The TikTok ban has gone from being something we all more or less agreed upon to an entirely different argument altogether. Where it was about concerns about the Chinese Communist Party getting ahold of our data, it's now about politicians in D.C. controlling what we can and can't see when we surf the web.
As I write this, the Senate is something of a battleground with the likes of Rand Paul standing in the way of the TikTok ban, and for a very good reason. It effectively gives the executive branch the power to completely ban apps, websites, and services from America if controlled by "foreign adversaries," specifically adversarial countries.
As Rand Paul posted to X:
The passage of the House TikTok ban is not just a misguided overreach; it's a draconian measure that stifles free expression, tramples constitutional rights, and disrupts the economic pursuits of millions of Americans. With an iron fist, Congress dictated an unrealistic and narrow path for divestment, effectively banning TikTok and ignoring its substantial investments in data security. This act is not securing our nation—it's a disturbing gift of unprecedented authority to President Biden and the Surveillance State that threatens the very core of American digital innovation and free expression.
🚨📰 My statement on the House TikTok Ban 📰🚨
— Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 13, 2024
The passage of the House TikTok ban is not just a misguided overreach; it's a draconian measure that stifles free expression, tramples constitutional rights, and disrupts the economic pursuits of millions of Americans.
With an iron…
Is there a danger that TikTok, or more accurately its parent company ByteDance, could hand over our information to the CCP? Sure.
Has it happened?
There's no evidence of that ever happening and it would be very hard for ByteDance to do that due to the fact that our TikTok data is currently stored on Texas servers under the control of a company called Oracle. If you'd like to know more about my stance on the ban of TikTok, I'm very open about it and provide reasons why.
(READ: TikTok Is Hardly the Problem: Why I Stand Against the Ban)
For me, this isn't about China, and if you read the bill that would ban TikTok, you'd see it's not really about China for the Democrats either. This is about the ability of our own government to censor the internet at its discretion.
And here I have a problem.
Let me say this flatly. I do believe that when it comes to the internet some lines should be drawn, and I'll give a very solid example below, but ultimately, the choices I make for my internet experience are up to me, not any elected or unelected person.
Let me start by telling you where I believe the government should intervene by first showing you a video by Jd Delay discussing a TikTok content creator named Jacquelyn who uploads videos of her three-year-old daughter Wren. These videos aren't cute moments with her child or recordings of the funny things toddlers do.
This woman is purposefully uploading content that is highly sexually suggestive and is purposefully attractive to pedophiles.
TikTok has an entire army of people attempting to report and take Jacquelyn down for her disgusting exploitation of her daughter. It's clear that a lot of this content is being consumed by pedophiles, and the disturbing popularity of these videos suggests to me that the same people continue to revisit these videos at different times for reasons I will not discuss out of pure disgust.
One of those TikTok influencers is "Kallmekris" who created a video discussing Jacquelyn's exploitation of her child in further detail. I suggest you watch the whole thing when you have the time, as Jacquelyn's content is actually a problem throughout the internet, not just on TikTok. At one point, Kris posts videos of a forensic psychologist discussing the methods and patterns of pedophiles going to "child influencer" social media pages, in the event that they can't find child pornography.
I have no issue with parents having social media accounts with their children in them, and to be fair, most are very innocent and have no exploitative nature of any kind. However, there are parents out there who are purposefully catering to a very active and hungry pedophile crowd on social media.
And I'm struggling to understand how this isn't child abuse.
If you're a parent who is purposefully catering to pedophiles by utilizing your child as the draw, then are you not intentionally putting your child in harmful situations of a sexual nature? Moreover, what kind of life is the mother preparing the child for? The child will age, and as they age, will they not have to engage in the content in a more aware capacity to keep the views and money coming in?
To be clear, I'm very wary of the government's ability to step in when it comes to your child, and believe that any law crafted on this needs to be very fine-tuned, but this is clearly an issue that should be addressed as the internet has created a new kind of child exploitation. This isn't a First Amendment issue. This is ultimately a child abuse and pedophilia issue.
Is this me taking a pro-censorship position? Yes, but a very nuanced one.
My issue is blanket censorship where all nuance and reasoning are tossed out in favor of providing "safety" in exchange for liberty. Banning entire platforms because the owner might sell my data to a foreign country that can become our enemy because one man or his goons say so isn't going to cut it. Whether or not I put my data at risk is my decision. My safety is up to me, an adult with the ability to make decisions for myself.
This TikTok ban isn't going to stop with TikTok. You and I both know that once we hand the government mouse a piece of cheese, it's going to ask for a glass of your rights. If and when something happens on the internet that could have been prevented with more power, they will look at the law that banned TikTok and say that the reason X happened is because it wasn't sweeping enough. They will add things to it that give the government more power.
This TikTok bill puts the government's foot in the door when it comes to internet censorship. If the government truly cared about protecting innocent people, then we would see them discussing ways to protect children from pedophiles.
...but as we've learned over the past few years, asking politicians to protect children from pedophiles is barking up the wrong tree.
