Amid allegations that TikTok might be silencing dissent against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, CNN sought the insight of a University of Cincinnati professor. Users have reported that their anti-ICE content is running into issues on the platform, a claim that TikTok attributes to a mere power outage at one of its data centers.
Jeffrey Blevins, who teaches political science at UC's School of Public and International Affairs, provided some clarity on the matter. Speaking to the intricacies of the First Amendment, Blevins underscored the difficulty in proving political censorship due to the opaque nature of TikTok's recommendation process. As he explained in a statement obtained by CNN via UC News, "proving TikTok is censoring content because of political considerations would be difficult to prove."
The situation epitomizes the tension between free speech and private ownership in the digital age. Despite the accusatory rumblings among TikTok's community, the platform, owned by the Chinese company ByteDance, stands its ground, arguing that technical glitches are the culprit behind the dispersed disruptions users are experiencing. For TikTok, the position might be technically plausible, but for critical voices on the internet, it's a chilling thought that their advocacy could be quelled not by law but by corporate discretion.
Blevins also noted a paradox that's often overlooked in debates over censorship on social media platforms. "They’re a private platform. They have a First Amendment right to do that," he told CNN via UC News. This bears reinforcement—since many view social media as a public square, it's easy to conflate public expectations with legal reality. Social media may not be "public in a way that matters under the law," as Blevins puts it. Regardless of user sentiments, TikTok's obligations are not the same as those of a government entity when it comes to upholding the principle of free speech.
