Perhaps one day we will remember the spectacle of the questioning of TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew in the US Congress as a turning point in the history of globalization. During more than 5 hours of aggressive questioning, Chew – who is not Chinese but Singaporean – defended his Chinese-incorporated company against the legislative body’s limited understanding of the technological world.
The Joe Biden administration views TikTok as a potential threat to national security and wants the Chinese company that controls it, ByteDance, to sell the platform to an American company; otherwise, you face a possible ban. Chew, on the other side, is proposing that ByteDance retain majority control of TikTok, but that its US operations be left entirely to Texas-based Oracle, which would store all US user data on its servers and control how users use it. TikTok algorithms recommend content. However, the Chinese government has stated that it will oppose a forced sale.
But the likelihood of Chew’s “Texas Project” convincing Congress or President Biden seems remote. Both do not have much confidence in the intentions of the Chinese government for good reasons. For years, Chinese hackers, allegedly with state support, have relentlessly attacked the government. and to US companies, siphoning off trillions of dollars of intellectual property. Although hard numbers are hard to come by, the pervasiveness of Chinese hacks set off alarm bells from experts around the world.
(Read: The Pentagon tracks more than 650 UFO cases, what does the investigation say?)
The bipartisan push to limit TikTok reflects the growing mistrust of China, one of the very few things that Democrats and Republicans agree on in Washington. Although China itself has counter strategies, blocking US-owned platforms, the proposed US ban could accelerate the deglobalization trend.
The implications
From a domestic policy point of view, there is a difference between the proposed ban on TikTok and the ban on the sale and import of video and communications equipment from Chinese manufacturers.
Ranting against TikTok can be easier than banning it. With 150 million US users, it is one of the most popular apps in the country., in which adults spend an average of 56 minutes a day. From a domestic policy standpoint, there is a gigantic difference between the proposed ban on TikTok and the recent US ban on the sale and import of video and communications equipment from Chinese manufacturers like Huawei.
In addition to the multitude of tiktokers who make a living on the platform who could be collateral victims if banned, the app is extraordinarily popular among voters under 30, with surveys indicating that nearly two-thirds of young people oppose this measure. Another point to take into account is the Democratic trend shown by this population. Should TikTok be banned, opposition from young people could hurt Biden’s re-election chances. Democratic Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who is endorsed by millennials, spoke out against the ban.
(More: This is how Paraguayans live in Taiwan in the midst of tensions with China)
Chew certainly earned points among the youngsters. If the goal of banning TikTok is to protect American voters from being spied on and manipulated, he argued, Congress should then devise a plan that also addresses abuses by US-based platforms. After all, the Cambridge Analytica scandal showed that Facebook’s misinformation and privacy violations helped former President Donald Trump win the 2016 election.
The reality is that youAll social media platforms, and not just TikTok, should be regulated by the Government. The Federal Trade Commission is considering a crackdown on trade surveillance and unsafe data management practices by tech giants.
Unfortunately for TikTok, banning Chinese-owned companies is much easier than regulating tech giants. Despite his popularity, TikTok is just one front in the current tech war between the US and China.to which are added the restrictions on the sale of advanced semiconductors to Chinese companies.
(Keep reading: The faces of China’s strategy to take center stage in the world)
The growing and bitter rivalry between the US and China leaves no room for an agreement to be reached that addresses the concerns of both countries for security. For example, China could rethink its protectionist policies and allow US technology companies to operate in its home market, but that would jeopardize the authorities’ tight control over the information ecosystem. Similarly, the US could require that TikTok’s US operations be sold at a significant premium representing partial compensation for what the Chinese government called “theft.”
Those who downplay the devastating effect that the US ban on TikTok could have do not understand the economics of social media. The ability of advertisers to reach US audiences is precisely what gives social media platforms value. If a platform is outlawed, its value to advertisers disappears.
TikTok is putting up a good fight, but it may lose it. US lawmakers are reportedly making progress on their plans to ban it. While legitimate national security concerns associated with TikTok must be addressed, a direct ban would not prevent Americans from being spied on and manipulated. Unfortunately, it could also confirm the beginning of the end of the global internet.
(Also: What will the US and its allies do if China decides to invade Taiwan?)
Where are they partially banning it?
Under the premise of protecting its national security, the United States has led the partial ban on TikTok and is considering implementing the measure generally. On February 28, the Biden government gave the order to veto the application on the cell phones and computers of officials. This decision has been followed by other countries such as the United Kingdom, France, Canada, Belgium, Latvia, Denmark, New Zealand, Australia, among others. The European Parliament even voted in favor for all servers to remove the social network to prevent data breaches. NATO also rode on that wave.
However, India was the first country to ban TikTok in 2020, along with other Chinese companies, due to tensions between the two governments.
KENNETH ROGOFF
© PROJECT SYNDICATE
MILAN
Professor of Economics and Public Policy at Harvard University and winner of the 2011 Deutsche Bank Prize in Financial Economics, he was chief economist at the International Monetary Fund from 2001 to 2003.
More In-Depth News
Gustavo Petro, prominent note with Joe Biden, but discreet with congressmen
Dying by knocking on the wrong door: shootings cause concern in the US
#war #TikTok