As an avid TikTok user, I support the app\u2019s existence, not just because I refuse to use Instagram Reels as a substitute for my favorite platform, but because its potential ban is a clear manifestation of yellow peril \u2013 the Western view of Southeast and East Asians being a threat to Western society. Though TikTok\u2019s chokehold on the younger generation is easy to make fun of, it\u2019s important to appreciate the app\u2019s purpose: different users attempting to capture the most viral moment through short videos. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
There is a large range of uses for TikTok, not just the obvious lip-syncing, dancing and meme-sharing; the app is also a way to connect with others through common and creative expression. TikTok demonstrates how we communicate through social media \u2013 one of the ways being through spreading awareness about social justice issues. Though sources on TikTok are not always 100% reliable, some content consists of first-hand accounts, opening up new perspectives through oral history. Additionally, since most videos range from 15 seconds to 10 minutes, content creators are motivated to appeal to their audiences in a small amount of time, and quickly spread information about topics that they may know little to nothing about. This encourages users to do research beyond social media and educate themselves on worldwide issues. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
So why has the government been against TikTok for so long?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Rumors of TikTok\u2019s ban in the U.S. have been ongoing, dating back to August 2020 when President Trump signed an executive order that would have banned TikTok if it hadn\u2019t been sold to an American company within the next 45 days. To this day, it is still owned by a Chinese company called ByteDance. 3 months after Trump signed the ban order, a federal judge blocked the ban<\/a>, arguing that there should be a rational motive before banning TikTok. The next year, the Biden administration also continued to monitor the security measures taken by TikTok. In March of 2023, U.S. senators proposed the RESTRICT Act<\/a>, which states that \u201cSpecifically, the Department of Commerce must identify, deter, disrupt, prevent, prohibit, investigate and mitigate transactions involving ICT products and services (1) in which any foreign adversary (such as China) has any interest, and (2) that pose an undue or unacceptable risk to U.S. national security or the safety of U.S. persons.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Doesn\u2019t that sound familiar? When has there been a point in history where the Chinese identity hasn\u2019t been seen as a threat? <\/p>\n\n\n\n Dating all the way back to the 1880s, Chinese immigrants were viewed<\/a> as \u201cpotential threats to national security, [securing] Congress\u2019 exclusive Constitutional right to regulate immigration as a function of its war powers, internal and external.\u201d The idea that East Asians were a threat to American growth was further reinforced by Kaiser Wilhelm II\u2019s depiction of East Asians as a threat to Western society, ultimately leading to the coining of the term \u201cyellow peril<\/a>.\u201d No one knew that an image based on Wilhelm II\u2019s dream would have a permanent impact and create never-ending damage to the Asian community. <\/p>\n\n\n\n A few days after the RESTRICT Act\u2019s proposal, TikTok\u2019s CEO Shou Zi Chew testified<\/a> before the U.S. Congress for over five hours, where he denied any allegations of TikTok being owned or controlled by the Chinese government, claiming that there was no sufficient evidence to support the alleged claims.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But is a ban on TikTok truly a national security concern, or just a reinforcement of anti-Chinese sentiment?<\/p>\n\n\n\n