TikTok is in the process of getting banned again.
Last Thursday, Shou Zi Chew, CEO of the wildly popular video-sharing app, testified before the U.S. Congress for over five hours in an attempt to dispel concerns related to user privacy and the spreading of misinformation. The controversy surrounding TikTok’s potential nationwide ban is not new: the Trump administration attempted to ban the Chinese social media app back in 2020 over similar concerns. Although this notion was blocked by the courts, lawmakers and regulators in the United States have reignited concerns that sensitive user data could be placed in the hands of the Chinese government by the app’s parent company, ByteDance. In addition, others have suggested that the Chinese government could utilize the app as a means to spread propaganda and misinformation to unsuspecting users in the United States.
TikTok and ByteDance’s relationship with the Chinese government is a subject that involves a lot of uncertainty. China’s national security laws require its companies to comply with certain security activities. Although TikTok doesn’t operate in China, its parent company does, and the public has limited means to discern the scope of the government’s access to sensitive user data.
Throughout the hearing, Chew defended TikTok’s privacy practices, emphasized the app’s unavailability in mainland China, and refuted claims regarding ByteDance’s spying on American citizens. However, numerous members of Congress fired back on his claims and expressed disbelief over Chew’s assertions. Although user privacy was at the forefront of the agenda, numerous representatives also quoted research that found TikTok’s algorithms recommended videos to teens that promoted disturbing content such as suicide, self-harm, and eating disorders. TikTok is widely known for its viral challenges, and representatives were quick to point out the harmful effects that many of these challenges have on impressionable children.
Chew's first appearance in Congress was marred by disagreement and controversy. Many TikTok creators have mocked Congress members for their seemingly out-of-touch questions, specifically U.S. Rep. Richard Hudson’s question regarding how Wi-Fi connectivity works on TikTok. However, Chew was also criticized by Congress for his indirect responses and was blasted by Rep Tony Cardenas as a “good dancer with words.” Overall, Thursday’s hearing left Congress members largely unconvinced that TikTok is free from exploitation by the Chinese government.
Andrews students have their own thoughts about the potential TikTok ban.
Aeja Watson (senior, nursing) "I think [TikTok] can be good and bad. Bad in that TikTok is where a lot of young people get their basic news and general information. Good in that it’s less of a distraction. At least for me it is one of the social media apps that I go on whenever I am free.”
Jewel Murray (senior, physical therapy), “While I think that protection of privacy is important I think that banning the app might do more harm than good because a lot of businesses will lose their audience base in Gen Z and Gen α. This ban will also eliminate TikTok as an outreach tool for helping people reach God.”
If the TikTok ban were to take effect, it would have a major impact on not only the everyday user, but on influencers, content creators, and companies. With more than 80 million monthly users in the United States, more than half of these users come from the millennial and Gen-Z generation. TikTok’s explosive growth in the United States has been fueled by the app’s unique concept of virality. Unlike other social media platforms, TikTok enables users to become viral and attain a massive following with just one successful video. Content creators and companies who have spent countless hours and invested thousands of dollars in expanding their fanbase will be forced to seek alternative platforms if the ban goes through. A lot of uncertainty lies ahead, and only time will tell if TikTok will be here to stay or a thing of the past.
The Student Movement is the official student newspaper of Andrews University. Opinions expressed in the Student Movement are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editors, Andrews University or the Seventh-day Adventist church.