The recent move to ban TikTok in the United States has sparked a heated debate about the delicate balance between national security concerns and individual civil liberties. As lawmakers grapple with the implications of this decision, it is imperative that they consider the broader context and consider the potential impact on free speech, privacy, and rights of Americans.
The racial dimension of surveillance
American domestic surveillance has a troubling history of targeting marginalized communities. Black activists faced intense scrutiny in the 1960s, and Muslim Americans faced disproportionate scrutiny in the post-9/11 era. The latest move to ban TikTok continues this pattern. President Biden recently signed legislation giving ByteDance nine months (or up to a year, depending on conditions) to sell its U.S. operations. If ByteDance fails to do so, it would be illegal for U.S. companies to provide web hosting services to TikTok, effectively banning the app by 2025. ByteDance intends to challenge this law in court, calling it unconstitutional. The company aims to protect its interests and prevent a forced sale or outright ban on TikTok in the United States.
In August 2020, then-President Donald Trump issued an executive order effectively banning the app in the United States by banning U.S. entities from doing business with ByteDance. The order was originally scheduled to take effect in late September. But the legal battle continued, and TikTok continued to operate in the United States.
The rise of TikTok
TikTok, the short-form video platform, has taken the world by storm. He has over 1 billion users worldwide and has become a cultural phenomenon that allows people to express themselves through music, comedy, and other creative content. But its rapid growth has also raised eyebrows among policymakers, particularly because of Chinese ownership.
Beyond TikTok: Data abuse and vulnerabilities
While recognizing TikTok's flaws, it is important to recognize that the entire data ecosystem is exploitative and vulnerable, regardless of the nationality of the app's owners. The rush to ban TikTok appears to be motivated by a desire to protect user data from foreign governments. Both Democratic and Republican lawmakers have expressed concerns about TikTok potentially sharing Americans' data with the Chinese government. This “national security threat” is often framed through vague references to the company's potential ties to the Chinese Communist Party.
WhatsApp, Meta, Israeli Military Surveillance
But US politicians expressed similar anger over reports that WhatsApp data owned by US company Meta may have been used by the Israeli military to target Palestinians. Nothing has happened yet. WhatsApp denied these reports, saying they were not accurate. However, according to Meta's latest available transparency report, the Israeli government made 1,088 requests to the company between January and June 2023. More than half of these requests are classified as emergency disclosure requests, which Meta says “may result in voluntary disclosure of information to law enforcement agencies.” If there is “good faith reason to believe that the matter involves an imminent risk of serious bodily injury or death.” Meta created user data in response to the majority (78%) of requests from the Israeli government.
Interestingly, reports that WhatsApp data (owned by US company Meta) may have been used by the Israeli military to target Palestinians were met with similar comments from US politicians. There is no anger. WhatsApp denied these reports, but the issue remains. Meta's transparency report does not disclose the nationality of users whose information is being requested by foreign governments. The US government's decision to single out TikTok while ignoring US tech companies' data-sharing practices suggests that US data and surveillance policies are partly driven by racism.
national security debate
The main arguments against TikTok center on national security. Critics claim that the app's parent company ByteDance could share user data with the Chinese government. Although there is no concrete evidence to support this claim, there are calls for a ban due to fears of foreign influence.
The role of big tech
While we work to ban TikTok, we also need to consider the role of big tech companies in shaping the digital landscape. Facebook, Twitter, and other platforms wield tremendous power over public discourse and often make editorial decisions that affect millions of users. This concentration of power in the hands of a few companies has raised concerns about censorship, bias, and the erosion of democratic values.
global context
It is hard not to conclude that the current ban on TikTok is being advanced because of its effect on empowering previously marginalized voices, a situation that is detrimental to the official narrative of the United States. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen also hinted at the possibility of banning TikTok within the EU, mirroring measures already taken against the TikTok platform during the European Commission's corporate call. The global debate over TikTok highlights the tension between national security and individual rights. Governments around the world are grappling with how to regulate digital platforms without stifling freedom of expression.
double standard
Ironically, the attention to TikTok's data practices highlights a double standard. US technology companies routinely collect vast amounts of user data without explicit consent. Social media giants like Facebook and Google remain free to operate despite facing intense scrutiny over their data-sharing practices. Selective outrage over TikTok's potential data sharing reveals bias that undermines principles of equal treatment and fairness.
Impact on freedom of speech
Beyond the data privacy debate, TikTok's ban raises serious questions about free speech. The app has become a platform for marginalized voices, allowing users to share their experiences, opinions, and creativity. By suppressing TikTok, we risk silencing these voices and limiting the diversity of expression in the digital realm. The First Amendment protects our right to speak freely, even when that speech challenges the status quo or is offensive.
legal precedent
Banning TikTok sets a legal precedent for regulating social media platforms. If governments can ban apps based on national security concerns, what other platforms could be subject to similar scrutiny? There is a delicate balance between safety and individual rights. We need thoughtful legislation and judicial oversight. The TikTok case will likely shape future discussions about technology regulation.
These additional aspects need to be considered when delving deeper into the intricacies of TikTok bans. This decision goes beyond a single app. It reflects broader societal tensions around technology, freedom, and governance. Engage in an informed debate that protects civil liberties while addressing legitimate concerns.