of the DOJ’s claims regarding advertiser ad networks. Shareholders reacted cautiously, with Google’s stock dipping 1.4% post-judgment, though analysts note penalties may be limited given the company’s profitability.

The broader implications extend far beyond advertising. For conservative observers, the case underscores how the disconnect between tech monopolists and traditional media threatens free expression.

This ruling isn’t just a legal milestone – it’s a cultural one. By framing the case as a battle for the “digital public square,” the DOJ has seized on a conservative rallying cry, aligning antitrust with values of free markets and limited corporate power. As Google prepares its appeal, debate will intensify over whether courts can dismantle monopolies without stifling innovation. For now, the decision stands as proof that accountability for tech giants is no longer a remote possibility but an evolving reality.

 

yogaesoteric
April 22, 2025