Yeah they do, charities are just businesses that don’t distribute profits to share holders. Making money or not has nothing to do with charity status - it’s about what you do with the profits.
This is a very recent interpretation. It is legally true, but it goes against the true meaning of the word.
When you work for a charity, do you ask for a raise? Do you get a bonus if you collect more money? How much to you get to keep?
Not even mentioning that sometimes the money goes through a chain of charities, all making a living out of it, but leaving almost nothing for the final beneficiary.
Salaries are an operating cost and have nothing to do with the disbursement of profits. Some people at charities are very well paid but that has nothing to do with the charitable status.
Operational expenses. Sure. But I am taking the situation into consideration. And I am not denying the fact that Durov needs to make money, eventually, to cover expenses.
The problem is on the word monetize. It seems like the idea might be to sell ads which will eventually require some form of personalization even though it is not explicitly sold. Just like what happened with whatsapp. It is free but we saw what was tried with FB integration.