Banning TikTok is a performative, unconstitutional, authoritarian move that won't stop China from spreading propaganda or getting Americans' data
TechdirtMike Masnick
Context & Ripple Effects
TikTok’s China ties have long been framed as risks involving privacy, censorship, propaganda and national security, even as expert coverage questioned whether blocking the service was a proportionate response. The current argument revisits that unresolved tension as Washington considers a bipartisan proposal to require ByteDance to sell TikTok or lose US app-store access.
The earlier 2020 effort also exposed an implementation problem: an app-store restriction could leave the app unable to receive security patches, as coverage of the prior proposed restriction noted. That history makes the dispute about more than TikTok’s ownership; it is also about whether a ban can achieve its stated security goals without creating new risks.
First-order effects
The opinion gives opponents of a TikTok restriction a constitutional and effectiveness-based case against a ban or forced-sale regime, while supporters must more clearly connect the remedy to the asserted data and propaganda risks.
TikTok and ByteDance face a debate centered not just on Chinese ownership, but on whether an app-store cutoff can be implemented without harming the security of existing US users.
Second-order effects
A forced divestiture or app-store restriction would pressure platform operators and policymakers to define how distribution, updates and security support work during any transition, a weakness highlighted by the earlier patching-risk concern.
The argument strengthens the incentive for policymakers to pursue measures targeted at data handling or influence operations rather than relying solely on exclusion of one platform, though the coverage does not establish which approach will prevail.
Third-order effects
If repeated TikTok actions continue to rely on ownership-based restrictions, courts and lawmakers will be pushed to set clearer boundaries between national-security intervention and constitutionally protected communication platforms.
The broader policy test is whether platform governance can address foreign-influence and data-access concerns through durable, technically workable rules rather than one-off bans; this coverage shows that question remains contested.
The trend: TikTok is becoming a test case for whether US technology policy addresses foreign-ownership risks through targeted safeguards, forced ownership changes, or platform bans.
I can't believe how many people are suddenly okay with the government banning entire media platforms because they are afraid of the country the app comes from I thought we all agreed for years that China banning it's citizens from accessing our media platforms was authoritarian a…
I think the only real justification for a TikTok ban is that China has been blocking American social media companies from competing in its country for years, and so therefore that gives TikTok an unfair business advantage. But even this justification doesn't really hold up all t…
Lots of shitty takes on TikTok going around If there were a genuine desire to protect citizens and uphold virtues, people wouldn't be pontificating We'd pass a federal privacy act that would limit *all* companies + intelligence agencies from collecting data …
I know that not everyone is aware of this - because apparently our policymakers 👀 are somehow managing to curate feeds consisting of nothing but teenagers dancing - but some of the very best science communication happening out there right now is on TikTok.
Genuine question for people who support the TikTok Ban: Do you also support China banning American social media apps, citing the same national security concerns that our government is using to justify the ban? If not, why is it okay when we do it but not when they do it?
This is really a horribly naive and/or disingenuous take. It will obviously end in divestiture not a ban unless the CCP decides otherwise. Forcing divestiture by proxies of hostile governments of major media properties is not likely to be unconstitutional any more than CFIUS bl…
Never forget... “The firm, Targeted Victory, reportedly planted op-eds and letters to the editor in major local and regional newspapers across the country. A Targeted Victory director told staff that the firm needed to “get the message out that while Meta is the current punching…
On Wednesday, the House passed a bill that, if signed, would start a 160-day clock for the Chinese-controlled ByteDance to divest TikTok — or else risk a total ban. TikTok has gone into overdrive mode, sending push notifications to its American users pushing a false narrative — …
Someone in the comments on this post made a great point (albeit using language and name-calling that Taylor doesn't deserve): If people like Libs of TikTok are so influential that they can cause harm to children through the platform (which is 100% true), why isn't the CCP having …
It's entirely possible that our Congress is sclerotic and sinophobic and just out of touch with the youths, AND that TikTok exerts subtle influence over what is seen on their app in ways we might not like. I mean, every social media company does this! Would be weird if TikTok d…
The US forced the Chinese entity owning the LGBTQ dating app Grindr to sell it. This kept people safe — Beijing is an explicitly anti-gay autocracy. That it had access to data of LGBTQ communities around the world could literally kill people. A TikTok divestment has precedent.
Well-meaning Americans who say this US bill on TikTok is anti-Asian racism / xenophobic appear unaware of the Global South's wariness of TikTok. India, Pakistan, Vietnam, Taiwan, Indonesia, etc. — all have outright bans or limits on TikTok. These are Asian countries!!
The same Americans saying the bill on TikTok is racist / xenophobic make no mention of China's ban of Google, Insta, FB, X, etc. Why this double standard of criticism? What about China's “racism” for banning US tech? Because this isn't about racism, it's about national securit…
And it's not like China bans TikTok in its own country, eh (yes we know, Douyin: different code base, different algorithm, different content, different rules of engagement, so, no, not the same app). Why are we so insistent on keeping a hacker portal run by organized cybercrimin…
“The President will be given the power to ban WEB SITES, not just Apps.” POTUS should not be given the power to ban either. Explicit well documented triggers need to be legislated.
I think it is a bit odd for Tech Dirt to feel so confident in what is “unconstitutional” when no precedent appears safe with this particular Supreme Court https://www.techdirt.com/...
In all the years of China/TikTok rhetoric, no one — to my knowledge — has ever proved that the Chinese govt has manipulated TikTok or obtained user data from it. So many of the dire warnings are based on speculation about something that could *theoretically* happen or straight-u…
Supporters of the TikTok bill insist that it will never be used to accuse American sites of working for foreign enemies. Literally the same people accuse opponents of the bill of working for foreign enemies.
the bill *might* target a real risk. it hasn't been made clear. as masnick points out, the classified evidence wasn't convincing to all. even if the risk was proven real i would not be convinced this bill is the best/right way to combat it https://www.techdirt.com/...