Aggregator

Over the last month, lawmakers moved swiftly to pass legislation that would effectively ban TikTok in the United States, eventually including it in a foreign aid package that was signed by President Biden. The impact of this legislation isn’t entirely clear yet, but what is clear: whether TikTok is banned or sold to new owners, millions of people in the U.S. will no longer be able to get information and communicate with each other as they presently do. 

What Happens Next?

At the moment, TikTok isn’t “banned.” The law gives ByteDance 270 days to divest TikTok before the ban would take effect, which would be on January 19th, 2025. In the meantime, we expect courts to determine that the bill is unconstitutional. Though there is no lawsuit yet, one on behalf of TikTok itself is imminent.

There are three possible outcomes. If the law is struck down, as it should be, nothing will change. If ByteDance divests TikTok by selling it, then the platform would still likely be usable. However, there’s no telling whether the app’s new owners would change its functionality, its algorithms, or other aspects of the company. As we’ve seen with other platforms, a change in ownership can result in significant changes that could impact its audience in unexpected ways. In fact, that’s one of the given reasons to force the sale: so TikTok will serve different content to users, specifically when it comes to Chinese propaganda and misinformation. This is despite the fact that it has been well-established law for almost 60 years that U.S. people have a First Amendment right to receive foreign propaganda. 

Lastly, if ByteDance refuses to sell, users in the U.S. will likely see it disappear from app stores sometime between now and that January 19, 2025 deadline. 

How Will the Ban Be Implemented? 

The law limits liability to intermediaries—entities that “provide services to distribute, maintain, or update” TikTok by means of a marketplace, or that provide internet hosting services to enable the app’s distribution, maintenance, or updating. The law also makes intermediaries responsible for its implementation. 

The law explicitly denies to the Attorney General the authority to enforce it against an individual user of a foreign adversary controlled application, so users themselves cannot be held liable for continuing to use the application, if they can access it. 

Will I Be Able to Download or Use TikTok If ByteDance Doesn’t Sell? 

It’s possible some U.S. users will find routes around the ban. But the vast majority will probably not, significantly shifting the platform's user base and content. If ByteDance itself assists in the distribution of the app, it could also be found liable, so even if U.S. users continue to use the platform, the company’s ability to moderate and operate the app in the U.S. would likely be impacted. Bottom line: for a period of time after January 19, it’s possible that the app would be usable, but it’s unlikely to be the same platform—or even a very functional one in the U.S.—for very long.

Until now, the United States has championed the free flow of information around the world as a fundamental democratic principle and called out other nations when they have shut down internet access or banned social media apps and other online communications tools. In doing so, the U.S. has deemed restrictions on the free flow of information to be undemocratic.  Enacting this legislation has undermined this long standing, democratic principle. It has also undermined the U.S. government’s moral authority to call out other nations for when they shut down internet access or ban social media apps and other online communications tools. 

There are a few reasons legislators have given to ban TikTok. One is to change the type of content on the app—a clear First Amendment violation. The second is to protect data privacy. Our lawmakers should work to protect data privacy, but this was the wrong approach. They should prevent any company—regardless of where it is based—from collecting massive amounts of our detailed personal data, which is then made available to data brokers, U.S. government agencies, and even foreign adversaries. They should solve the real problem of out-of-control privacy invasions by enacting comprehensive consumer data privacy legislation. Instead, as happens far too often, our government’s actions are vastly overreaching while also deeply underserving the public. 

ではいざというとき食料が不足したらどうするか。実は基本法改正案では「国内自給率向上」については主要対策から外され、目標数字を定めていません。もっとも、一貫して下がり続けてきた食料自給率に対し、政府は現行基本法では目標値を設定してきたが、同法が施行された25年間、一度も達成したことはありません。自給率目標といってもお経みたいなものなので、はずした方がすっきりするのかも知れません。いずれにしても政府は自給を重視していない。ではいざ緊急事態で食料不足が発生したときはどうするのか。（大野和興）

Our Women's Rights Programme's policy advocacy coordinator presents highlights of APC's multi-faceted participation and advocacy at the UN’s Commission on the Status of Women (CSW)…

Meet the Common Room Networks Foundation, an Indonesia-based organisation committed to maintaining a space for freedom of expression and community empowerment that utilises arts and culture, ICTs and…

Meet Bangladesh NGOs Network for Radio and Communication (BNNRC), a Bangladesh-based organisation focused on media development and building the capacity of CSOs on digital transformation. 

　全国１７４１市町村のうち、書店ゼロの自治体が今年３月時点で４８２市町村に増え全体の２７・７%に達した―出版文化産業振興財団の調査でわかった。それによると沖縄、長野、奈良の３県で書店がない市町村が過半数を占めた。２０２２年９月の初調査と比べて全体で１・５％増えている。また書店が１店舗あるだけの市町村は３４３に上り、この〝無書店予備軍〟と書店ゼロを合わせた比率は４７・４％に。　人口減少とインターネットによる書籍販売の急拡大が主因だ。日販ストアソリューション課「出版物販売額の実態..

今年の春闘は1990年代以降で33年ぶりに最高の賃上げになったと報道されているが、果たして労働者が闘って勝ち取ったものなのだろうか？「政＝岸田政権の支持率浮揚の道具」、「労＝先進国最低の賃金レベルを引き上げたい」、「使＝人手不足対策と法人税引き上げへの牽制」といった、政労使の同床異夢の結果であり「賃上げが約束された春闘」だったのだ。33年ぶりの賃上げということは、33年間、賃金が上がらなかったということ。闘って勝ちとった賃上げでない以上、簡単に奪いとられてしまう危険がある。

Meet Bangladesh NGOs Network for Radio and Communication (BNNRC), a Bangladesh-based organisation focused on media development and building the capacity of civil society organisations on digital transformation. 

Language English