The official line on U.S. control of TikTok’s algorithm sounds benign. By “U.S.,” I mean the federal government—or the corporations it influences or directs. The purported benefits include:
National Security / Foreign Influence Concerns
The fear is that China, through ByteDance or Chinese law, could compel TikTok to share data or manipulate its algorithm to push propaganda or disinformation.
Data Privacy & Protection
Supporters argue this is about keeping American user data secure, stored in the U.S., and protected from unauthorized foreign access. Algorithm control is part of that—if the models are run outside U.S. oversight, there’s a risk that data could leak or influence could be exerted beyond regulation.
Compliance with U.S. Law (Divestment / Avoiding a Ban)
Congress passed the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, which requires TikTok’s Chinese ownership to be divested or subject to strict controls—or else face a ban. Algorithm control is often cited as a requirement to satisfy this law.
Political Accountability / Transparency
Another goal is to ensure the platform is not being used—intentionally or not—to advance foreign adversary narratives or undermine U.S. interests. Control implies more ability to audit, regulate, and intervene if needed.
Preserving TikTok in the U.S.
Rather than banning the app outright, U.S. control of its algorithm could allow it to remain in operation, minimizing disruption for users, creators, and businesses. The alternative—ban or shutdown—carries significant costs.
So where’s the problem?
On the surface, that all sounds reasonable. But what could go wrong? Just ask Stephen Colbert or Jimmy Kimmel.
The fundamental purpose of an algorithm is to decide what to present to which users. It is not impartial or neutral. Humans write the code that determines how the algorithm functions and altering it to serve political purposes is no technical challenge. Those coders, being human, are vulnerable to pressure, whether financial or personal.
The recent end run around the First Amendment that removed Colbert and Kimmel from broadcast television illustrates the danger. It is a first step down a slippery slope: giving the U.S. government the ability to determine who sees what. Trump has already demonstrated mastery at manipulating social media. Control of TikTok’s algorithm would give him an even more powerful platform to extend that manipulation to millions.
Would that be fair, ethical, or legal? Of course not. But as recent history shows, such considerations are not meaningful obstacles for Trump.
My stated view is that social media has accelerated the erosion of society, and we’d be better off without it altogether. That will never happen. So, the question we must confront is whether the supposed benefits of controlling TikTok’s algorithm are outweighed by the very real risk of tuning it to serve one political agenda.
Confronting Mediocrity 