Rand Paul Is Right: Banning TikTok Would Be Idiotic
Three reasons not to ban the popular social media app
HD DownloadWhy is the government trying to ban TikTok? The popular social media app, which is owned by ByteDance, a Chinese company, has come under fire from both Republicans and Democrats who are determined to get rid of it. They're worried the Chinese government has too much influence on the platform.
Never mind that more than 150 million Americans use TikTok to express themselves creatively, consume news they wouldn't find elsewhere, and keep themselves entertained—nanny state politicians like Sen. Josh Hawley (R–Mo.) and President Joe Biden think they should have the power to control what kinds of foreign content you're allowed to see.
Not everyone in Washington thinks banning TikTok is a good idea. Sen. Rand Paul (R–Ky.) recently denounced the idea of giving the Biden administration more power to control social media.
Paul is right. Here are three reasons why letting the federal government prohibit TikTok is an idiotic idea.
First off, the dangers of TikTok have been overstated. Yes, it's true you can find really vile content on the platform—it's not all dance videos, recipes, and makeup tutorials. But that's not unique to TikTok; there's bad stuff in all corners of the internet. Just because a website or an app is bad sometimes for some people doesn't mean we should violate the First Amendment rights of millions of others. Censorship is censorship, even if it's well-intended. We should leave it to individuals, families, and schools to set restrictions on social media usage—not the federal government.
It's true that TikTok is unique in that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can pressure the company in ways that are bad. It's very likely that TikTok mutes certain controversial subjects, and takes down the accounts of dissidents in order to protect the CCP.
But the sad truth is that the U.S. government has applied similar pressure to American social media companies like Facebook and Twitter. Journalists have discovered that federal agencies like the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security regularly asked Twitter to delete content the government didn't approve of. My own reporting for Reason has revealed that the White House and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention applied constant pressure on Facebook during the pandemic to restrict speech. If members of Congress are really so worried about government propagandists controlling the discourse on social media, they should start by putting their own house in order.
Lastly, any new law that gives the feds the power to ban TikTok could easily be weaponized against other companies. The RESTRICT Act, which is co-sponsored by Sens. John Thune (R–S.D.) and Mark Warner (D–Va.), empowers the Commerce Department to take action against foreign threats on social media. But lawmakers, national intelligence experts, and mainstream media pundits are constantly accusing Facebook of allowing too much foreign misinformation on the platform. This is the PATRIOT Act 2.0: If we give the government more tools to police TikTok, it's going to use them against all of us.
So let's leave TikTok alone. Not just because of the dance videos—but also because of the First Amendment.
Edited by John Osterhoudt; camera by Isaac Reese
Photo: Imagine China/Newscom; Petr Svancara/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Ron Sachs/CNP/ SplashNews/Newscom; Chris Kleponis - CNP/picture alliance / Consolidated News Photos/Newscom; Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Newscom; Graeme Sloan/Sipa USA/Newscom
- Video Editing and Audio Production: John Osterhoudt
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
All other problem have been solved already.
This is their attempt to "solve" some of those other "problems". Like dissent.
I am making over $30k a month working part time. I am a full time college student and just working for 3 to 4 hrs a day. Everybody must try this home online job now by just use this Following
Website........ http://Www.Smartjob1.com
I basically make about $14,000 to $18,000 a month online. It’s enough to comfortably replace my old jobs income, especially considering I only work about 10-13 hours a week from home. I was amazed how easy it was after I tried it copy below web
HERE ——–>> https://salarycash710.blogspot.com/
I am making a good salary from home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
Here is I started.……......>> GOOGLE WORK
It's interesting to note that Rand Paul has received millions of dollars in political donations from billionaire Jeff Yass, who owns 7% of Bytedance. Just saying.
It's also interesting to note that Rand Paul has been very consistent and constant as a defender of 1A in spite of you and your kind there, Shrike.
Easily start receiving more than $600 every single day from home in your part time. i made $18781 from this job in my spare time afte my college. easy to do job and its regular income are awesome. no skills needed to do this job all you need to know is how to copy and paste stuff online. join this today by follow details on this page.
Here is I started.……………………>> http://Www.jobsrevenue.com
It's also interesting that Flush made a good point there and defending the 1A is not relevant here. We have an obligation to protect our country, our secrets, our personal information, our children.
Of course it’s a 1A issue if Americans are being blocked from viewing perfectly legal material.
And the government has an obligation not to restrict speech or press regardless of the source. There's nothing in the 1st amendment that says "except for foreign stuff".
Oh lord, when someone invokes "it's about the CHILDREN", we know they have no legs to stand on.
The government does have an obligation to protect the country. Protecting your secrets, personal info and children is on you. No one is making you share it with a Chinese company.
TikTok shouldn’t be banned.
But the operation of any and all companies who are owned or whose owners/officers/employees potentially fall under the control of the CCP/Chinese government should be banned in the US.
TikTok can continue to operate in the US if it (or its US subsidiary) is sold to US and/or European owners.
Supporting corporations under the control and thumb of a totalitarian, mass murdering, hostile regime is not a good hill for Rand Paul to die on. And it certainly isn’t principled libertarianism.
Agree on banning due to CCP control. Anyone who has worked with the Chinese know that there are no private companies operating there. CCP controls all.
Are there principled libertarians? Rand Paul is another in a large pile of opportunistic, money grubbing, corporate cogs clogging up and giving Government a bad name. His intentions are entirely personal.
I think Rand Paul is better than most. I think he is usually motivated by libertarian-ish arguments and he is not as libertine, progressive, and utilitarian as Reason staff.
Also, he made his comments in the context of the RESTRICT act, and the RESTRICT act really is an awful piece of legislation.
But part of the reason RESTRICT is so awful is because people like Paul have failed to propose better alternatives.
Saying the government shouldn't have the power to shut down a thing isn't the same thing as supporting it.
The government not only has the power to shut down companies controlled by the CCP, it has an obligation to do so.
This is about punching the Chinese oligarchs in the nose by depressing the stock price. Nothing gets big that fast in a dictatorship without active permission and participation. What do you think they went into power for?
Chicoms, yo. Yo, Chicoms.
Agreed. Chicago commies are the worst.
Yeah, they get a choice of two tomorrow.
Chicago commies, Chinese commies……. best to just kill ‘em all for mommy.
Rand Paul Is Right: Banning TikTok Would Be Idiotic
You'd do it for Randolph Scott.
[singing] Randolph Scott [/singing]!!
We should leave it to ... schools to set restrictions on social media usage—not the federal government.
So government schools should set restrictions, as long as it's not the government?
It’s not censorship if it’s done by a private non-profit funded by the State Department.
TikTok will fall when another more interesting app rises. When that happens TikTok will fall in a shorter time than Congress can pass a law to get rid of the app.
True. It's inevitable. However, we are so far behind the curve as it relates to the internet and how it affects children and education. Education in its current and slowly evolving form has become nearly obsolete and a waste of time for kids. We're still trying to teach as if it was 1950. The internet has laid waste to the music biz, film/tv, brick and mortar commerce and education. As we sit here fumbling for a solution, listening to useless "public servants" like Rand Paul, the internet, China, and other entities take control of our commerce, our government, our politics and our social and cultural modes and control them for us.
Wow. Did a search for "keylogger", nothing came up. Despite it being widespread news that TicTok incorporates one.
Neither is there any mention of TicTok sharing customer data with the Chinese government.
It's spyware! That's not speculation, that's established fact.
I'll gladly grant that the RESTRICT act is wildly over-expansive, giving the government way too much power. But we shouldn't ban spyware controlled by a strategic enemy of the country? Seriously?
What customer data can the Chinese government get from TikTok that they can't buy from Facebook, Google, YouTube, Instagram, Twitter, etc.?
Why buy it when you get it for free?
Just so you know, your Google keyboard on your android phone is a literal keylogger.
And nothing I say should be used to excuse Tik Tok of this behavior, but should be a way to shine a light on everything you do online.
So let’s leave TikTok alone. Not
just because offor the dance videos—butalso because offor the First Amendment.TikTok dance videos = 1A? Robby, you’re part of the problem.
KMW's verbal argument on Kennedy was "they totes can't ban it, it's sooooooooooooooo popular"
Tik Tok is gender-affirming-care. It's literally saving lives.
From the bill text: “shall, upon conviction, be fined not more than $1,000,000, or if a natural person, may be imprisoned for not more than 20 years, or both.”
For those of you who think you’re sticking it to the CCP, please remember that the people actually getting sent away for 20 years will mostly be Americans.
For comparison, having an illegal satellite dish in Iran is a $2800 fine. In Zimbabwe they merely confiscated multiband radios capable of receiving “foreign influence on elections”. For North Koreans caught using illegal non-NK versions of Android: “A lighter case, we would be sent to a reform facility and imprisonment would be for one to two years. Most people get out with a bribe though.”
Just arrest any TikTok user as a Communist Chinese spy, and the 'problem' will solve itself.
"Arrest","User". Why limit ourselves to that.
Why limit ourselves, when the law also allows forfeiture of "Any property, real or personal, tangible or intangible, used or intended to be used, in any manner, to commit or facilitate a violation or attempted violation"
We can take the car and house of anyone we claim intended to attempt to use TikTok. They can then try to prove they had no thoughts or intents.
Outlaws VPN?
More quotes from the text of the bill:
'b) Permitted Activities.--Officers and employees of agencies
authorized to conduct investigations under subsection (a) may--
(1) inspect, search, detain, seize, or impose temporary
denial orders with respect to items, in any form, or
conveyances on which it is believed that there are items that
have been, are being, or are about to be imported into the
United States in violation of this Act or any other applicable
Federal law;"
No potential for abuse there.
I live in South Dakota, so as a constituent of Senator John Thune, a co-sponsor of the bill, what is the best way to let him know he is acting as an authoritarian asshole?
in November delay the 16 South Dakotans who keep voting him back to Washington
As it is South Dakota I am guessing Senator Thune is pretty safe. I would try voting libertarian next election. Thune will still win, but if it is close it might scare him.
It is unknown whether banning TikTok is wise. All acts and all omissions come with pro's and con's. The hysteria over Russia's allegedly influencing our elections was a foolish attempt to cover up Hillary's grossly incompetent 2016 election strategy. That does not mean that TikTok does not pose a threat. One thing that is a threat -- listening to anything Rand Paul says.
The RESTRICT Act is way too broad.
The RESTRICT Act is way too broad. Tik Tok is being used as an excuse to extend surveillance and control everywhere.
I don’t think this is an issue about 1A, but one of surviellance and social manipulation. There’s no protected speech on a Chicom application – only what’s permissible by the party. I understand the content of the same app in China is completely differenent from that in the states. I’m sure we Americans can provide just as lowbrow and culturally decadent content as the Chinese can, without the amassing of the date of every generation of Americans for future and present psyops.
Well is banning Tic Toc banning free speech or stopping China’s spying? We have to come on an agreement and common definition on those two issues to know what is the right thing to do.
We should not ban free speech.
We should stop our adversaries spying if we can.
Which is the correct answer is not going to be easy to resolve, and neither side is 100% right or 100% wrong.
We do need to come to a consensus on this, but that seems impossible in the US today.
Rand Paul is right on occasion. Unfortunately, he's such a total buffoon the rest of the time, and we Libertarians have to spend an inordinate amount of time and effort reminding people that he's a Republican, not a Libertarian.
wrong place
"We Libertarians have to spend time and effort reminding people that Rand Paul is a total buffoon"
Ahahaha!
In between getting your Star Trek costume ready for the next LP convention, campaigning to get weed legalized, and forcing bakers to make cakes for gay weddings? Yeah, glad to know there are serious Libertarians out there who really have their eye on the ball.
I generally agree with Rand, but this one has me scratching my head. Yes, the “Restrict” law is unconstitutional garbage. That said, Tik Tok is Chinese propaganda, espionage, and social manipulation all wrapped together - simply block it from all American service providers with internet filters using our existing Espionage laws. If someone really wants to go to the dark web just to access it, we’ll and good - but don’t make it easy for people to access.
Service Tariff. Problem solved.
Rand is right; It is BS. I signed up for tiktok; it never asked for dirty details like SSN, Bank account #, etc, etc, etc... How can it be a threat? The only thing it wanted was an email address that can be easily setup with fake data.
If someone doesn't want to risk it; they are more than FREE to not do business with China. THAT IS THERE CHOICE!!!!! That is what is suppose to separate us from them. How is becoming just like them saving us from them??????????????????
Think about it....
On the one hand, our government is at worst corrupt and at best inefficient, and we have every reason to second-guess their motivations and doubt the efficacy of any action they may take.
On the other hand, TikTok’s format and algorithm are a weapon designed to hijack and program the minds of the young and/or impressionable, and it’s actively succeeding in teaching the next generation to be superficial, self-absorbed morons with no ability to reason or understand, and a massive sense of entitlement instead of goals and aspirations. And that’s the ones who haven’t been social contagioned into one or another self-destructive trend or fad.
So, basically, we can’t have TikTok because it will literally destroy any possibility of democracy working, and we can’t ban TikTok because it would be un-American and undemocratic and we have no real tool to achieve that goal anyway. It seems the Chinese have finally developed a super weapon capable of defeating their greatest obstacle (open society) without firing a single shot.
"Rand Paul is right"
This is hardly news