Debate on Tik Tok Still Ticking

By Arielle Karni ‘26
Throughout history,  many individual states and the nation as a whole have banned specific items, often based on an overarching concern for the general public's safety or
the environment in which we live. Children’s books published before 1985 were banned for containing trace amounts of lead, and beluga caviar and Chilean sea bass were banned due to extinction concerns. Nunchucks were banned after Bruce Lee popularized them in the 1970s, spurring crime waves ​across New York City. The latest of the government’s targets is TikTok.

​

The government should not be telling us which apps to use, just like it should not tell us which newspapers and books to read. Attempts to eliminate free speech on TikTok violate the First Amendment
TikTok is a social media platform with 1.53 billion users worldwide (​more than 1​00
million of which are in the US), on which one can share and watch short video clips ranging from the latest dance craze to cooking recipes (TikTok pasta anyone?) ​to comedy sketches. It is owned by the Chinese company, ByteDance.
In recent months, the US​, as well as Canada, Great Britain, New Zealand, France and Australia, among other nations, has banned Tik Tok from governmental devices. Now, ​the Biden administration and members of Congress on both sides of the aisle are attempting to ban Tik Tok nationwide unless the Chinese owners of the app sell their interests.
Is the government genuinely concerned that the D’Amelio family will take over the nation or that Alix Earle will overly influence teenage girls across the county? Not quite. Yet President Biden, former President Trump and Congress all view the app as a national security threat, arguing that ByteDance can, and may be obligated to, divulge sensitive user data to the Chinese government. They cite various Chinese internet laws, including the 2014 Counterespionage Law and the 2017 National Intelligence Law, that require Chinese companies to assist in state intelligence gathering efforts. Some are concerned that Tik Tok can have the same effect on elections as Facebook and other social media apps had during the 2016 presidential election by manipulating users with political ads and other curated political content.
The status of legislative efforts, court rulings, the federal government’s positions, ByteDance’s reactions and China’s threats will continue to change. However, one thing will remain the same: the US government is overreaching in a Big Brother-style attempt to ban Tik Tok, despite legitimate national security concerns. 
However, efforts to ban the app are futile. We, kids, are constantly at least one step ahead of our parents in ways to get around screen time limits and the latest apps that hide our messages from parental oversight. Similarly, will another app not pop up once Tik Tok is banned that could be more dangerous? 
“Tik Tok was once Musical.ly, so it is proven possible for apps to constantly evolve and for new apps of this sort to emerge,” said freshman Ashton Weiss.
Instead, the U.S. government should educate users on privacy measures they should be taking. Congress and the White House should address their concerns over data security with ByteDance directly and through legislation in a logical, reasonable and diplomatic manner rather than simply banning a popular app. 
Storing user data with a US company, electing a US board of directors to oversee TikTok operations in the US and subjecting the app to federal agency oversight are just a few alternatives that could address national security concerns rather than trying to eliminate TikTok. These solutions will have a much more lasting impact on all the current platforms and the next generation that will follow. Banning is a lazy response. It is time for “Big Brother” to step down and for the government to step up to address these issues in a constructive manner.

​