The Story and Debate Behind the Ban
On January 19, 2025, Tiktok shut down its services, making them inaccessible to its approximately 170 million U.S. users, only to return approximately twelve hours later with a message reading, “Thank you for your patience and support. As a result of President Trump’s efforts, TikTok is back in the U.S.”
This temporary ban, a result of the fear of national security concerns due to ByteDance’s alleged connections to the Chinese government, was put in place with the passage of the “Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act.” This act provided TikTok with a deadline to either be sold away from Byte Dance–its parent-based company–or completely stop operations within the United States.
Despite attempts made by the parent-based company to hold ownership of the app, such as an appeal Byte Dance made to the Supreme Court that argued that the ban would violate First Amendment Rights, their attempts were ultimately overruled. As the deadline approached, ByteDance refused to sell Tiktok, eventually forcing the app’s closure. Then, when to-be President Donald Trump posted on social media a promise to return TikTok and give them more time to divest from Byte Dance, a confirmation the app was waiting to hear from the Biden Administration, service was slowly restored to American users who had not already deleted the app.
The possibility of a permanent ban on TikTok has caused Americans to wonder if this ban is indeed justified or too harsh. Supporters of this ban say that Tiktok’s ties with the Chinese government would make sensitive American data vulnerable to misuse, given Chinese policies that require companies to work with the federal government if such a need arose. This law thus raises the possibility that TikTok can serve as a possible illicit doorway to American user data, which could then be used against the U.S. during times of disagreement or conflict.
On the other hand, other people viewed this ban as too strict and raised the possibility of this ban being a byproduct of tensions between the U.S and China rather than the result of a genuine espionage threat posed by the Chinese government. This conflict between national security and freedom of speech has been argued many times and is one that eventually leads to the same basic question: How will today’s democracies respond to a growing interconnected digital world?
Social Media and Student Storm
Immediately following the ban, TikTok users took to social media to voice their opinions. Many people praised the way that TikTok contributed to American society, with user “Shawty Astrology” stating on X (Twitter), “TikTok contributed over 18.5 BILLION dollars to the US economy in 2024, stimulating economic job growth, increasing revenue for traditional businesses and corporations on the app, helping disabled & unemployed people to pay their bills.”
This user’s statement, with over seven thousand likes, highlighted how many people were upset at TikTok’s ban, especially considering its positive effect on the American economy and its negative effect on those who rely on the app to make a living. These feelings of resentment were not only evident on social media , however, with students of Edison High also expressing frustration during the short time the app was inaccessible.
“I was a bit disappointed at the ban because I use Tiktok a lot and feel like other platforms such as Instagram reels do not cater to my interests as much,” said Parth Shidhaye ‘27.
“I use Tiktok a lot and felt upset after the ban because Tiktok was my primary entertainment source,” said Ashmit Gandhi ‘26.
Teachers too shared their perspective of this ban.
“The Tik Tok ban is a tricky situation,” said History teacher Ms. Leanne Rubiano. “I see it as a reflection of ongoing tensions between government regulation and free speech. While concerns over data privacy and foreign influence are valid, banning Tik Tok outright might set a dangerous precedent, giving the government the opportunity to control speech over digital platforms. Instead of a ban, I think the first step to consider is data security and transparency across all social media platforms.”
All users make good points. On one hand, it is indeed true that TikTok contributes a lot to the American economy by employing thousands of workers and giving small businesses an easy and cheap way to market products. Not only that, but TikTok also remains one of the few platforms that offers highly personalized and engaging content variety, especially for younger and teenage audiences. Additionally, Ms. Rubiano’s point of a dangerous precedent of governmental control being set seems possible too. However, while these concerns are important, the potential risks associated with data privacy and national security cannot be largely ignored either.
National Security vs Freedom of speech
In its arguments to the Supreme Court, TikTok claimed that a ban would undermine American citizens’ very first constitutional right to freedom of speech. TikTok was right in this argument that a ban would indeed restrict freedom of speech by controlling what Americans could access, share, and create on digital platforms.
However, while freedom of speech is a fundamental right, it can not be traded at the expense of national security. The concerns raised by the lawmakers are valid and emphasize the need to balance the protection of national security, which can be easily compromised at the hands of one of America’s biggest rivals. Although Tiktok claims that it would never hand over American data to Chinese officials, China’s lack of transparency raises doubts about Tiktok’s assurance.
Given the Chinese government’s control of the flow of information out of the country, any pressure on Tiktok to hand over user data would remain concealed, preventing it from ever reaching the West—thereby, making Tiktok a silver plate full of user data that could be exploited whenever China feels right.
Additionally, past examples from within Chinese borders, such as Jack Ma losing more than half his wealth after criticizing Chinese regulators, further undermines Tiktok’s claim that the Chinese government does not interfere with private companies, highlighting the potential for coercion of businesses operating in China.
Moreover, it also remains unlikely that banning Tiktok would set dangerous precedents of government control as this concern is not one that is new. For example, the U.S. has previously restricted companies like Huawei and ZTE from operating in critical sectors due to national security risks, demonstrating that bans on foreign-controlled entities are sometimes necessary. Even if a ban were to take place, it would primarily apply to cases involving genuine national security threats, rather than serving as a tool for broad government censorship.
While a ban on TikTok would mean limits on American freedoms, the potential risks of the app outweigh its contribution to freedom of expression. TikTok raises a heightened and authentic concern for possible espionage on American citizens, something that remains much worse than the inability to access a certain app. Therefore, it is in America’s best interest to give TikTok a bit more time to divest from Chinese entities, but if not done so, then to wave a final time to the platform and let it go.
