China-Focused TikTok Scrutiny Ignores Similar Privacy Concerns in US-Owned Apps

A bipartisan group of senators has launched the RESTRICT Act, which might enable the federal authorities to probably ban expertise from international locations the U.S. considers to be adversaries, together with China. Final Thursday, congressmembers grilled TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew throughout a five-hour listening to on the app’s ties to the Chinese language authorities, its knowledge practices and its results on kids’s psychological well being. Critics say this China-focused scrutiny largely ignores related privateness considerations over the usage of U.S.-owned apps and social media platforms. We hear extra from Julia Angwin, an investigative journalist and contributing opinion author at The New York Occasions, whose newest visitor essay is titled “Easy methods to Repair the TikTok Downside.”

TRANSCRIPT

It is a rush transcript. Copy will not be in its last kind.

AMY GOODMAN: That is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The Conflict and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman, with Juan González.

As a rising variety of governments worldwide enact new limits on social media apps, we glance now at bipartisan calls at house to ban one particular app right here in america: the Chinese language-owned TikTok. Final Thursday, congressmembers grilled TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew throughout a five-hour listening to on the app’s ties to the Chinese language authorities, knowledge practices, and its results on kids’s psychological well being. That is Democratic Florida Congressmember Darren Soto questioning Chew.

REP. DARREN SOTO: So, Mr. Chew, would TikTok be ready to divest from ByteDance and Chinese language Communist Celebration ties if the Division of Treasury instructed you all to take action?

SHOU ZI CHEW: Congressman, I mentioned in my opening assertion I believe we’re — want to deal with the issue of privateness. I agree with you. I don’t suppose possession is the problem right here. With a variety of respect, American social firms don’t have an excellent monitor file with knowledge privateness and consumer safety. I imply, take a look at Fb and Cambridge Analytica, only one instance.

AMY GOODMAN: This comes as a bipartisan group of U.S. senators has launched the RESTRICT Act, which stands for Proscribing the Emergence of Safety Threats That Danger Data, Communications, Expertise Act, which might enable the federal authorities to probably ban expertise from international locations the U.S. considers to be adversaries, together with China. In the meantime, Democratic Congressmember Jamaal Bowman of New York has been a number one opponent of a TikTok ban.

REP. JAMAAL BOWMAN: So, we’re speaking about free speech for on a regular basis Individuals. We’re speaking about small enterprise house owners who use TikTok to develop their enterprise. And my query is — and we’re going to pivot to the opposite a part of the dialog: Why the hysteria and the panic and the concentrating on of TikTok? As we all know, Republicans, specifically, have been sounding the alarm, making a Crimson Scare round China.

AMY GOODMAN: Congressman Bowman has been joined by New York Congressmember Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who laid out her considerations in a video she posted on TikTok after opening her first account on the app.

REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ: Often, when america is proposing a really main transfer that has one thing to do with vital threat to nationwide safety, one of many first issues that occurs is that Congress receives a labeled briefing. And I can inform you that Congress has not obtained a labeled briefing across the allegations of nationwide safety dangers concerning TikTok. So, why would we be proposing a ban concerning such a major situation with out being clued in on this in any respect? It simply doesn’t really feel proper to me.

AMY GOODMAN: For extra, we’re joined in New York by Julia Angwin, investigative journalist, previously with ProPublica, contributing opinion author at The New York Occasions, the place her newest guest essay is headlined “Easy methods to Repair the TikTok Downside.” We final spoke to her in 2014 about her e-book, Dragnet Nation: A Quest for Privateness, Safety, and Freedom in a World of Relentless Surveillance.

Julia, welcome again to Democracy Now! It’s nice to have you ever with us. I imply, it was wonderful to see this absolute bipartisan nearly consensus within the specific listening to that the CEO of TikTok was being questioned at, being grilled and demanding that TikTok be offered to a U.S. firm to ensure that it to be saved. Speak about what Bowman mentioned, what AOC has mentioned, and what you suppose are the key considerations right here.

JULIA ANGWIN: Thanks a lot for having me on. It’s nice to be right here.

And I’ve to say, it was wonderful to look at Congress lastly taking privateness severely — however just for one app, proper? So, I’ve been writing about privateness points; I revealed my e-book nearly a decade in the past. And other people have been attempting to get Congress to go a federal privateness regulation that will shield our knowledge on all of our apps, in the entire completely different ways in which we’re mediated by expertise. And we’re one of many solely Western nations that has not handed such a invoice. And so, now we’ve got, after all, this frenzy round TikTok and this concept that they’re those who we actually must be protected in opposition to. And the fact is, there’s actually nothing that TikTok is accused of that the opposite social media platforms haven’t carried out, as properly.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And isn’t there additionally the problem of the query of governments having the ability to use these apps for their very own ends? I’d assume that something that China can do — the Chinese language authorities can do with TikTok, the U.S. authorities can do with the American social media apps which might be unfold all over the world.

JULIA ANGWIN: I imply, it’s a very good level that each one of those social media platforms can and have been manipulated and censored by governments, proper? And so, most just lately, the newest instance we’ve seen of this, really, was that there’s a Twitter worker who just lately was simply convicted of spying on Saudi dissidents on behalf of the Saudi authorities. And so, he used his entry as an worker with a view to spy on authorities — on Twitter customers. And, you recognize, Google through the years has mentioned that they’ve dismissed greater than a dozen workers for misusing knowledge about Google customers. And so, we’ve got seen that this type of factor can occur at the entire platforms.

It’s additionally true that you simply don’t should personal a platform with a view to misuse it, proper? So, within the 2016 election, we all know that Fb was principally utilized by Russian propagandists to unfold misinformation. We all know that Fb’s platform was utilized by the Myanmar authorities to unfold lies and hate in opposition to the Rohingyas, which then led to a genocide. We all know that Fb’s platform was utilized by folks organizing the Capitol riot on January sixth and that Fb didn’t cease that. And so, we all know these platforms will be misused. And there’s no query that China might additionally, after all, attempt to misuse the TikTok platform.

However what’s attention-grabbing is that TikTok has proposed a plan that will wall off U.S. knowledge from China’s entry. It principally has mentioned to the federal government, “We might retailer all of our knowledge about U.S. customers at Oracle, a U.S. firm, and we’d really undergo oversight by the Treasury-led Committee on International Funding within the U.S.” So, basically, that committee would be capable of examine their algorithm to see in the event that they’re selling disinformation from China or some other state, and in addition would be capable of examine to ensure that the info about U.S. folks just isn’t being transmitted again to China. That’s a degree of management and state management over an app that we haven’t seen earlier than, and in addition is far more oversight than any of the opposite social media platforms have been uncovered to.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And I’m questioning the broader implications of Congress attempting to ban TikTok, particularly in view of the truth that america, for the final 40, 50 years, has been the primary proponent of globalization, of breaking down boundaries between international locations and letting firms prolong their attain and their commerce. I’m questioning — as an illustration, the same battle that occurred over Huawei and 5G, and the unfold of 5G all over the world, with america, as an alternative of welcoming better intercourse between international locations, was really in search of to close down the power of a Chinese language firm to market 5G expertise all over the world. What’s this going to do to the potential for particular person international locations now to start to shut their borders to commerce and commerce within the digital age?

JULIA ANGWIN: I imply, it is a actually good level, proper? So, if we put — the proposals on the desk are, A, to place TikTok below state management, to ban it or to pressure a sale. All three of these issues are issues that I believe the U.S. authorities would actually be mad about if another nation tried to do to one in every of our firms, proper?

Proper now, already, if you consider the social media platforms and the way they behave all over the world, though we frequently prefer to be mad at them for varied causes — and we’ve got plenty of causes to be mad usually — the fact is that they’re being requested in most international locations to behave as authorities censors, proper? So, like in India, there have been enormous stress on the tech platforms to do censorship on behalf of the federal government. And a few of that censorship, the businesses have argued, is unlawful. Proper? And so, they’ve — they’re really on the market preventing for his or her customers to have free expression. And that’s true in a variety of international locations. These firms really spend a variety of time preventing with the governments to strive to ensure their platforms is usually a place the place everybody has a voice.

And so, for the U.S. to out of the blue say, “OK, we wish to help freedom of expression all over the world” — proper? We try this not solely by way of our non-public firms however by way of our overseas diplomacy and our USAID, and many others. We now really don’t need it at house, proper? We’re going to really principally censor TikTok right here. It makes it actually arduous for us to justify supporting freedom of expression all over the world.

AMY GOODMAN: So, let me ask you about different elements of the RESTRICT Act, which is co-sponsored — I imply, all of that is bipartisan, in a time when the Congress couldn’t be extra partisan. However on going after China on this, you’ve acquired Senator Thune, and also you’ve acquired Senator Warner, and, after all, others which might be co-sponsoring. So, we all know that they need TikTok to be offered to a U.S. firm, however are you able to speak about different features of RESTRICT Act? Is it true you can face a million-dollar effective for those who entry TikTok? And in addition, what does this say about proscribing VPNs? And clarify what they’re.

JULIA ANGWIN: Yeah. So, the RESTRICT Act is principally this bipartisan invoice that has come about as a result of the White Home, apparently, believes that they don’t even have the authorized authority to ban TikTok. So, they have been floating this ban after which realized that they wanted the authorized authority. So this invoice, so far as I perceive it, is definitely meant to offer them that authorized authority that they don’t really feel like they’ve proper now. And so, it empowers the Commerce Division to do some evaluations of various apps and to see what the dangers are, after which to take completely different measures to counteract them, together with a ban.

And so, I believe that the truth that it’s bipartisan-supported is an indication of how united Congress is correct now. I imply, I’ve by no means seen the Dems and Republicans on the identical aspect so aggressively as on this specific situation. And it truly is attention-grabbing, as a result of they’re not united on privateness as a bigger situation, proper? Like, the privateness payments haven’t moved, however this situation, which is extra, I believe, a China situation than a privateness situation — proper? The truth is the explanation they’re united is as a result of everybody sees political capital in uniting to combat in opposition to the “China risk.” Proper?

Now, you requested me about VPNs. VPNs are digital non-public networks, so, principally, it’s one thing you’ll put in your telephone with a view to route round your web supplier. It’s usually utilized in locations, like China, the place the federal government is censoring web visitors, and it’s a technique to attempt to circumvent that censorship. And so, it’s attention-grabbing that you’d consider proscribing that, when in actual fact that’s one thing we are likely to export to different nations with a view to promote freedom of expression.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And will you discuss a bit in regards to the distinction in method to coping with social media and expertise by the European Union versus what sorts of laws that Congress is contemplating?

JULIA ANGWIN: Yeah. I imply, that’s such an incredible query. The EU has been simply years and years forward of america when it comes to taking the threats from these platforms severely and addressing them thoughtfully. So, as an illustration, they handed a complete privateness regulation again in 2018 that laid out, you recognize, fundamental requirements for a way knowledge ought to be handled, what sort of rights customers have over their knowledge.

After which, this 12 months, really, new legal guidelines are coming into place to control the algorithms. So, it’s the primary time that algorithms are going to be regulated. These social media firms which might be above a sure dimension should report back to the EU on the — they should measure the dangers that their algorithms are creating to issues like teen psychological well being, the dangers to democracy. These are actually large and necessary questions that the businesses should reply. Then they’ve to indicate how they’re going to mitigate these dangers.

And that’s one thing that could be a actually artistic technique to attempt to method this situation with out censorship. So, the concept is, the EU just isn’t saying, like, “We’ve determined that it is a dangerous factor for democracy.” They’re saying, “It’s good to measure that threat. It’s on you to indicate the way you’re selling democracy and the way you’re not permitting for authoritarianism.” And so, I believe it’s an attention-grabbing experiment, and the U.S. hasn’t carried out any of that, proper? Like, we’re nowhere close to regulating algorithms. We haven’t set a fundamental privateness regulation. And, you recognize, the templates are on the market.

I’ll say this, although. California has handed a very robust privateness regulation that principally emulates the EU regulation. And so, in California, there’s really a robust privateness regulation that goes into impact this 12 months. And so, we’re lastly catching up on the California degree, however, after all, Congress has been threatening to preempt that regulation with one thing weaker, so we could not really get to maintain that.

AMY GOODMAN: We solely have about 30 seconds, Julia, however particularly for younger folks, it’s important, particularly for younger folks on psychological well being points, the rise in suicide. What precisely will be carried out? And as with different points that you simply’re elevating, can the businesses actually regulate themselves?

JULIA ANGWIN: Proper. I don’t suppose the businesses can regulate themselves. We’ve had a long time of them pretending to control themselves, and I believe we’ve got fairly clear proof that that’s not working. So I do suppose we have to, collectively, as a society, decide what our necessary objectives are, and pressure them to do it. And I believe teen psychological well being is one the place, A, there’s not sufficient analysis on precisely what’s inflicting the teenager psychological well being issues and the way a lot social media performs in, and, two, we haven’t put any legal guidelines in place to kind of implement the businesses to take that situation severely.

AMY GOODMAN: Julia Angwin, investigative journalist, we’ll hyperlink to your new article, “Easy methods to Repair the TikTok Downside,” creator of Dragnet Nation: A Quest for Privateness, Safety, and Freedom in a World of Relentless Surveillance.

Developing, Bootstrapped: Liberating Ourselves from the American Dream. Stick with us.