TikTok app icon on a mobile phone via Wikimedia Commons.

On April 25, Students for Life of America (SFLA) was banned from TikTok for alleged “multiple Community Guidelines violations” without any opportunity for appeal. While the pro-life group was not given any reason beyond this for its ban, the move came after the group posted the following video, in which SFLA President Kristan Hawkins debated a pro-choice student at the University of Texas San Antonio:

According to SFLA, the video, in which Hawkins effectively shut down the pro-choicer’s arguments as to when life begins, had gone viral across multiple social media platforms and currently has over 2.2 million views on YouTube. Yet TikTok is the only platform that appears to have deemed the video’s content reason enough to shut down the group’s account.

SFLA notes that it lost 35,000 followers when the app blocked account managers from appealing the ban.

“If you’re pro-life on Tik Tok’s social media platform, you have a target on your back,” Hawkins in a statement. “There is no other explanation for why SFLA’s account was recently banned after posting life-affirming content while abortion supporters continue to run rampant on the app. Tik Tok seems to be practicing corporate viewpoint discrimination.”

Read more at Live Action.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
5 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Gene Ralno
Gene Ralno
1 year ago

Seems to me, prohibition of anything permitted by the 1st Amendment is a clear violation of the U.S. Constitution, America’s supreme law. If TikTok violates this law, it should be fined for the first offense and banished from the U.S. internet if it continues.

Censorship is anathema to American freedom and access to the internet is part of the free enterprise guaranteed in America. Without such freedoms, there is no America.

Fred
Fred
1 year ago
Reply to  Gene Ralno

The first ammendment is a restriction on government or those that are acting for the government. Tiktok is just another far left liberal company. They can set the rules for their company as they see fit. Under your interpretation, I can come on your property or business and say whatever I want and you can’t stop it. They just can’t discriminate against protected classes of people. You really need to read the constitution and study it some before you declare someone is violating it.
The response for us against Tiktok to to not support them by using their service.

Gene Ralno
Gene Ralno
1 year ago
Reply to  Fred

Pretty good argument but most Internet funding comes from the U.S. government — taxpayers. The internet has become the digital public square that makes TikTok profitable. If it wants to stand on a soapbox in our part of the public square, it must allow the owners to voice their positions. If it denies such participation, it needs to find another place on this global marketplace.

Fact is, the Internet began as part of a program funded by the U.S. and subsequently, became a major instrument for U.S. research. Twitter, Facebook, et al., and especially platforms like TikTok, need to reconsider their respect for the 1st Amendment or relocate to another part of the internet. Perhaps Russia would offer TikTok a more profitable market. China might work better for it.

Philip Hammersley
Philip Hammersley
1 year ago

Remember TikTok is a product of Red China. China FORCES abortions after a certain number. DJT tried to intervene with TikTok but some liberal judge blocked him.

Fred
Fred
1 year ago

DELETE TICK TOCK