To support student journalism and the content you love, become a member of The Daily Orange today.

Spencer Chan, a Syracuse University freshman and creator of the Milking Ardor podcast, believes TikTok has allowed creators like himself “to grow their businesses, personal brands and passion projects.”

Despite the platform’s ability to foster a creative space, the United States Senate introduced a bipartisan bill on March 7 that would give President Joe Biden the legal authority to ban TikTok.

Titled the RESTRICT Act, the bill not only focuses on banning TikTok, which has 150 million American users, but has been the main subject of debate during this week’s Congressional hearings. The act’s acronym stands for Restricting the Emergence of Security Threats that Risk Information and Communications Technology, and is deemed a way to protect citizens against foreign-linked technologies that pose a national security risk.

While TikTok has its primary data centers in the U.S., it is owned by the Chinese company ByteDance. Given increasing security concerns regarding Chinese security, as seen in the Chinese spy balloon incident of last month, American officials have their guards up, but the question is whether their interests are truly vested in the safety of the American people.

According to Business Insider, at least 32 members of Congress or their family members had investments in Facebook in 2020, and at least 155 held stock in major news companies, television networks or entertainment conglomerates. Without TikTok, a huge competitor in that sector, many politicians stand to profit.

Arlo Stone | Design Editor

TikTok has taken time, and ultimately business and profit, away from its competitors. The drop-off of Facebook, specifically, has impacted politicians who use the app as a campaigning tool to reach the younger generation.

The RESTRICT Act targets foreign-linked companies. But if the goal is to “protect our children” from these security breaches, shouldn’t all data collecting be targeted?

As it turns out, Facebook actually exceeds TikTok in data gathering, with access to the user’s exact location and ability to store and process all profile information. Moreover, companies like Facebook, Google and Snapchat all have deals with Chinese ad tech companies that sell user data.

Instead of simply banning TikTok, what could actually help protect user privacy and data collection is a blanket data protection law in America, concerning all platforms and companies. Unfortunately, the U.S. has neglected this option and remains one of only a few countries lacking nationwide data protection laws. Also, 47 U.S. states have weak or non-existent consumer protection laws. While there is no set standard for consumer protection laws, experts suggest securing consumers with the right of access and information, risk assessment, transparency and fiduciary duty.

Tensions between the U.S. and China also seem to be at the center of concerns regarding restrictions of foreign technologies. With China and Russia developing closer relations amidst the war on Ukraine, the U.S. is worried about China expanding its dominance in the digital world.

China’s increasing control throughout the digital world is guided by the CCP’s monopoly over information released by Chinese companies, making it understandable that the U.S. would fear its presence in the American market. Unfortunately, like many issues in today’s political climate, this questioning has at times insinuated discriminatory and racist sentiment; it was just two years ago that the media was addressing President Donald Trump’s xenophobic labeling of COVID-19 as the “Chinese Virus.”

During the hearing of TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew before Congress, he was continuously asked questions about Chinese propaganda and the country’s role in the function of the app that took away from the main argument of the case. He had to remind our representatives that he was Singaporean and the data is stored on U.S. soil.

It is racist remarks like these that make it hard to separate actions taken against the Chinese government from those taken against Chinese people. But Rep. Stephanie Murphy believes this is something we must do. “We have to be able to make a clear distinction that our adversary is the Chinese Communist Party, not the Chinese people, and certainly not the Asian Americans who live here and have contributed so much to this country,” Murphy told the Washington Post.

We should be aware of the difference between the government and the people. Actions taken to protect users from ByteDance’s data collection are specifically targeting the Chinese government’s laws allowing data requests from Chinese companies for intelligence-gathering, not the Chinese people as a whole.

Rep. Jamaal Bowman, one of the few TikTok advocates left in Congress, has expressed his concern that the effort to ban the Chinese-owned platform is in fact an instance of racist policymaking. TikTok COO Vanessa Pappas also touched on what a shame it is, that in the face of TikTok being committed to provide a platform to foster inclusivity for their diverse communities, the Congressional hearings felt rooted in xenophobia.

In addition, they both believe that TikTok has become an integral part of our societal culture and has “created a community and a space for free speech for 150 million Americans and counting,” as Bowman said.

Among the 150 million who use TikTok, there are undoubtedly countless SU students who use the app to create content, promote their small-businesses or simply to enjoy others’ content and products.

Politically-motivated interests impact so much of our daily lives and the potential banning of TikTok is simply another example. It would be one thing if consumer data protection was prioritized across the board and this was one of many efforts. But targeting one platform, or really, one country, is counterproductive and a waste of our officials’ time.

Olivia Fried is a Freshman studying International Relations. She is a bi-weekly columnist and can be reached at oefried@syr.edu

Published on March 27, 2023 at 12:34 am