The United States&rsquo; ban on TikTok marks a watershed moment in the evolving relationship between technology and national sovereignty. For those familiar with TikTok&rsquo;s journey in India, this moment carries a striking sense of d&eacute;j&agrave; vu.
When India banned the short-video platform&mdash;along with 59 other Chinese apps&mdash;on June 29, 2020, it cited a threat to national security. The Ministry of Information Technology accused the blocked apps of &ldquo;stealing and surreptitiously transmitting users&rsquo; data in an unauthorized manner to servers which have locations outside India.&rdquo;
The concerns that led to India&rsquo;s ban&mdash;data security, unauthorized transmission of user information, and potential foreign surveillance&mdash;have proven prescient.
It&rsquo;s also become clear that every democracy must find its own balance between digital openness and national security.
Subsequent revelations, including testimony before the US House Intelligence Committee in 2024, have shifted the conversation.
When the Committee heard that&nbsp;the Chinese government could spy on Americans&nbsp;using &ldquo;rivers of data&rdquo; sourced through the software from users&rsquo; phones, it didn&rsquo;t just validate India&rsquo;s concerns. It exposed a universal challenge facing modern democracies: How can any country trust a company bound by Chinese law to cooperate with Beijing&rsquo;s intelligence services? The answer is simple: it can&rsquo;t.
Notably, this was two years after TikTok began &ldquo;Project Texas&rdquo;&mdash;which promised US-based data storage and oversight to mitigate security concerns. Not only did Project Texas fail to assuage bipartisan fears, it was a sophisticated PR exercise; and the promise of US-based data control, a smokescreen. 
Like India before it, America ultimately decided that the risks of a Chinese-controlled platform outweighed its benefits.
Master manipulator 
Multiple investigations have shown TikTok as being capable of feeding its users&nbsp;<a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1ww6vz1l81o">misleading and divisive content </a>ahead of and during elections. The Romanian election controversy of 2024 crystallized these fears.
When TikTok&rsquo;s algorithm allegedly helped catapult obscure ultranationalist candidate Călin Georgescu to the presidency&mdash;even temporarily&mdash;it demonstrated how social media platforms can influence democratic processes anywhere. The platform&rsquo;s rejection of manipulation allegations, contradicted by a <a href="https://www.globalwitness.org/en/campaigns/digital-threats/what-happened-tiktok-around-annulled-romanian-presidential-election-investigation-and-poll/">Global Witness&nbsp;</a>investigation, highlights the difficulty of maintaining platform neutrality in an era of sophisticated influence operations.
But how did TikTok get Georgescu <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/how-tiktok-can-potentially-get-a-president-elected/a-70965931">elected</a>?
First, social-media influencers were paid to create&mdash;ostensibly neutral&mdash;content about the ideal candidate using tags like&nbsp;&ldquo;integrity,&rdquo; &ldquo;independence,&rdquo; and &nbsp;&ldquo;professional.&rdquo;&nbsp;This phase is called &ldquo;priming&rdquo;.
Then, comments&mdash;largely from bots&mdash;such as &ldquo;#VoteGeorgescu&rdquo; started appearing in this &ldquo;primed&rdquo; content, connecting it to the candidate.
The second phase, &ldquo;astroturfing&rdquo; involves creating the impression that high numbers of users approve of a concept, or person, even when that is not the case in reality.
The fact that Russia, not China, was allegedly behind the Romanian campaign only underscores the platform&rsquo;s vulnerability to exploitation by any hostile power.
If Project Texas showed us anything, it showed that it is difficult, if not entirely impossible, for any social media platform truly segregate its operations by nation. It also showed that data localization alone cannot guarantee security.
Trust &amp; Sovereignty
So, at its core, the US TikTok ban is a story about trust. Its Chinese parent company, ByteDance never managed to convince authorities that it could prioritize American interests over &ldquo;external&rdquo; demands. In an era where personal data has become as valuable as oil, the prospect of millions of Americans&rsquo;&nbsp;information being potentially accessible to foreign actors became politically toxic.
The incidence highlights how democracies worldwide are grappling with digital sovereignty. If India fostered domestic alternatives like Josh and Moj, other countries focused on strengthening data protection frameworks or pursuing partial restrictions&mdash;all solutions that work in the specific geographic cultures in which they&rsquo;ve been adopted. 
Economic Fallout
India and the US were both massive markets for TikTok. By blocking the app, India boosted local innovation. But at what cost to global digital connectivity? The dozens of copycats that mushroomed in the fallout show both the limitations and potential of digital protectionism. India&rsquo;s many platforms thrive within the domestic market&nbsp;but struggle to achieve international relevance.
The economics of these decisions deserve further scrutiny.
Congress moved last year to force ByteDance, to sell its stake in the app or be cut off from the US market. The law gave the company a deadline of January 19&mdash;one day before a new president would take office.&nbsp;TikTok decided to unplug voluntarily instead.
Trump, who takes office as the 47th&nbsp;President of the US in less than 24 hours, has indicated he may give TikTok a 90-day extension to secure a buyer, throwing ByteDance an unexpected lifeline. This potential reversal highlights how political shifts can rapidly alter the digital landscape. ByteDance&rsquo;s&nbsp;voluntary withdrawal might have been premature&mdash;a calculated risk that backfired if Trump follows through on his promise of leniency. The uncertainty surrounding TikTok&rsquo;s fate in the US market has already impacted its valuation, with potential buyers watching closely to see if they can negotiate a better deal under a more accommodating administration.
According to Wedbush analyst <a href="https://fortune.com/2025/01/16/how-much-tiktok-worth-who-serious-about-buying/">Dan Ives</a>, TikTok is valued &ldquo;well north of $100 billion&rdquo;&nbsp;with its algorithm and potentially up to $200 billion in a &ldquo;strong strategic fit&rdquo;.
However, without the algorithm, its value could drop to between $40 billion and $50 billion.
Interestingly, ByteDance has repeatedly said it does not plan to sell. Experts have also noted the Chinese government is unlikely to approve a sale that includes TikTok&rsquo;s coveted algorithm.
ByteDance&rsquo;s decision to unplug rather than sell its stake speaks volumes. It reveals that maintaining control over the platform&mdash;and its valuable data&mdash;was more important than maintaining access to the world&rsquo;s&nbsp;largest consumer markets.
New Digital Order
What&rsquo;s clear is that the era of treating social media platforms as neutral technology companies is ending. Whether through India&rsquo;s early ban, Europe&rsquo;s strict data protection regulations, or America&rsquo;s recent action, democracies are asserting control over their digital spaces. The question is no longer whether to regulate these platforms, but how to strike a balance between security, innovation, and global connectivity.

TikTok put out a message saying its services were 'temporarily unavailable'

Every democracy must find its own balance between digital openness and national security

US TikTok Ban Signals a Shift in Tech Sovereignty

Every democracy must find its own balance between digital openness and national security

January 19, 2025 | 22:54 IST