Skip to main content

How does freedom of the press relate to a TikTok ban?

On this blog, I have previously discussed the U.S. government's attempts to implement a TikTok ban due to concerns over China allegedly using the app to spy on Americans. The potential ban is deeply controversial across partisan lines. Despite the many valid criticisms of the app, people across the world use the platform to share news and firsthand accounts of major events. 

Caitlin Vogus, a senior advisor at Freedom of the Press Foundation, wrote that banning TikTok is unconstitutional and, "could set a precedent that empowers the government to censor or outlaw news outlets, too." She goes on to list the five main reasons why a ban would be against the Constitution. They are as follows: 

  1. Even if the government labels something as foreign propaganda, the First Amendment prevents the government from banning speech. 
  2. Forcing divestment, rather than just banning TikTok, still violates the First Amendment. 
  3. Americans have the right to free speech, and that includes the right to speak using TikTok as a platform. 
  4. The government cannot nullify the First Amendment simply by claiming it's an issue of "national security."
  5. There are other, less oppressive ways to deal with TikTok's various issues. 
“Freedom of the press” can be defined as allowing journalists to report information openly and honestly to the public. The citizens’ right to know is valuable, and a free press knows what is important to the people and relays it to them without barriers. In a truly free press system, journalists and citizens would have free access to worldwide internet platforms to share their messages across the world.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Revisiting "Harvest of Shame": How social media would transform the narrative

CBS and Murrow’s “Harvest of Shame” is one of the best examples of advocacy journalism in history. From a journalistic standpoint, the documentary is well-filmed, contains several hard-hitting and valuable interviews, and a good balance of emotions and facts to educate and influence the audience. People from different sides of the issues were given chances to speak. The documentary opened up with harrowing accounts and heartbreaking interviews with some of the migrant workers and ended with a succinct call to action from Murrow, urging Americans to fight for the migrant workers because they don’t have the political power to advocate for themselves.      “Harvest of Shame” is a perfect work of advocacy journalism that served to educate Americans on the plight of migrant workers and uplift the group. Airing the documentary right after Thanksgiving was also a genius decision, because as Murrow said, the food on America’s tables would not be there if not for the overlooked la...
1 comment
Read more

Strategic communication on TikTok

Strategic communication is the method by which people in power, at least their public relations teams, control media narratives to spin stories in favor of their employer. This can apply to businesses, celebrities, and politicians alike.There are four components of strategic communication: message shaping, message salience, message credibility, and message framing. How do we see these strategies utilized in the modern day, especially on social media platforms like TikTok? Shaping is when public relations representatives generate simple messages and themes to show the audience, which the audience then absorbs and recalls when the specific issues are brought up. On TikTok, this can be seen by brands and politicians using hashtags and short campaign slogans to succinctly share their message to the audience. Message salience refers to the importance of repetition in getting one's message across. Communication channels need to be inundated with the simple messages to ensure they reach t...
1 comment
Read more

How are candidates capitalizing on the prevailing narratives of this year's election?

In the 2024 General Election, a prevailing narrative that has taken hold is the fight for women’s reproductive rights and immigration. Kamala Harris’ campaign has highlighted her intentions to reinstate Roe v. Wade and statewide access to abortions and reproductive healthcare, while Donald Trump’s campaign is sticking with the recently-adopted “leave it up to the states” motto. While Harris’ platform focuses on women’s issues, Trump’s campaign is still focusing on illegal immigration and the “border crisis.” Many of Trump’s ads attack migrants and Harris’ policies as vice president, calling her the “border czar” and using foreboding music to make viewers associate immigration with feelings of unease and distrust. That can be seen in this advertisement , as well as many of the other ads from his team. Meanwhile, the Harris/Walz campaign has taken the platform that women have the right to choose and Roe v. Wade protections must be reinstated. Her ads take a gentle, empathetic approach to...
2 comments
Read more