Let's review. The US House of Representatives has passed, in what is nowadays an impressively bipartisan vote, (and with 352 yeas) a bill that would force Chinese parent company ByteDance to divest itself of TikTok or face a US ban.
A study last year out of Rutgers University indicated a "strong possibility that content on TikTok is either amplified or suppressed based on its alignment with the interests of the Chinese government." Perhaps more worrying, the broad use of TikTok is a means by which interests in China may build up a database on Americans and America, and whoever at ByteDance can get that information would be susceptible to demands from his/her government to pass it along.
What information exactly (aside from dance trends) would China get in this way that it could turn to nefarious purposes? It could help identify targets for recruitment for espionage, or data could be crossed-checked with other sources to blow the cover of people now working for US intelligence agencies under cover. Not negligible concerns, but there is no specific evidence China has done this.
Perhaps most worrying is the possibility that China could use the prevalence of TikTok apps on American phones as an entrance for malicious software.
From such considerations you get a case for action. But ... there is the first amendment to consider. TikTok, whatever else it is, is a place where people and institutions express themselves. They express their opinions on a range of subjects. Its loss would be another public square closed down. And the closure would be NOT for content neutral reasons, but because it is thought to be a public square with a pro-China tilt. That is why I started with the Rutgers study about that alleged tilt. It is not the only reason, but it is very much in the mix and it is not at all content neutral.
Then there is the possibility that the real reason for cracking down on TikTok has little to do with the public case I just outlined.
https://gizmodo.com/politicians-who-voted-to-ban-tiktok-may-own-as-much-as-1851356203
I offer a humble opinion, with several disclaimers. First, the opinion: Espionage, of any stripe, is not a lawful activity. Now, the disclaimer(s): competition compels ll sorts of interests to DO all sorts of things, possibly more in the area of pursuit of economic advantage, without overt bloodshed and warfare. Everyone wants as much as his neighbors have. Criminals will use the time tested vehicles of violence and intimidation to get what they want. They have no qualms about this. Nations, or ideologies, walk a thinner rope, because they don't want to appear above the lawand have a wealth of experience in rope walking.
ReplyDeleteThe chess game analogy is perennial here. Ethics and morality left the building---centuries ago*.
*one conclusion: competition and cooperation no longer ride the same trail. complexity erected too many roadblocks. you can't get to infinity either...my litany on that is known, ask your friends if you have not read it. However, do not ask Tiktok. They advocate legalized espionage.I think so.