Internet Censorship: A Slippery Slope

On April 24, 2024, President Joe Biden signed a law, which was also passed by the Senate, with a provision that could ban the popular social media app, TikTok. The bill was passed with a bipartisan 352-65 vote, and it was disguised as foreign aid for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan.

There were mixed reactions all across the country- Many argued that a bill like this could improve public safety by removing Chinese spyware from everyday life, where others argued that a bill like this is unconstitutional by removing a large platform that has given voice to millions of people who have had their voices intentionally suppressed by a government that clearly cares nothing for them.

This topic is extremely nuanced- There is no right or wrong answer when it comes to this unprecedented event, at least, not that we know of, and sticking blindly to one side is the reason why this ban was able to pass in the first place.

TikTok has been under fire for years following the revelation that the algorithm used inside the app has ties to Chinese malware intended for spying on the American public. It’s been the subject of countless debates in terms of child safety and illegal content being posted, and the app is no stranger to the controversy of its wildfire-like spreading challenges that have resulted in hospitalization or death for many.

However, TikTok has also offered a voice to those who have been silenced for too long. TikTok has given platforms for the mentally ill, for the LGBTQ community, for BIPOC people all over the world, for women and domestic abuse victims (later turned survivors)- The list goes on and on. 

By removing an app with this widespread reach, the government is doing several things, but two stand out the most. They are censoring dangerous content, but also censoring stories that, up until now, have rarely been able to be told.

It’s worth noting, however, that exposure to certain content, especially at a young age, can result in violence. Several studies have shown that the earlier a child is exposed to pornography, the more likely they are to be involved in domestic sexual violence in their adulthood. Boys are more likely to sexually abuse their female partners when porn is introduced into their lives during their formative years, and girls are more likely to accept said abuse if exposed to pornographic content before their critical thinking skills are evolved. 

Those studies also mention that exposure to pornography and gore online lead to extensive complex trauma. While mass exposure to this content hasn’t been around long enough for its full effects to be known, the actual consequences we’ve been able to see recently are devastating. Suicide rates in male teens raised 31% from 2007 to 2015, and while suicide rates were reduced by 5% from 2018-2020, they returned to a peak in 2021 and show little signs of lowering.

While social media and exposure to violent, sensitive content is not the sole cause, it plays a major role in a child or teen’s mental health as they develop into adulthood. Censoring the internet for child safety makes sense, and it should happen, especially for young children (see the rise of iPad kids, Gen Alpha children who have been raised by their tablets instead of by their parents)- But, it should not be the government’s place to enforce those guidelines onto parents.

It sounds odd to say something like that- The government is simply trying to protect children, right? However, giving the government power to censor “pornographic content” is what has resulted in a complete ban of queer education in the south, as well as the ban of African American studies in Arkansas and the removal of key information regarding slavery and the civil war all over red states. There is nothing pornographic about two women holding hands, nor is there anything pornographic about the psychology of gender vs. sex, but once that power to censor is in the government’s hands, the definition of “explicit content” begins to waver and lean towards political agendas. 

Paxton’s stages of fascism involve intellectual exploration “where disillusionment with popular democracy manifests itself in discussions of lost national vigor.” Between all sorts of fascist governments, book burnings and control of information have been major steps towards this disillusionment, and the removal of public information has now extended into social media as well. 

While America is not a fascist state (yet), censoring information at the rate that we’ve been heading at doesn’t look too bright for us as a free nation. Currently, we’re at a huge turning point for the fate of our nation, and if things don’t work out, we could very much as well say goodbye to the first amendment.