In response to President-elect Donald Trump’s recent filing seeking a pause on a new U.S. law set to ban TikTok on Jan. 19, the United States Department of Justice has petitioned for the Supreme Court to reject the request on claims of national security threats.
The social media platform TikTok, owned by Chinese parent company ByteDance, has found itself under scrutiny in the U.S. over fears of foreign influence on user data. ByteDance, a Beijing-founded social media giant, developed TikTok in 2017 and later merged it with music sharing app Musical.ly. Although TikTok itself has never operated in China, the U.S. government remains concerned about the potential transfer of sensitive information with the People’s Republic of China.
Because of this concern, the U.S. government proposed the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act. This act requires ByteDance to sell TikTok to a non-Chinese company or issue a U.S. ban by Jan. 19.
It is undeniable that TikTok has become a cultural staple in American society. The expansive accessibility of the influential and educational platform has kept its user base large. It truly is a cultural phenomenon reminiscent of the early days of social media. However, in the eyes of the U.S. government, the app’s impact is overshadowed by its Beijing ownership and alleged Chinese Communist Party ties.
A TikTok ban represents not only the loss of a social media phenomenon for the nation but also a growing distrust in innovation shared between countries. Whether driven by economic benefit or international tensions, inventive technology has become something to simply possess rather than share. Increasing sentiments to keep creations in-house to maximize both corporate and governmental profit have eroded our trust in foreign products. In this vein, we risk losing sight of how the exchanges of ideas foster societal flourishing.
Suspicions surrounding innovation have grown worldwide as internal tensions have escalated. Notably, the trade disputes between China and the U.S. — particularly in anticipation of Trump’s second term — highlight the culmination of a rocky relationship between the two international powerhouses.
Due to increasing tensions between China and the U.S., the American government remains wary of the possible weaponization of TikTok’s user data by the Chinese government.
However, safety measures have been suggested to counter data weaponization. One effort is Project Texas, a proposed plan to give the U.S. government and American companies oversight of TikTok’s data practices. Project Texas would have TikTok partner with Oracle, a tech company based in Austin, Texas. This partnership would store U.S. user data, inspect source algorithms and work under the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States to oversee TikTok’s U.S. servers. The project, however, was dismissed because it didn’t sever TikTok from its parent company, ByteDance, which left fears of Chinese influence on data unresolved.
Yet, TikTok has made it clear that a complete divestment from ByteDance is not possible, largely because such a sale would require approval from the Chinese government, which appears unwilling to do so. ByteDance has asserted that it will not entertain the idea of selling and remains headstrong in holding onto the program.
The U.S. government, in refusing to consider Project Texas, is acting far too hastily in banning TikTok outright. Proposals like Project Texas are a necessary middle ground in international media consumption. They allow companies to maintain their autonomy while enabling countries to implement their own safeguards on technology. It’s this kind of collaboration that we expect to see in international transactions, yet it has become hard to find in the modern-day market.
Far too often, technology faces outright bans rather than cooperative problem-solving. The U.S. has demonstrated this with President Joe Biden’s ban on Chinese software in internet-connected cars and a prior ban on Chinese brands Huawei and ZTE technology. Similarly, China has banned or restricted platforms like Facebook, Google and Dropbox since the early 2000s. The result has been a tech cold war between the two countries, exacerbating already rocky international relations.
While security risks should not be taken lightly, collaborating with willing companies to safeguard U.S. data is more productive than shutting out innovative brands. U.S. policy should be able to balance protecting American data while working with international companies rather than fighting against them.
Instead of imposing an outright ban, the government should explore creative solutions that maintain the integrity of international ownership while incorporating safeguards on U.S. servers. By rejecting innovation solely based on its international origin, we risk isolating ourselves in an American market unable to evolve alongside global counterparts. Such isolation holds us back from economic cooperation that could one day lead to stronger diplomacy throughout the world.
Layla Asgarian Nahavandi is an Opinion Staff Writer. She can be reached at lasgaria@uci.edu.
Edited by Isabella Ehring and Xinyu Zhang