Catherine Maltman | United States Fellow
Image sourced from Solen Feyissa via Flickr.
Before the incoming administration formally took over on the 20th of January, Donald Trump was already treating the TikTok ban passed by Congress as a relic of the Biden era — a sign that his second-term administration would approach cybersecurity and the tech landscape very differently from the first. The ban had been welcomed by many across the three branches of the United States (US) Government, with Trump’s backflip marking a shift away from general consensus within Republican ranks and the broader intelligence community. Although most US users are welcoming Trump’s change of heart, let the user beware — if Trump’s divestment plan fails to yield results and he does not consequently reinstate the ban, the US Government and its citizens could be dealing with national security and free speech concerns for the foreseeable future, beyond the scope of just TikTok.
While Trump was previously critical of TikTok’s Chinese ownership and originated the idea behind a ban, his recent actions pre-election indicated he was looking for a way to delay or overturn it. This became a reality when, following his inauguration, he issued an executive order delaying the ban by 75 days. This baffled many Republicans, including Trump’s nominees for key national security posts, who had noted the continued threat posed by TikTok’s ownership. Although Trump’s comments suggest he supports an outcome where TikTok is sold to an American company, there is no clear plan for what happens if ByteDance refuses to sell (as they have done in the past) or if a deal is not reached before the order lapses. It remains unclear whether Trump genuinely wants the company to be sold or if he is merely biding time to circumvent the ban. Whatever Trump’s motivations – whether corporate lobbying and donations to the Republican Party from TikTok ownership, his close relationship with tech billionaires like Elon Musk, or TikTok’s role in the recent election – they raise concerns that, under the Trump Administration, US security interests may be driven solely by political considerations, rather than bipartisan national security concerns.
Assuming that the company cannot be sold, undoing the TikTok ban would be doing a disservice to the American people, the functionality of the other branches of government, and the wider national security architecture in the US. The US should be looking to increase regulatory oversight for all apps, not undo progress. Congress overwhelmingly supports the ban, national security officials have questioned TikTok’s influence on US politics, and the intelligence community has valid concerns about users unknowingly downloading malicious software. Foreign interference in US politics has reached new levels of sophistication, heightening concerns over technology and cybersecurity. Given this, the Trump Administration must take decisive action against any threat — foreign or domestic — that has raised alarm among elected officials and career intelligence officers alike.
For general users, TikTok should not be regarded as a beacon of free speech, nor should users so willingly trade social media access for their personal and national security. Every day, TikTok collects data from around 170 million Americans and uses that information to change what users can see on their timelines and in their searches. This can mean censorship of certain information, or unknowingly being influenced towards a certain topic or idea, without a realisation of what the algorithm is doing. The idea that banning TikTok limits free speech ignores the fact that the content is not ‘free’ in the first place – TikTok’s algorithm is dictating users’ timelines, and every social media platform has terms and conditions that determine access to information and content.
Yet despite large-scale data mining, users mocked the idea of a ban under a new TikTok trend “Goodbye to my Chinese Spy”, with many having opted to move to another Chinese app with higher levels of censorship, RedNote. TikTok has admitted to employees using data for surveillance on US journalists, while RedNote is known to store data in China. The current defiance from US-based tech users joining RedNote, those celebrating renewed access to TikTok, or those using DeepSeek – which enforces strong censorship – raises a larger concern about what ‘free speech’ and cybersecurity truly mean to users. Despite real-world concerns driving the TikTok ban, the US Government must work to rebuild trust and understanding of the government’s justifications for these kinds of bans and the depth of digital interplay in state sovereignty. This discussion around TikTok, especially the public backlash, demonstrates an opportunity and need to foster greater cybersecurity literacy.
With many in the US Government considering foreign influence one of the biggest threats to US democracy, the potential for China to use TikTok’s data and algorithm to target US citizens with misinformation and disinformation demonstrates that these apps do not support the kind of free speech users are looking for. The US should be working to mitigate algorithmic manipulation – foreign and domestic – and protect the privacy of its citizens, otherwise, it risks setting a dangerous precedent for national security and free speech. If President Trump allows TikTok to continue operating without proper regulation and fails to curb foreign ownership linked to large-scale data mining, the future of US democracy could be at risk in an increasingly cyber-driven world. A truly national security-focused President should seize this as an opportunity to work with the US public and drive international discussions to promote a more secure cyber landscape. Only through achieving that can the core democratic rights that users want, such as free speech, truly be upheld.
Catherine Maltman is the United States Fellow for Young Australians in International Affairs. She holds a Bachelor of Arts, a Master of International Relations, and a Master of International Law from the University of Western Australia. Passionate about U.S. politics and international affairs, Catherine is eager to contribute to discussions about the United States' evolving role on the global stage under the incoming administration, particularly its implications for security and trade.
Kommentare