up being so grateful that she was able to make it to the other side because we intervened. >> patrick kennedy with his book, "profiles in mental health courage" sunday night on c-span's q&a. you can listen to q&a and all of our podcasts on our free app. >> the house will be in order. >> c-span celebrates 45 years of covering congress like no other. we have been your primary source for capitol hill, providing balanced unfiltered coverage of government, taking you to where the policies are debated and decided, all with support of america's cable companies. c-span, 45 years and counting, powered by cable. the future of tiktok in the united states and are discussion with axios tech policy reporter maria curi.

welcome. guest: thank you. host: what was at the issue and the core? guest: this started a year ago when energy and commerce committee chairman rogers brought tiktok ceo to testify. two issues were spoke, there were national security concerns and data privacy concerns with the app and specifically with its owner, bytedance, having ties to the chinese government. this started a year ago. shortly afterwards a bill was introduced and that is now that we have law which directs the divestment or ban of tiktok. host: would it be a technical ban if it goes through? guest: depends on who you ask. this is not necessarily a bill to ban the app. it gives tiktok the option of

finding a different owner, a u.s. owner that isn't a national security threat. because that sale could be so complicated and politically precarious, you could actually ask at this was a man ultimately. host: what timeframe doesn't give tiktok to make the decisions? guest: it gives them nine months and the president could extended three months, so your total. host: the parent company, what is it and what are the concerns about those ties to the chinese government? guest: it is called bytedance and has operations in china and engineers in china and the concern is that the chinese government ever wanted to have that company had over u.s. data it can do so. that is what is concerning for u.s. lawmakers. if you ask tiktok, it will say all u.s. data is housed in the united states and they wouldn't forced to turn that data over to

the chinese government. but that did not convince any lawmakers on capitol hill from either side of the aisle. host: is a national security and data privacy concerns. where does national security come in? guest: the national security concern comes in is that you can do foreign influenced campaigns. there are young americans using this application and if the chinese government wanted to spring -- spread propaganda, the fear is that they could do so in influenced american politics in that way. host: our guest here to talk about the future of tiktok in the u.s.. if you want to ask questions, democrats (202) 748-8000, republicans (202) 748-8001, independents (202) 748-8002. you can text (202) 748-8003. is this a partisan issue? guest: it is not.

it has unified democrats and republicans on capitol hill. we saw this first during the hearing when the tiktok ceo came and he was grilled by both sides of the aisle. when it cleared committee it was unanimous. when it cleared the house and senate it had broad support. this is shared by both parties. host: the tiktok ceo got on the platform after the passage of the legislation and responding to president biden signing it. here is a portion of what he had to say. [video clip] >> the show here, congress passed a bill that the president signed into law that is designed to ban tiktok in the united states. that would take tiktok away from you and 170 million americans who find community and connection in all platforms. this is a man on tiktok -- ban on tiktok and you and your voice. politicians who say otherwise, many who sponsor the bill admit

that a tiktok band is the ultimate goal. -- ban is the ultimate goal. the freedom of expression on tiktok reflects the same american values as a beacon of freedom. tiktok gives everyday americans a powerful way to be seen and heard and that is why so many people have made tiktok part of their daily lives. rest assured we aren't going anywhere. we are confident we will fight for your rights in the court. the facts and the constitution are on our side. our community is filled with people who found acceptance and compassion encouragement and increasing awareness into broader perspectives, ultimately adding more joy to their lives. our community is also filled with 7 million business owners. we will make our case in court and you can still enjoy it tiktok like you always have.

in fact, if you have a story about how tiktok impacts your life, we would love you to share to showcase what we are fighting for. we will invest and innovate to keep our community vibrant, exciting and safe. through our data security efforts we have built safeguards that no other company has made. we have invested billions of dollars to secure your data keep our platform free from outside manipulation. i can't say this enough. this extraordinarily diverse community is what makes tiktok so special, make it matter and make it meaningful. i will keep working to ensure you always have the opportunity, safety, and freedom to enjoy all tiktok has to offer. thank you. host: a long response from the ceo of tiktok. we are not going away, very emphatic on his part. what is that based on? guest: he is driving the

confidence from the fact that this country is strong on first amendment protections and he certainly plans to bring this to court. it will probably end in the supreme court and his main argument will probably be this is the first amendment violation on the millions of users that use the app. host: use of the constitution is on our side. guest: correct. host: let's hear from jeff in arkansas, a democrat for our guest. caller: good morning. a quick question. you are talking about american companies buying into tiktok, has there been established and a list of companies that are lining up to buy tiktok? guest: that is a great question. it is a very expensive company so that narrows down the pool of buyers significantly. some potential companies that would be able to afford it art meta or google but they have

major platforms like instagram and facebook and youtube and that could run into some monopoly concerns, too much social media power in the hands of just one parent company. some other companies might be able to come in and purchase the app. microsoft has been floated but no one has come out and said we are interested in buying this app. host: whoever decides, what scrutiny goes by the federal government if there is interest to buy it? guest: it might run into antitrust issues with the department of justice or the ftc, but it will definitely be better than a chinese based company for a lot of regulators. host: i think early on, president trump's treasury secretary steven mnuchin expressed interest in gathering a collection of people to buy it. guest: i don't think it has gone

anywhere. it was in the news cycle and haven't heard from it, but who knows? host: you heard from a ceo, but as far as influencers and those who use tiktok for business, what have they said and how they -- have it address the regulators? guest: a lot of anger. it provided a lot of americans an opportunity not just to express themselves but to build businesses and make money off of products and businesses. a lot of people are upset right now. one of the tactics, because the bill sprung onto tiktok and they didn't see it coming. one of the tactics the company used as having pop-ups show on -- up when they come on and say this is your congressman number and call them. we saw people calling offices on capitol hill and inundating them to reject the bill and that had

the opposite effect and that convinced lawmakers to vote in favor of the bill because they saw it as evidence that this could really be used to mobilize large groups of people in politics in the u.s. host: we saw the president signed the bill, but what were the concerns over the concerns that congress has about the company and tiktok itself? guest: president biden is supportive of this measure. he obviously signed it into law but with so many other issues going on, it hasn't been the main focus for the white house. there has been support and it went through. host: the president still plans to use the platform for his campaign plans? guest: that is right. they will be adamant to say that the presidency is different from the campaign and public officials, known in the federal government or on the hill is allowed to use tiktok. that has already been banned for a while.

there is a little bit of a disconnect there and the president has faced criticism for his campaign using the app. host: viewers (202) 748-8000 for democrats, republicans (202) 748-8001, independents (202) 748-8002 to ask questions. we will hear from roy, austin texas, republican. caller: the statement i would like to make is the fact that we keep hearing about everyone saying the first amendment right is being violated. the problem is if tiktok was the only show in town, they may be right. but since tiktok is not the only show in town, there are other apps that do the same exact theme, they can easily migrate to those apps. nobody's rights are being violated. i don't know why they keep promoting that hype. guest: i hear you and i think

one of the concerns from first amendment scholars might raise that would set a precedent for other apps to be banned. that is one of the fears that right now it is just tiktok but others could depending on who the president is, come under scrutiny and before you know it maybe we have a more fragmented internet, not just globally where the internet looks very different in china versus the united states, but within the united states uses and creators having less options. it really is a matter to be watched. host: you talk about other companies. is there a sense of waiting in the wings should there be a band and they are waiting to fill the gap? guest: absolutely. i think it is 190 minutes i think that americans are spending on tiktok every day. that is definitely an opportunity for other apps to come in and take advantage. host: david is next from

atlanta, independent line. caller: good morning. i have two questions. the first one is on national security. do you think the chinese government is actually gathering information on american citizens? do you actually think the chinese government would allow an american company to purchase tiktok? guest: to the first question whether the chinese government is actually gathering information on americans, in 2022 forbes did an investigation that showed american journalists were being spied on and tracked by the app. beyond that, we know that the app tracks our movements, videos we watch, for how long we watch them. we don't know whether or not the

chinese government at this point is using that information for anything, but the fear that they could. that is really what was the impetus for lawmakers to act. to your second question, with the chinese allow another american company to buy tiktok? no, i very highly doubt that. and even if tiktok did decide to find a different parent company, the algorithm which is what makes the app so powerful and useful for other people is probably not going to be sold because the chinese government would intervene in that sense. the algorithm is what makes the app, what recommends video and keeps us on the app because it is learning what we enjoy watching. it so a sale of tiktok without the algorithm would not be attractive to any buyer. host viewers that the compy operates businesses based on u.s. models, so why not go

further about x or facebook? guest: tiktok is abiding by u.s. laws. the parent company is in beijing -based and the argument is the chinese government could just force the company to hand over data regardless of where it is stored whenever it wants. what was the second question? host: why not make the same kind of analogies for x or facebook? guest: we live in a company that -- country that does not have a federal privacy law like many countries around the world. one of the criticisms lawmakers faced when they work pushing this forward and getting it through congress, which they are very rarely passed, was that we still haven't addressed the root of the issue which is the lack of a privacy law. one other bill that has not

gotten as much attention as the tiktok band is actually this law that would championed by lawmakers that would ban data brokers from selling our sensitive information to any foreign country that we deem adversaries. that is also another important measure. american companies are also using our data in selling it. host: are there other countries as concerned about national security or privacy when it comes to tiktok like the united states? guest: yes there aren't many countries that have banned the app for federal employees in users, government employees. as far as a band for all people of that particular country, it is much rarer. india has that but not many others. host: maria curi is joining us from axios about the tiktok man.

let's go to north carolina, independent line. caller: my question is more or less on a national security but more on use and addiction. i understand most people are concerned about the youth and how it is affecting mental health. guest: you are cutting out but i think i got the gist of it is what is being done about the addiction aspect and youth mental health? this will not address this issue, because we know once tiktok does not prevail in court and is eventually removed from the u.s. market, there are many social media companies out there. another issue that congress is working toward is passing laws that would address this mental health issue and giving parents more controls and putting more

responsibility on the shoulders of companies to be responsible in the products they are pushing on minors. we will see if that clears congress. host: stephen, connecticut, independent line. caller: a couple things. one is there is data collection. in the one is algorithmic intelligence to drive events subtly. there are classic operations and they drove certain events to tip the scales in subtle events. and of course collect -- not to influence how we say or think for sales.

chinese intelligence is not to sell me a car or something. guest: the difference between data collection and algorithmic intelligence? host: can you clarify what you want our guest to answer? caller: how do you think chinese intelligence would use tiktok on the american population because there are laws that they can collect what they want in china. guest: if you speak with lawmakers, they say the algorithm is so powerful it sucks you into a feedback loop of the content you are already engaging with and then you are in this loop perpetually. i mentioned the amount of minutes americans are spending on average, that is a lot of time and that will create echo chambers and reinforce beliefs that you already have and make discourse on the others.

i think this is one of the concerns that lawmakers had in the context of the israel-hamas war, where they felt that the app was suppressing pro-israeli speech. on the other side of that, you have people saying that was just a reflection of the actual discourse happening among young people in the united states right now and that is what the conversations were reflecting. but the algorithm is very powerful and it is not unlike other algorithms and other apps. it is very unique for tiktok but you also have powerful algorithms and other apps that influence the way we think. host: the legislation was said to be put forth from disinformation and misinformation. guest: another concern was more americans than ever are getting their news from social media, and that includes tiktok, and that is an issue not just with companies that have business in

china but also in the u.s.. host: a question, why shouldn't they be treated like publishers? guest: that is a great question. it comes down to the content and who is moderating that content. platforms moderate their own content but it is the users that are deciding what goes on there and they are not necessarily liable for that and so that is online publishers that are liable for content they decide to publish. one of the biggest debates has always been, should we make these platforms liable for what is on their platforms? the idea has bed that we shouldn't -- been that we shouldn't because that can lead to companies deciding what we see and don't see and it would be better to be left to the hands of americans. that is another active debate on capitol hill is how to handle the liability question read -- question.

host: kevin, independent line. caller: i remember this going on when president trump said he would ban tiktok unless they gave us $10 million -- $10 billion in the treasury. what happened with that? guest: the tiktok efforts under former president trump didn't really go anywhere. they were held up in court. we know now that he made some statements on the campaign trail that he would not move forward with a ban on tiktok. that would just be wins for the other big tech. he flip-flopped on that issue. host: from ian in d.c.. caller: i am wondering if this legislation was too narrow. should be -- we be worried that the company could change names or be sold to another foreign

institute and the legislation wouldn't cover it? guest: this has really been reported out of a tiktok ban or divest that the language would target any company that is deemed owned or controlled by a foreign rat. not even just -- foreign threat, and not just china but north korea, iran and other countries that we don't have clear information that apps are coming from them but the bill writers were looking to the future if there was an app like that in the future. host: is there a way to understand how tiktok became so popular? guest: i think it gave a lot of creators and young people a platform to express themselves. i think the algorithm itself, the short form video, was unique and revolutionary and different from you to where you had longer

videos and people could spend hours on just one rabbit hole of videos as we have all done at one point or the other. with tiktok, it was quick, easy hits and before you know it more than an hour has passed and it gained popularity. host: tom joins us in georgia, independent line. caller: i was going to say that this is not like this is unusual. we have a platform that is owned by an adversary and there are issues involving espionage, foreign infiltration, who knows what. these are the problems, really. but this is an opportunity for brighton to show his -- four

biden -- for a biden to show his colors. and for the chinese to help him get elected. guest: propaganda isn't illegal in the united states, but to spread its in a more limited publication that only reaches a certain amount of people versus on a social media platform that millions are on for long periods during the day is a question that is one of the things the court will have to grapple with. it is interesting about the way technology has changed the freedom of speech and first amendment conversations. host: has issues from china and what degree does it further issues with china? guest: it exacerbates the issues.

the u.s.-china relations are more tense than ever and the united states government directly going after one of china's most successful social media applications. we have seen the chinese already asking apple to remove some of the united states platforms from the market including instagram threads and what's up. this will -- what'sapp. this could lead to where we are not as freely communicating with others around the world. right now it is just the u.s. and china but first amendment scholars have concerns it will lead to less communication and a less open information ecosystem. host: walk us what to expect over the next couple of months. guest: we can expect tiktok to sue and this will go to the courts and they are going to make first amendment arguments against the bill. you can expect the government to

make national security arguments. we will see what the court decides but during that time usually what happens is the law would not move forward until the court proceedings are done and that could take months. afterwards, then it would be nine months for bytedance to divest from tiktok and then the president could give them an additional three months. so more than a year at this point before americans really start to feel any impact. afterwards, i think what would happen is the app stores would have to stop carrying the apps and then americans would stop being able to use it. host: this is from michelle in illinois, democrats line. caller: just a quick question. i was wondering, what about the millions of jobs and businesses that have been created off of this platform?

has congress said anything about those businesses that will have to shutter after a year? should this not go the way they are planning? guest: that is a legitimate concern and you have a lot of small business owners and creators raising this concern. i think lawmakers would say try moving to a different platform. ultimately national security concerns are more important and there are other options for small business owners, although it is disruptive and is definitely going to impact a lot of people relying on this app right now. host: the website is axios.com. maria curi serves as a >> is there a relationship between soft and hard money and pacs and super pacs? >> can you explain the difference between dual and

cooperative federalism? >> are you a student about to take the advanced placement government exam? join us on washington journal 9:00 a.m. eastern saturday for our annual cram for the exam special to get e st tips to succeed on the test. an ap teacher from california will take your calls and text questions on the content and structure of this year's exam. >> the areas to focus on, the founding documents required, the supreme court cases required. you know part of the exam will come from those lists. >> so get your test questions ready and participate by calling in or asking your questions on facebook, on x, or at hashtag #cramfortheexam. >> c-spanshop.org, discover

apparel, home to core and accessories. every purchase you make goes towards supporting our nonprofit operations. start shopping n by scanning the code on the right or visiting us online at c-spanshop.org. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more, including comcast. >> you think this is just a community center? >> comcast is partnering with 1000 community centers to great wi-fi students from low income families can get what they need to be ready for anything. >> comcast supports c-span as a public service along with these other television providers. giving you a front row seat to democracy.