Global Perspectives on TikTok: Legal, Political, and Economic Challenges
Task: What are the key differences between the political, legal, and economic systems of China and the USA, and how do these differences impact TikTok's operations and global controversies?
This particular report deals with the various issues faced by TikTok considering the differences between the political and legal systems worldwide. The disputes bound by legal and political matters directly influence the business activities of the company. The legal, political, and economic systems help in portraying the blend of individual and group values which can also be guided by collectivism.
There are differences in the overall structure of the political, legal, and economic systems of China and the USA.The political system of the US is quite different in terms of the basic structure as China displays an authoritative system of administration which is quite different from the governance patterns of the US. There are no instances of freely elected leaders and ministers in the country and political opposition is always suppressed in country. Religious activities are mostly controlled by the Chinese Communist Party and Civil rights are mostly oppressed by the administration.The political system of the US is based on a federal democratic approach and structure which involves various freedom aspects in terms of business, health, education, and other infrastructure facilities. The people and citizens are provided the liberty to choose the eligible candidates for the ministerial position by the process of a free and secret ballot system (Allensworth, 2021).The legislative, judicial, and executive structure is considered the three foundation elements of the governance of the US which is quite different from the structure of China.
China on the other hand has no common law and instead has a civil law structurethat carries the executive, judicial and legislative systems. The legal system of the USA in comparison to China is more descriptive and vivid with components like the US constitution, federal legislation, foreign treaties, state laws, and judicial interpreting decisions (Barker, 2020).Therefore, the legal structure of both these countries is not similar. The US also has a mixed economy which provides elements of capitalism and socialism. The free economy consisting of mixed elements is beneficial for the country as it embraces a free market capitalization in terms of capital usage and also allows the intervention of administration for the public good. The economic structure of China can be attributed to a mixture of state-owned enterprises and mixed-ownership enterprises and it also contains a large domestic center for facilitating foreign business from across the world (Bhuiyan, 2022).Therefore, it is evident from the details that the systems of both countries are different from one another and they cannot merge at some point of time in the future.
The big technical crackdown in China has been attributed to the social and political causes that have affected the country for the last three years. The market size of the technology-based organizations has enhanced their overall capital power in the Chinese market creating a risk for the smaller organizations based in China. The larger global tech organizations have monopolized their respective markets to win the country which became a matter of concern for the Chinese government. It created a risk of grabbing immense power which would outplay the smaller players in the industry and create an economic decline in the country (Clayton, 2020). However, the main reason for the cutting down on investments by the larger technology firms in the manufacturing plants and units in China can be attributed to the Covid 19 related lockdowns, restrictions on travel, and disruptions in the global supply chain. The country however changed its plans in a particular year regarding the crackdown on the large global technology firms that has its operations in the country like Apple, Microsoft, and Google. It was not considered the right course of action taken by the Chinese Government and they have retaliated from the stance by easing the restrictions related to the tech crackdown in many parts of the country (Goodkind, 2022).
The reduction in the market and political power has eventually created issues in the domestic gross economy and the GDP of the country has been badly affected this year. However, the decision has not been completely wiped out by the government as they have created plans and policies related to the conduction of business activities in the country related to large foreign-based organizations. China has enforced a strict regulatory framework for domestic tech companies for retaining its largest domestic powers in the market (Hendrickson and Galston, 2019).The reason for this crackdown has been explained by the administration as a safety measure to reduce unfair market competition. The main areas of the crackdown in the global tech organizations have resorted to ruling areas of antitrust and data protection which have created retaliation from various global organizations as they have sold off the shares in the country. In per personal opinion, the action can seem beneficial for the country according to the present situation; it can create issues for the future sustainability of the global manufacturing hub, which is one of the largest revenue generators for the country in the last thirty tears (Kang and Haskell-Dowland, 2020).
There is a significant difference between the governance of the two countries related to the monopolization of tech-based firms in the countries. The US-based firms based in China have created a monopoly in the overall technology market in the country which was becoming a threat to domestic tech-based organizations in China. This was creating a negative impact on the overall growth index of the domestic companies which could have created issues with the gross average GDP of China. The interference of the US administration related to the operations of large tech-based organizations in the US can be attributed to the aspects of monopolization of the tech industries. The other industries in the market began to suffer considerably due to the impact of the larger technology-based organizations. Therefore, the distinction between the actions of the two governments can be considered as the cause or rationale for which they implemented the steps (Montag, Yang and Elhai, 2021).The differences between the national and political influences and ideologies form the base of the creation of a distinctive feature related to the two events that created a stir in both countries.
The implementation of the Sherman Antitrust Act is a significant clause in the law that controls the monopolization of US-based organizations in the country. This law and act were constructed to promote economic fairness and competitiveness in the country and regulate the commercial and economic activities among the states in the country. However, China took the step or initiative only to safeguard the interests of the domestic firms which were losing their business to the larger technology-based manufacturing and marketing organizations in the country (Saunders, 2021).These aspects create a significant difference between the motives of both governments regarding the application of anti-monopolization efforts and strategies for promoting or safeguarding national economic interests.
The US government implemented a ban on the use of TikTok on devices issued by the federal government due to various national security concerns. The China-based parent company named Byte Dance is the leading cause of the ban in the US along with many other countries globally. The governments of many countries including the US feared that the china Government can leverage TikTok to access the devices and use the data of the users. This can eventually lead to a security breach and data manipulation along with mishandling. These issues were raised after the initiation of the ban on the use of this particular application in many countries (Zenone, Ow and Barbic, 2021).The software application company was accused of tracking locations and collecting internet browsing data from the websites used by the users and followers of the application.
Various other countries restricted the usage of the application due to other reasons or concerns like Indonesia and Bangladesh banning the application based on pornography-related content and countries like Armenia and Azerbaijan restricting usage due to the spreading of misinformation which could eventually lead to conflicts. However, the application is not the only one which can be associated with these issues, there are other applications like Facebook and Twitter along with other social media applications that can also be considered vulnerable for the users, Security issues have also been raised against the usage of personal information and data by these software applications (Zhu, 2020). Therefore, it can be considered that various governments in the world mistreated the application based on these accusations, whereas, other US-based applications have been granted a clean chit in these issues and were reported to be safe for the users without the possibility of data leakage and security issues.
It has been seen that TikTok was treated in an unjustified and unfair manner due to the ban faced by the company in many countries worldwide. The China government monopolization aspects related to the US-based technical organizations also seem to be justified based on counter attack regarding the ban of various Chinese software applications like TikTok. The differences in the overall political, economic and legal structure of China with the USA make it vulnerable to the operations of large technology-based US organizations which have tended to grow by the aspects of monopolization which can create interstate conflicts and reduce the economic prospects for China in the domestic and global market.
Allensworth, R.H. (2021). Antitrust’s High-Tech Exceptionalism. [online] www.yalelawjournal.org. Available at: https://www.yalelawjournal.org/forum/antitrusts-high-tech-exceptionalism [Accessed 25 Jan. 2023].
Barker, C. (2020).Why some governments fear even teens on TikTok. [online] The Conversation. Available at: https://theconversation.com/why-some-governments-fear-even-teens-on-tiktok-140389 [Accessed 25 Jan. 2023].
Bhuiyan, J. (2022). Why did the US just ban TikTok from government-issued cellphones? [online] the Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/dec/30/explainer-us-congress-tiktok-ban [Accessed 25 Jan. 2023].
Clayton, J. (2020). US tech giants accused of ‘monopoly power’. BBC News. [online] 7 Oct. Available at: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-54443188 [Accessed 25 Jan. 2023].
Goodkind, N. (2022). Biden’s merger watchdogs just put corporate America on notice - 50 years of allowing more monopolies are ending soon. [online] Fortune. Available at: https://fortune.com/2022/01/19/bidens-merger-watchdogs-just-put-corporate-america-on-notice-50-years-of-allowing-bigger-and-bigger-monopolies-are-ending-soon/ [Accessed 25 Jan. 2023].
Hendrickson, C. and Galston, W.A. (2019).Big tech threats: Making sense of the backlash against online platforms. [online] Brookings. Available at: https://www.brookings.edu/research/big-tech-threats-making-sense-of-the-backlash-against-online-platforms/ [Accessed 25 Jan. 2023].
Kang, J.J. and Haskell-Dowland, P. (2020).China could be using TikTok to spy on Australians, but banning it isn’t a simple fix. [online] The Conversation. Available at: https://theconversation.com/china-could-be-using-tiktok-to-spy-on-australians-but-banning-it-isnt-a-simple-fix-142157 [Accessed 25 Jan. 2023].
Montag, C., Yang, H. and Elhai, J.D. (2021). On the Psychology of TikTok Use: A First Glimpse From Empirical Findings. Frontiers in Public Health, [online] 9(641673). doi:10.3389/fpubh.2021.641673.
Saunders, A. (2021). Can Biden really crack down on tech monopolies? [online] TechCrunch. Available at: https://techcrunch.com/2021/12/19/can-biden-really-crack-down-on-tech-monopolies/ [Accessed 25 Jan. 2023].
Zenone, M., Ow, N. and Barbic, S. (2021).TikTok and public health: a proposed research agenda. BMJ Global Health, [online] 6(11), p.e007648.doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2021-007648.
Zhu, Y. (2020). The Expectation of TikTok in International Media: A Critical Discourse Analysis. Open Journal of Social Sciences, [online] 08(12), pp.136–148. doi:10.4236/jss.2020.812012.