-
Important news
-
News
-
Shenzhen
-
China
-
World
-
Business
-
Speak Shenzhen
-
Features
-
Culture
-
Leisure
-
Opinion
-
In-Depth
-
Photos
-
Lifestyle
-
Travel
-
Special Report
-
Digital Paper
-
Kaleidoscope
-
Health
-
Markets
-
Sports
-
Entertainment
-
Business/Markets
-
World Economy
-
Weekend
-
Newsmaker
-
Diversions
-
Movies
-
Hotels and Food
-
Yes Teens!
-
News Picks
-
Tech and Science
-
Glamour
-
Campus
-
Budding Writers
-
Fun
-
Qianhai
-
Advertorial
-
CHTF Special
-
Futian Today
在线翻译:
szdaily -> World -> 
US users defend TikTok, mock lawmakers’ hysteria
    2023-03-28  08:53    Shenzhen Daily

U.S. lawmakers last week enacted a heinous political stunt to portray TikTok, a video-sharing social networking company, as a national security threat.

Despite the congressional grilling, TikTok received unwavering support from its myriad U.S. users, who defended TikTok’s innocence, expressed their support and mocked the lawmakers’ hysteria and ignorance at the hearing.

Throughout the hearing, the lawmakers neither cared about nor believed in the explanation by TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew. Instead, they were blindly focused on hammering home the message that TikTok is a threat to data privacy of 150 million American users and national security.

Asked at the hearing whether his company would comply with the divestment requirement, Chew told the lawmakers that ownership was not the issue. “With a lot of respect: American social companies don’t have a great record with privacy and data security. I mean, look at Facebook and Cambridge Analytica,” he said, referring to the revelation in 2018 that Facebook’s user data has long been secretly gathered by a British political consulting firm.

That scandal similarly triggered intense congressional investigation, involving testimony by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg before both the House and the Senate.

While the committee dismissed Chew’s explanation of the universal lack of protection of data privacy across the U.S. tech industry, The Washington Post found Chew’s point not only valid, but also worth those uproarious lawmakers’ introspection.

“At a hearing in which TikTok was often portrayed as a singular, untenable threat to Americans’ online privacy, it would have been easy to forget that the country’s online privacy problems run far deeper than any single app. And the people most responsible for failing to safeguard Americans’ data, arguably, are American lawmakers,” The Post said.

TikTok users across the United States didn’t buy their congressional representatives’ browbeating of their beloved app. Following the hearing, one content creator posting on TikTok by the handle of “@notnotnotrekcut_” described the hearing as “awful” and a “hot garbage.”

He said in another video that since he has learned so much from TikTok, ranging from health tips to wealth management skills, he’s not going back to other social media platforms he once used. “I’m on TikTok’s side through and through!”

Beneath the videos posted by Chew, whose account’s user name goes as “@shou.time,” there are countless comments from TikTok users in support of the CEO and the app. One comment read: “Regardless of the outcome, thank you for creating such a platform for the world. The interconnectedness you gave us will not be forgotten.”

Another message under a separate video by Chew said, “I apologize for USA congress. You are amazing.”

On Tuesday, some 30 TikTok users held a rally outside the U.S. Capitol, demanding that the U.S. Government continue to allow the use of TikTok by the American public, because their art creations, education, expression of views, and so much more by which they make a living depends on and thrives alongside the platform.

Experts argued that if the Joe Biden administration moved to ban TikTok nationwide, such an executive order would almost certainly be challenged by those opposing it, citing the measure’s violation of U.S. citizen’s First Amendment right to freedom of speech.

There was a recent precedent: a TikTok ban issued by then-President Donald Trump in 2020 was met with multiple lawsuits and ultimately blocked by a U.S. federal judge, who ruled that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act that the ban relied on was inapplicable in the case, because the ban will effectively restrict the free flow of information.

“The law says whatever Biden would do can’t impede the flow of information,” William Reinsch of the Center of Strategic and International Studies, a Washington-based think tank, was quoted by the Post as saying. Reinsch is also a former U.S. Commerce Department official.

(Xinhua)

深圳报业集团版权所有, 未经授权禁止复制; Copyright 2010-2020, All Rights Reserved.
Shenzhen Daily E-mail:szdaily@126.com