TikTok will probably either have to be sold to a US owner or shut down in less than two months.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/dec/06/tiktok-sale-ban-us
Governments have legitimate interests in protecting data security and addressing potential foreign influence, so it's ok to use legislative or regulatory channels with stated public policy objectives.
But US legislators' xenophobia and hypocrisy is a major component of the push for a forced divestiture.
The fact that the company who owns TikTok would presumably receive fair market value in a sale is better than outright expropriation. But the flavor of the process is: engage in this forced transaction, or we'll burn your economically productive assets. "A nice, slightly addictive product you have here. It would be a shame if something were to happen to it."
Forcing private companies to restructure or sell based on national origin would have been called "state-led capitalism" elsewhere, so it's notable that this doesn't seem to be the reaction when the US government does it.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/dec/06/tiktok-sale-ban-us
Governments have legitimate interests in protecting data security and addressing potential foreign influence, so it's ok to use legislative or regulatory channels with stated public policy objectives.
But US legislators' xenophobia and hypocrisy is a major component of the push for a forced divestiture.
The fact that the company who owns TikTok would presumably receive fair market value in a sale is better than outright expropriation. But the flavor of the process is: engage in this forced transaction, or we'll burn your economically productive assets. "A nice, slightly addictive product you have here. It would be a shame if something were to happen to it."
Forcing private companies to restructure or sell based on national origin would have been called "state-led capitalism" elsewhere, so it's notable that this doesn't seem to be the reaction when the US government does it.
## Will a TikTok ban limit free speech?
TikTok makes the free speech argument ("The TikTok ban, unless stopped, will silence the voices of over 170 million Americans here in the US and around the world on January 19th, 2025"). It's fine as far as it goes, but ultimately not super-persuasive - the same US-based users can publish opinions or creative projects elsewhere. Those content creators who are making money on TikTok will suffer economic damages, but it's still the case that alternative exist.
Instagram Reels was quite obviously "inspired" ("borrowing from") TikTok's vertical short-form video format, user interface, and many key features. Even the way Reels handles music, transitions, and video editing bears striking similarities to TikTok's original design. So alternatives are there, but I don't think everyone will start necessarily start recording their opinions on Instagram reels.
If that's true, we who live outside of the US will be prevented from hearing American voices. While there isn't a "right to hear others", my wish to hear some Americans will be rendered impossible.
## Fracturing the internet
The Great Firewall of China doesn't just affect Chinese citizens, but also limits our ability to hear Chinese voices and perspectives from China. That's one huge cost of the Firewall. If it isn't great when China fragments the internet, then... is it ok when "our side" does it?