TikTok ban could set precedent for social media free speech and privacy, experts say
The clock is ticking for TikTok, and questions of freedom of speech and national security are on the line.
This week, representatives for the popular video-sharing app are arguing in a federal appeals court for its ability to operate in the United States. A federal law, which goes into effect in January, would ban the app for U.S. users in the name of national security concerns. Chinese company, ByteDance, owns TikTok.
Virginia Tech communications experts Megan Duncan, Jimmy Ivory, and Cayce Myers explain what this case means for social media’s role in public perception and political opinion.
“While we might think of TikTok as mostly fun dance videos and people sharing their beauty routines, this federal law and subsequent court hearings demonstrate that social media is political,” Duncan said. “Because it is a place where public opinion can be influenced and because it is a company that controls substantial money and power, social media is political.
“Platforms, such as TikTok and others, have been shown to influence public opinion relating to what topics users think are important and worth paying attention to,” Duncan said. “They can also influence a user’s perception of the balance of public opinion on an issue.”
The case has wide implications in the United States, given TikTok’s expansive following, Myers said.
“Interestingly, while the case involves discussion about national security and the potential for espionage, U.S. use of TikTok has proliferated with the platform having more than 170 million users that includes individuals, businesses, and even major U.S. politicians,” he said.
The case spotlights the role that social media plays in free speech and what regulation means.
“The ban of TikTok is significant because of the First Amendment implications for both TikTok and its users,” Myers said. “TikTok argues that the forced divestment creates a double standard under the First Amendment for their platform, which ultimately violates free speech."
Ivory said it could be a while until there is a resolution in the case.
“The case will set a precedent about the extent to which regulating software applications' ownership is a First Amendment issue for their users,” Ivory said. “I would not expect resolution any time soon. We are likely to see this case appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States regardless of how this appeal goes.”
About Duncan
Megan Duncan is an associate professor in the School of Communication. Her research focuses on how partisans judge the credibility of and engage with the news. Using survey-embedded experiments, surveys, and other quantitative methods, she’s interested in knowing more about audiences, their perceptions of the news, how they form opinions, and how to use this knowledge to make democracy stronger.
About Ivory
Jimmy Ivory is a professor of scientific and technical communication in the Department of English. His primary research interests deal with social and psychological dimensions of new media and communication technologies, particularly the content and effects of video games, virtual environments, and simulations.
About Myers
Cayce Myers is the director of graduate studies at the School of Communication in the College of Liberal Arts and Human Sciences. He specializes in media history, political communication, and laws that affect public relations practice.
To schedule an interview, please contact Margaret Ashburn at mkashburn@vt.edu or 540-529-0814, or Jenny Boone at jennykb@vt.edu or 540-314-7207.
