Protecting security of information or breaching First Amendment rights? Tick tock, tick tock…

In April 2024, President Joe Biden approved a bill that could lead ByteDance, the parent company of TikTok, an app used by over one third of Americans, to sell its assets within the next nine months. This bill was tied to a larger package set to deliver $95 billion in foreign aid to nations such as Ukraine and Israel, a bill heavily backed by Congress. Opinions on this topic vary, with some worried that this is a violation of the First Amendment while others believe it is justified due to possible Chinese espionage. 

Michael Allen, a West social studies teacher, understands the perspective coming from the President. 

“From the Biden administration, there is fear that potentially sensitive information in the United States can be leaked to China, or information from US citizens can be used by China without their knowledge, and the Chinese government has the ability to push propaganda out there to unknowing American citizens,” he said.

Many American citizens, including 79 out of 97 votes in the Senate, believe that the possibility that ByteDance could dip into American data and information is a very real threat. Privacy and freedom of speech is a much more cherished value in the United States than in the Chinese government. 

“There is no free flow of information in China,” Allen said. “There is an army of internet censors, and the Chinese government has the ability to look into any information that anybody has in China. What access does China have to our information, and how much can they actually influence us with the information that they are able to send out through this app?”

In addition to a violation of user privacy, the United States is also worried about the serious possibility of Chinese intervention within the highest tiers of the government system. 

“The fear is that the Chinese government will get information from the TikTok users. They could use information for election interference. China is known for election interference,” said Julie Moss, another social studies instructor at West.

However, though this bill had backing, it wasn’t nearly as popular as the larger legislative action it was tied to, that being the large sum of foreign aid to US allies such as the warring states of Israel and Ukraine. Allen explains how this helped the bill squeak through the hands of Congress and Biden. 

“A lot of time what happens when passing large funding bills is you tie in something that might not pass to something that is overwhelmingly popular,” Moss said. “Everyone wants to continue to support Ukraine in its struggle against the authoritarian regime in Russia, so throwing it into that made it more likely to pass.” 

Moss elaborated. 

“Ukraine aid was in a dire situation, and they were starting to lose ground due to a lack of ammunition and weapons,” she said. “That’s why they tack things like this onto bills, because it will slip through and the larger bill needs to get passed.” 

In the wake of this passing, ByteDance has responded by filing a lawsuit against the government, hoping to stop the possibility of the company divesting or being banned.

“The company (ByteDance) itself is going to be taking this to court as a first amendment violation of free speech. They feel like they are being discriminated against and that they are being censored,” Allen said. 

In addition, many members of the public are also displeased by the possible consequences. 

“People perceive there to be government intervention in free speech of expression,” he said. “If there is some measure of security risk that is actual, then it is a justifiable action but if there isn’t, then it isn’t justified.” 

“Users really like it, and business owners that don’t have a lot of startup capital like it to advertise. People don’t want to be told that they can’t use a platform for their benefit, and are fearful that it will be taken away,” Moss said. “In reality, espionage hasn’t been proven, so they have a point.”

Even among students at West, the possibility of a TikTok ban has caused a stir. Young people, who tend to use TikTok the most within the American population, are mostly opposed to this legislation. Bria Blabaum, a freshman, stated that the government should direct less focus on an issue that hasn’t been proven and more on other, more prevalent, concerns. 

“Due to the fact that there are issues today that are causing deaths, there are far more pressing issues than an app that has been around for years that cannot be proven to have caused issues. In reality, they can't even prove that the owner is selling data to China to begin with,” she said. “They lack evidence and fail to recognize the fact that many other businesses also use citizens’ information for profit.”

Freshman Abby Dewhurst agreed that the United States has larger issues to pay attention to than the social media platform. 

“The government should be more worried about helping with health care, school shootings, and gun control or poverty; things that are affecting the way people live and thrive in our country,” she said.

Looking into the future with this legislation in place, one can imagine a world where TikTok is “banned” and has been wiped off of all American devices. However, Allen said this likely wouldn’t be the case. 

“If this Chinese company does divest, you probably won’t see much of a change. TikTok will change ownership hands, but you will likely still have the platform. Kind of like Twitter and X,” he said. “If it is banned, my guess is that there are no shortages of people looking to fill that void. You’ll get another company that shows up, you’ll get another app that shows up that essentially replaces exactly what TikTok did. People will be over TikTok in a matter of minutes.” 

Moss agreed that the likelihood of a complete ban of the app or similar apps is altogether unlikely. 

“It is uncertain,” he said. “The viewpoint is that it will be taken away, but this isn’t necessarily the case. Will it be the same as before? That is unknown.” Allen also explained that business owners who rely on TikTok for advertising may not suffer, even if the app is canceled in the US. 

“I think it’s going to be a quick switch. Usually, people are using multiple apps at a time. They’re not just advertising on one app, but probably advertising on a range of apps,” he said. “If the people go away from TikTok, they’re going to go somewhere else, and it won’t take the business community long to figure out where the people are going and then put themselves into that space.” 

Overall, proponents like those in Congress see this legislation as a way to strengthen national security and ensure the privacy of citizens from the grim possibility of the Chinese government monitoring American data. On the contrary, opponents think that this legislation poses as a violation of the constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression that is so sacred to the American people. However, it is ultimately up to the individual and how much they trust the government to decide if this legislation was reasonable or not. 

“If you trust the government to look out for the welfare and security of the people, then you don’t  think this is an overstep,” Allen said. “If you don’t trust, then you think this is just the government trying to control people and dictate the message.”

by Phoebe Fletcher

Published May 20 2024

Oshkosh West Index volume 120 issue VIII