Now that the Supreme Court has upheld the ban, and we're waiting to see what Trump might do to enable TikTok to persist (which would be an interesting 'balance of powers' issue),
New York Times has
an article delving into it. There's enough content that it's easy to miss some things. Here's something particularly interesting:
"Would TikTok still be accessible from an internet browser?
No. Along with banning app store companies from hosting the app, the law applies to internet hosting companies.
Users will probably still have access to TikTok if they use a virtual private network, or VPN, which encrypts a user’s location.
The ban “might even be a major business boost for VPN providers,” Mr. Atkinson said."
Also this:
"Faced with the possible loss of TikTok,
hundreds of thousands of people in the United States have downloaded Xiaohongshu, one of China’s most popular social media apps.
Also called RedNote, Xiaohongshu has been the most downloaded free app in the United States on the Apple store since Tuesday. The app lets users share short videos as well as still, text-based posts, which sometimes attract long, Reddit-like comment threads. Like TikTok, Xiaohongshu is powered by a proprietary algorithm, which recommends content targeted to keep people scrolling."
So hundreds of thousands of people are flocking to a functionally equivalent platform from another company in China where I would think the same concern exist.
PC Magazine also has an article:
One concern is all this is how nebulous claims of 'national security' are, like that's the vaguely defined 'boogeyman' to whip out and overrule objections on an issue. What are the criteria beyond 'some big shot says so?' Credible potential risks have been hypothesized, but I don't think TikTok was en route to turn the U.S. into a post-apocalyptic wasteland. From the article:
"That statute prohibits US app stores and online hosting services from transacting with TikTok, other platforms owned by its Beijing-based parent firm ByteDance, and any other platform under the control of a “foreign adversary” and deemed harmful to national security by the president."
It's interesting we basically publicly labeled China an enemy.
And what about this piece - "The law put those provisions in force 270 days after its passage, which turned out to be Jan. 19, unless ByteDance divests TikTok to a US buyer. It also allows the president to give TikTok a 90-day deadline extension if he sees such a divestiture moving along."
Why does it have to be a U.S. buyer? In theory if ByteDance were a company in France, we wouldn't have this problem - France isn't deemed a 'foreign adversary.' So why is it a problem if a company in France buys it now?
And is it not going to be a problem if someone here buys it? If Meta buys it, when FaceBook has already been criticized for acquiring Instagram, will that not be seen as a social media monopoly? If people on the Left were worried about data harvesting and propaganda of U.S. citizens via the platform, would Elon Musk buying it make them feel better? There was a time when MicroSoft seemed bent on being the lead player in anything platform or major app. category and profitable in the tech. sector - so we want them owning and running TikTok? The Dept. of Justice is already breathing down Google's neck and trying to make them divest the Chrome browser...won't it go over just swimmingly if they buy TikTok?