Banning TikTok empowers censors – American Thinker

While I share the widely publicized concern that banning TikTok will enrich Meta, Google, and Snap Inc., the real winners of this maneuver haven’t been mentioned, and empowering them would limit viewpoint diversity and freedom of speech, making it harder for content creators like me to find an audience.

I host a small political podcast on which I and my colleagues frequently critique the government. As a small outfit with no big names, we rely on social media algorithms to connect us to audiences interested in our content. We have found that not all platforms are equal in this regard: TikTok, in our experience, has been the best at that job, YouTube is okay, but Instagram is a disaster. If lawmakers ban TikTok, the only platforms left will be those that are 1) worse at helping small creators find an audience and 2) more likely to play ball with the Censorship Industrial Complex (CIC).

Originally defined by American author and journalist Micheal Shellenberger, the CIC is an informal network of government, non-profit organizations, and big tech companies collaborating to censor social media and drive a collective understanding of politics conducive to their interests. According to Mike Benz, former cyber security specialist at the State Department, the arrangement for the CIC was created to fight the war on terror, used to encourage the Arab Spring, then turned on the West in the aftermath of Brexit and the 2016 election of Donald Trump. Their work culminated with the arrangement to suppress the Biden Laptop story.

It’s this hidden censorship regime, the one that in 2020 suppressed the Biden laptop story and encouraged Facebook to suppress truthful but inconvenient COVID19 information on Facebook, that stands to win the most from a TikTok ban. Removing a platform that at times challenges the accepted narrative would give even more power to that group of government actors (and their private counterparts) to decide what content gets promoted — and what content gets buried by the algorithm. 

Most recently, TikTok failed to follow the line on suppressing anti-Israel speech enough for the powers that be. However, perhaps even more concerning for the CIC was when TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew testified before Congress, making TikTok’s point of view and danger clear: They would resist any government censorship of the platform. 

Senator Marsha Blackburn mentioned these thought crimes in her PR for the ban. “It would not be surprising that the Chinese-owned TikTok is pushing pro-Hamas content,” she said. “The CCP benefits by destabilizing the Middle East and pushing the United States to put more manpower back into the region.” 

But proponents of the ban have not proven that this TikTok content is an intentional move to undermine the American public’s faith in their institutions or to inspire viewers to campaign for Hamas. It’s just as likely that these videos do better because they appeal to the user base, and the algorithm is simply giving viewers the videos they want to see.

It should always raise your tyranny antenna when a politician claims that speech by Americans to other Americans is divisive and being amplified (without any evidence) with the malicious intent to undermine our foreign policy somehow. Perhaps the youth just disagree with you, Senator, and these videos get the views the do because Bytedance wants to make more money keeping people on the app and seeing ads?

In a republic like ours, U.S. foreign policy should be up for debate — without the government selectively pushing narratives on us. Shutting down a side of debate by having companies “demote” posts or rerouting links to government approved outlets is censorship and destructive.

I’m not idealizing TikTok or Bytedance. They have their own issues of censorship, telling users to “Get info on US Elections” and “Get the facts about COVID” on some videos. But we need multiple social media platforms to ensure competition and limit the ease of censorship. Our goal shouldn’t be to mimic Chinese censorship but to champion freedom of expression.

Rather than killing off an entire media platform, Congress should go after censors themselves. Congress should ban the executive branch’s misuse of third parties for opinion manipulation and reform the intelligence agencies responsible. Defund the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency and the Atlantic Council. We have the guideposts for it; we’ve done it before. Simply restore the point of the Church Committee reform and clarify: Intel agencies can’t operate in the U.S. to manipulate public opinion.

In our fight for freedom of speech and specifically tolerance for speech critical of the government, surrendering the digital public square to a clandestine censorship cartel is a forfeiture of our liberty.

David Rand is a Young Voices Contributor, Podc

ast Philosopher at Human [Re]Action, Media, and Political Consultant.

Image: TikTok