In an era of growing geopolitical tension between the United States and China, the U.S. government has intensified efforts to force ByteDance to divest from TikTok. The White House cites concerns over national security and privacy, pointing fingers at ByteDance’s potential connections to the Chinese government. However, a closer examination reveals that these claims mask a broader agenda rooted in hypocrisy and economic opportunism.
Spying Practices: Glass Houses
The U.S. government criticizes China for potentially accessing data through ByteDance, while intelligence programs like the National Security Agency (NSA) have long been surveilling citizens globally. Edward Snowden’s revelations in 2013 shed light on PRISM, an NSA program that allowed access to vast amounts of data directly from major U.S. tech companies. Despite reassurances that changes have been made, this widespread surveillance undercuts the government’s credibility in accusing others of privacy violations. By emphasizing the hypothetical risks posed by TikTok, the U.S. government disregards its own established practices and portrays an unrealistic narrative that sidesteps its global surveillance.
Economic Imperialism in Disguise
The legislation forcing ByteDance to divest from TikTok is ostensibly about protecting American data from foreign adversaries. Still, it also appears to be about gaining control over a valuable digital asset with a global user base. TikTok’s success threatens Silicon Valley tech giants like Meta (formerly Facebook) and Snap. Divestiture, therefore, becomes a strategic move aimed at taking control of a profitable platform under the guise of national security.
Moreover, TikTok’s continued success under foreign ownership challenges the dominance of American social media platforms. Congress appears more interested in harnessing its success to bolster U.S. economic interests than ensuring user safety. Despite ByteDance offering a “shut-down option” and investing $2 billion in security measures for U.S. user data, the government remains focused on divestiture as a preemptive measure.
That’s right, a preemptive measure. ByteDance hasn’t done anything wrong that we know of. There is no evidence that China has forced them turn over U.S. customer data the way the U.S. has forced it’s company to turn over the data of international customers. Congress is literally saying, “We want that ball from China, and so we’re coming up with a shitty and hypocritical excuse to try and force them to give it to us.”
A Questionable Solution
According to Reuters, a lawsuit against the divestiture bill filed earlier this week states that selling TikTok to an American buyer may not be feasible. Potential buyers would need to navigate complex technological, financial, and geopolitical hurdles. The intricate code behind TikTok’s algorithm and recommendation engine would take years for new engineers to understand, making a seamless transition challenging. Thus, this divestiture would ultimately serve to disrupt the platform and deprive ByteDance of the value it created.
National Security or Economic Dominance?
The legislation effectively singles out TikTok and bars app stores and hosting services from supporting the platform unless divestiture occurs by January 2025. However, restricting access to a foreign-owned platform while ignoring the surveillance practices of American tech giants illustrates that the purported national security concerns are secondary to broader geopolitical and economic objectives.
Furthermore, why does it have to be an American company they sell to? If this wasn’t anything more than a poorly cloaked attempt at economic imperialism, then why would the sale to a company based in a U.S. ally like Japan or South Korea be sufficient?
Congress should engage in transparent dialogue and equitable regulation instead of wielding divestiture as a blunt instrument of control. True national security means applying the same standards to U.S. corporations as to foreign entities while acknowledging the surveillance history and practices that still persist.
Ultimately, the forced sale of TikTok reflects economic imperialism that threatens to further sour international relations under the thin, weak guise of “protecting Americans.” The U.S. government needs to stop forcing its hands into other country’s cookie jars.
