Professor Matthew Warren, the esteemed Director of the Centre for Cyber Security Research and Innovation at RMIT University, voiced his concerns about the growing risk TikTok represents to the Australian public. He underlined that the app’s intense data collection capabilities could be a gateway to potential cyber threats.
Highlighting Montana’s prohibition of TikTok, Warren termed it as a symbol of a larger worldwide shift motivated by global security apprehensions. This move, restricting TikTok’s usage by ordinary citizens, aligns with similar decisions taken by the Australian and the Victorian-state government to ban TikTok for government staff.
The Australian and the Victorian-state government have banned TikTok for all government employees. It is a natural next step now to ban TikTok completely as they have a duty of care to protect all Australian citizens against all risks including cyber risks. However, any ban won’t remove the apps from users’ phones if they already have it installed.
Professor Warren
‘Splinternet’: Redefining the Control and Surveillance of the Internet
Professor Warren further elucidates on the evolution of the internet, outlining the emergence of ‘splinternet’. This term denotes a situation where the internet fragments into distinct regional entities, including China, Russia, Iran, Turkey, and the West. Consequently, he predicts, “The dream of the internet being a global system ultimately disappears.”
This regional fragmentation of the internet presents a unique challenge of managing and coordinating these disparate subsystems while ensuring user data security and privacy. “The issue then is how do we manage and co-ordinate a global system that has become broken off into several sub-systems. For example, if an Australian citizen is interacting on the Chinese zone of the Internet, how could you protect the data and privacy of that Australian citizen?” contemplates Professor Warren.
Unraveling the Motivations Behind App Bans: Politics or Consumer Protection?
Dr. Torgeir Aleti, a Senior Lecturer at RMIT’s School of Economics, Finance, and Marketing, offers his perspective on the TikTok ban, suggesting a political angle cloaked under the guise of consumer protection.
Elucidating on the potential effects of app store bans, Dr. Aleti proposes that VPNs or pre-ban downloads may allow users to bypass these prohibitions. Further, he emphasizes the friction arising from the trade-off made by users of these platforms. In exchange for services like search results, social connectivity, news, or entertainment, users give away their personal data and privacy.
In exchange for free search results (e.g., Google), platforms to connect with friends (e.g., Instagram), information and news (e.g., Facebook), or entertainment (e.g., TikTok), consumers’ personal data and privacy are taken.
Dr. Aleti
One of the leading reasons for the controversy around TikTok is the treatment of ‘personal data.’ Indirectly, this issue triggers friction because the data is allegedly stored in China. This potential offshoring of data has sparked significant fears, particularly in the United States.
Dr. Aleti elaborates, “With TikTok, it’s the ‘personal data’ that causes friction indirectly because the data is allegedly stored in China – which is the main fear that is surfacing in the US.”
Like its ‘big-tech’ counterparts, TikTok operates on the principle of surveillance or information capitalism. These platforms gather user data, which they skilfully transform into consumer profiles through algorithms, subsequently selling these to the highest bidder. This process enables the delivery of increasingly personalised advertisements to consumers.
Regulatory Interventions: A Fair Alternative to Bans
As the dialogue around bans on apps like TikTok unfolds, a viable alternative often emerges in the form of regulatory measures. Such regulations could govern the data that can be collected, control the content pushed based on user knowledge, and impose limitations on targeted advertising.
However, Dr. Aleti insists that these regulations should be universally applicable, stating, “Regulation is always an alternative rather than banning the whole app. However, regulation must be applied equally to all platforms.” This approach ensures a level playing field, fostering healthy competition while simultaneously protecting user interests.
Also read: Singapore’s TriOn & Co Joins Mirovia: An Epochal Leap In Global Legal PR Network
Reflecting on the future of TikTok, Dr. Aleti suggests, “It’s not the end for TikTok. It is a popular app, so banning it may be a risky political strategy. That said, the popularity of social media platforms has always fluctuated (remember MySpace?), and it is tough to predict what the next big thing might be.”
As these discussions around TikTok and the ‘splinternet’ phenomenon unfold, the world watches with bated breath, eager to see how the future of global internet systems evolves.
Legal Disclaimer: The Editor provides this news content "as is," without any warranty of any kind. We disclaim all responsibility and liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. For any complaints or copyright concerns regarding this article, please contact the author mentioned above.
