Timing is Everything: Washington's Missteps in Regulating TikTok
The U.S. government's handling of the TikTok issue reveals a concerning pattern of hasty and politicall actions that fail to address the broader challenges posed by social media.
The Story:
The U.S. government's recent decision to ban the popular video-sharing app TikTok, owned by the Chinese company ByteDance, has been a subject of much controversy and debate. The law, which was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Joe Biden in late April, gives ByteDance until January 2025, two months after the U.S. elections, to sell TikTok or face a ban in the United States.
One of the main arguments for the bill was the long-held concern that ByteDance could use TikTok to spread propaganda and influence its American users, and potentially even interfere in U.S. elections. However, the law does not actually ban TikTok immediately; instead, it provides ByteDance with a grace period before the app would be forced to shut down or be sold to a non-Chinese company. The timing of this decision has been widely criticized, as it creates a concerning incentive for ByteDance or the Chinese government to potentially do whatever they can to help the candidate who opposes the TikTok ban get elected, in the hopes of securing a better deal than the app's certain demise under a Biden administration. This pernicious incentive arises just before a presidential election that has been described by Biden as crucial for the future of U.S. democracy and that Beijing has already reportedly tried to influence, according to U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken.
The decision to challenge TikTok's presence in the United States is not the first time the U.S. government has taken action against Chinese companies. In the past few years, the government has implemented sanctions against Huawei, created a list of Chinese Military-Industrial Complex Companies, and imposed restrictions on exports of advanced chips to China. However, the handling of the TikTok issue has been criticized as inconsistent, with the government avoiding a final decision for years before rushing to pass the law in a pivotal election year.
The new law also raises significant First Amendment concerns, as it singles out one social media company, at least in part due to concerns about pro-Chinese content, while not addressing the broader issues of misinformation, privacy violations, and the harmful practices of the entire social media landscape. The government would need to prove that forced divestment or a ban on TikTok is both based on a compelling government interest and represents the least restrictive means of addressing the perceived threat. A more comprehensive approach to regulating the data collection and privacy practices of all social media companies, rather than targeting a single platform, would be a more effective and legally sound way to address the concerns surrounding TikTok and other platforms.
The View:
The U.S. government's decision to target TikTok, while understandable given the valid concerns about the app's potential for foreign influence and data privacy issues, ultimately falls short of addressing the deeper, systemic problems that plague the entire social media ecosystem.
By rushing to pass a law that creates concerning incentives for election interference and raises significant First Amendment concerns, the government has demonstrated a concerning pattern of choosing the wrong moment to confront complex challenges, particularly when it comes to its rivalry with China. Rather than engaging in knee-jerk, China-bashing reactions or endless hearings that simply heap scorn on tech executives, the government should take a more comprehensive and strategic approach to regulating the data collection and privacy practices of all social media platforms. A a well-crafted, evidence-based regulatory framework that considers the impact of algorithms, the spread of misinformation, and the exploitation of user data would be a far more effective and legally sound way to address the myriad issues plaguing the social media landscape. The government's failure to tackle these broader problems while fixating on a single platform like TikTok reflects a troubling lack of coherence and foresight in its approach to the China rivalry.
Rather than rushing to score political points, the government must engage in the difficult, long-term work of crafting a comprehensive, coordinated strategy that addresses the root causes of the challenges posed by China and the social media ecosystem as a whole. Anything less than a systematic, well-considered approach will only serve to exacerbate the problems and undermine the government's credibility in the eyes of the American people.
TLDR:
The recent law forcing Chinese company ByteDance to divest from TikTok or face a ban is a case of poor timing, as it creates incentives for election interference rather than preventing it.
The decision to act against TikTok was rushed, ignoring the issue for years until it became a political controversy in an election year, highlighting a pattern of Washington avoiding tough choices on China.
While concerns about TikTok's Chinese ownership and potential threat to user privacy and election integrity are legitimate, the proposed legislation raises constitutional issues and fails to address the broader problems plaguing social media platforms.
Comprehensive data privacy regulation, transparency measures, and reforms to curb the destructive practices across social media platforms are needed instead of hastily targeted actions that do more harm than good.
The U.S. needs a coherent, long-term strategy in its rivalry with China, rather than ad hoc and rushed decisions that can backfire and create new risks.
Insights From:
Banning TikTok Could Incentivize Election Interference - Foreign Policy
Opinion | The House’s move against TikTok does too much and too little - The Washington Post