Monetization is another area where Telegram and Web3 diverge in how creators and users derive economic value.
Telegram’s Business Model
Telegram has traditionally avoided ads, focusing on a telegram data free, user-friendly experience. Recently, it introduced sponsored messages in public channels and plans for premium subscriptions, aiming to generate revenue while maintaining user privacy.
Monetization for creators happens indirectly, such as through paid bots or external services, but Telegram does not natively support ownership of digital assets or tokens.
Web3’s Token Economy
Web3 empowers users and creators with native monetization tools through tokens, NFTs, and DeFi mechanisms. Creators can issue NFTs representing art, music, or memberships, earning direct income without intermediaries.
Users can participate in tokenized economies, earning governance tokens or rewards for platform contributions. This new economic layer redefines value creation and ownership, allowing communities to thrive with aligned incentives.
Integration Potential: Can Telegram and Web3 Coexist?
Rather than viewing Telegram and Web3 as mutually exclusive, there are growing signs they could complement each other.
Telegram’s large user base and familiarity offer an onboarding path for new Web3 users. Integration of blockchain elements—like digital identity, tokens, or decentralized storage—could enrich Telegram’s ecosystem with Web3 features without sacrificing usability.
Telegram’s experimental blockchain project, TON (Telegram Open Network), though paused, showed ambition to blend centralized messaging with decentralized finance and tokenization.
As Web3 matures, hybrid models may emerge where centralized platforms adopt decentralized modules, offering the best of both worlds: ease of use and user ownership.
Final Thoughts
The choice between Telegram and Web3 frameworks depends on user priorities: the convenience and performance of centralized apps versus the sovereignty and transparency of decentralized networks.
Telegram continues to be a dominant messaging platform with robust security and user experience but retains centralized control over data and governance. Web3, while still evolving, pushes boundaries of decentralization, offering new paradigms of ownership, governance, and censorship resistance, albeit with usability challenges.
Ultimately, both models contribute to the ongoing redefinition of how we communicate, share information, and claim ownership in the digital age. The dialogue between centralized platforms like Telegram and decentralized Web3 technologies will shape the future internet’s values and architecture for years to come.