My fellow Americans, this is why y'all need more Intel friends. I'm sitting here watching the news. The debate surrounding the TikTok ban has largely been framed as a "national security" issue, with concerns about data privacy and the app's potential ties to the Chinese government. However, I think that's a bunch of . Keith Major says the ban is less about national security and more about revenue protection for the 1%, specifically targeting TikTok’s ability to empower everyday average Americans to generate income outside traditional corporate structures.
The "National Security" Justification
The national security argument hinges on concerns about data collection and potential influence operations. However, if that's true, then shouldn't we have the SAME concerns about Facebook and Instagram? Both of which have faced their own previous scandals over data misuse and misinformation. Yet, these platforms haven't gotten ANY of the smoke that TikTok has gotten.
Why not?
Now follow me on this because I know y'all think I'm a crackpot conspiracy theorist. If national security was really the primary concern, then why isn't requiring TikTok to localize their data within the U.S. border not a possible solution? Would that not address the information security issue without requiring a ban?
TikTok as a Platform for Economic Democratization
TikTok has revolutionized how individuals monetize their creativity. From influencers promoting products to small businesses marketing directly to global audiences, the platform allows everyday people—not just large corporations or established media entities—to tap into a lucrative digital economy. This accessibility challenges traditional models, where only a select few gatekeepers controlled content, distribution, and profits.
How do they do it, Keith Major? Well, I'm glad you asked…
Direct Creator Revenue: TikTok’s Creator Fund, live-streaming gifts, and brand sponsorships provide creators with direct income streams.
Small Business Growth: Entrepreneurs use TikTok’s algorithm to reach niche audiences without needing massive marketing budgets.
Decentralized Influence: Unlike traditional media, TikTok elevates voices based on engagement, not corporate backing, allowing marginalized and underrepresented communities to profit from their talents.
In essence, TikTok has created a revenue sharing model with content creators such that the more clowning you do, the more we both get paid. Thus, "Clown on!" In contrast, Instagram is wired up so that the sponsors and advertisers have to go through Instagram. And if your IG profile starts get'n a tad too popular too fast, IG will come up with a reason to delete your profile. Because what Mark Zuckerberg doesn't want is for the advertiser to get smart and go directly to the content creator with a deal.
Revenue Losses for Traditional Gatekeepers
Let's not kid ourselves, TikTok presents a SIGNIFICANT financial threat to U.S.-based tech giants like Meta and YouTube, which heretofore have dominated the digital advertising and creator economy. TikTok's ever-growing popularity draws users and advertising dollars away from these platforms. And the 1% doesn't like it.
Furthermore, TikTok’s ability to distribute income directly to creators undermines traditional corporate revenue models. Thus, the timing of this whole Supreme Court foolishness just so happens to coincide with TikTok's adoption of its new ad model and its success in capturing the younger demographic.
Protecting Economic Opportunity
Banning TikTok would silence the platform that has become a lucrative side hussle for millions. It also sends the strategic message that innovation and economic empowerment are secondary to protecting the entrenched corporate interests of the 1%.
Because think about it, the argument isn't data protection and information security. Because if that were the case, we would be scrutinizing ALL data platforms, not just TikTok. In reality, policymakers should be focusing on creating fair regulations that ensure data privacy across all of cyberspace. Right???
My $.02: Don't nobody in Washington, DC give a damn about the security of your data. The TikTok ban is about protecting revenue streams threatened by its democratized approach to wealth generation. This law case ain't about the national security threat of no damn app—it’s about who controls the future of the digital economy and whether everyday average Americans (the 99%) can continue to participate in it on their own terms.
Think about this. And I'm sure I'm not the only person. Every other Fridee, the bank is sending me an email notifying me that there has been a data breach and that I must change my password and am entitled to 12 months of free credit report monitoring. Considering that the banks are that raggedy with data security, how TikTok get'n all the smoke? Make that make sense?
Oh, and before I forget, how much moolah are we talkin'? TikTok generated $20 Billion (yes, that's billion with a 'b') last year which was a 67% growth from the previous year. Additionally, the average content creator makes between $5,000 and $15,000 annually just off of TikTok videos. Mind you, that's the average. Who's the king (or should I say queen) of the hill?
Charli D'Amelio is recognized as the highest-paid TikTok content creator, with estimated earnings of $17.5 million. She went from lip-syncing and dance videos to collaborations with CeraVe, Prada, and Dunkin’ Donuts, as well as her own show on Hulu.
So ladies, it boils down to this. The Supreme Court says that you can't make money of your own titteez because it's a national security threat, but you're free to post your titteez on Instagram and Facebook so that Mark Zuckerberg and his billionaire friends can make the money.
Does that sound fair?
And lastly, Meta's revenue has declined from 38% in 2021 down to 15% in 2024. Concurrently, Meta had a -32% decrease in youth subscribers. Take a guess at where all the young people went...
If you want to solve a crime in America, follow the money.
Comments