TikTok should Be Banned + it's Not FREE Speech

Unpopular Opinion: (Also: Facebook and YouTube should be limited) TikTok has become the epitome of what I call “brain worms”—a platform so good at keeping you glued to it that it’s rewiring how we think and throwing around completely foolish behavior. The app trains us to crave quick dopamine hits, shortening attention spans and replacing depth with fleeting, algorithm-driven trends. It’s like eating junk food for your brain: fun in the moment, but ultimately unfulfilling and harmful in the long run.

While TikTok has sparked creativity, it’s also fueled toxic cycles of comparison, misinformation, and endless fo it for the Vine mentality that leave us mentally drained and more divided. Maybe a ban isn’t such a bad thing—it might force us to detox and reclaim our ability to focus on things that truly matter. Sometimes, the healthiest choice is stepping away, even if it feels uncomfortable.

On the free speech angle: The First Amendment guarantees that “Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech.” This provision is directed at government actions that suppress speech based on its content or viewpoint. However, the focus of a TikTok ban rest on national security and data privacy concerns, rather than the regulation of specific speech or ideas.

If the government can demonstrate that such a ban is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling interest—such as protecting sensitive user data from foreign surveillance—it may survive constitutional scrutiny under legal doctrines like the "strict scrutiny test." Importantly, the ban would target the platform itself as a mechanism of data collection, not the content being shared on it. A ban on TikTok would not inherently prevent individuals from expressing themselves; it would merely restrict the use of a specific medium which qualify as a foreign government interaction via social media. The courts have long held that the government has the authority to regulate certain platforms or channels under specific conditions, provided alternative avenues for speech remain available. For instance, users could still express their ideas on other social media platforms, blogs, or public forums, thus preserving their ability to communicate and not trampling rights.