In his second term as president, Donald Trump has once again turned the spotlight on Big Tech, and TikTok, the Chinese-owned social media platform, is back in his crosshairs. His administration’s recent attempt to ban TikTok has revived debates over censorship, national security, and the role of political power in regulating technology. But beneath the rhetoric lies a familiar Trump strategy: use high-profile confrontations to consolidate influence, dominate the narrative, and blur the boundaries between public policy and personal gain.
On Jan. 18, 2025, TikTok went dark in the United States, the result of a law passed under Trump’s leadership—the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act. The law mandated ByteDance, TikTok’s Chinese parent company, to divest its U.S. operations, citing concerns over data privacy and Chinese government surveillance. But within hours of returning to the Oval Office, Trump signed an executive order delaying enforcement by 75 days, citing the need for “a better deal” that could involve a joint venture with American companies. By Jan. 20, TikTok was back online.
This move drew immediate criticism. Critics accused Trump of undermining the very national security arguments his administration had used to justify the ban. His defenders argued that the delay was a pragmatic step to negotiate a compromise that would protect user data while preserving TikTok’s massive popularity among younger Americans. Yet, the real motive behind the reversal seems more aligned with Trump’s personal brand of political theater.
Trump’s relationship with Big Tech has always been contentious. His claims of censorship have been a rallying cry for his supporters, fueling a narrative of victimhood and bias against conservatives. After being deplatformed by Twitter and Facebook following the Jan. 6 Capitol riots, Trump positioned himself as a martyr for free speech, building his own social media platform, Truth Social, as an alternative to the mainstream tech giants.
But Trump’s fight with Big Tech is as much about spectacle as substance. His accusations of censorship are often exaggerated. While platforms like Twitter and Facebook have occasionally flagged or removed his content, they also amplified his voice for years, profiting from the engagement his inflammatory rhetoric generated. By claiming censorship, Trump has managed to weaponize even his setbacks, turning them into proof of his influence and the establishment’s fear of his message.
The TikTok saga fits neatly into this pattern. Trump’s decision to delay the ban was not a defense of free speech or a principled stand against government overreach. Instead, it was a calculated move to keep the focus on himself and his administration, portraying him as both the enforcer of national security and the negotiator willing to preserve an app beloved by millions of Americans.
Trump’s handling of TikTok also emphasizes the blurred lines between his political and personal interests. During his first term, he proposed a similar solution to the TikTok controversy: forcing ByteDance to sell its U.S. operations to Oracle and Walmart. This proposal raised questions about whether Trump was using his executive authority to benefit his corporate allies. The 2025 iteration of this strategy—delaying the ban in favor of a potential joint venture—follows the same playbook. It positions Trump as a dealmaker while leaving open the possibility of lucrative arrangements for American firms with ties to his administration.
This isn’t new territory for Trump. Throughout his political career, he has leveraged public policy to bolster his personal brand and business interests. The TikTok negotiations serve as yet another example of his transactional approach to governance, where national security concerns are repackaged as opportunities for political and economic gain.
The TikTok controversy also highlights Trump’s larger impact on the tech landscape. His battles with platforms like Twitter and Facebook have amplified public scrutiny of Big Tech’s outsized influence over public discourse. But instead of addressing the root issues—opaque algorithms, monopolistic practices, and inadequate regulatory frameworks—Trump has used these platforms as both a scapegoat and a tool.
During his presidency, Trump weaponized social media to bypass traditional media gatekeepers, delivering his unfiltered message directly to his base. At the same time, he attacked these platforms for allegedly silencing conservative voices. This dual strategy allowed him to dominate the conversation while keeping his supporters in a state of perpetual grievance. The result was a feedback loop where the platforms, incentivized by engagement-driven algorithms, continued to amplify Trump’s voice even as they tried to mitigate the harm caused by his rhetoric.
The reinstatement of Trump’s Twitter account by Elon Musk, following Musk’s acquisition of the platform, is a case in point. Musk framed the decision as a commitment to free speech, but it was also a recognition of Trump’s unparalleled ability to drive engagement. The move reflects the broader reality of Big Tech: platforms are not inherently ideological but opportunistic. They will accommodate whoever helps them maintain relevance and profitability, whether that’s Trump or his critics.
Trump’s relationship with Big Tech is emblematic of a deeper issue: the concentration of power in the hands of private corporations that are neither accountable to voters nor fully regulated by governments. Social media platforms have become the de facto public square, but they are governed by opaque rules that are inconsistently applied. This creates an environment where figures like Trump can exploit both the platforms’ flaws and their attempts at regulation.
The TikTok saga also raises questions about the role of government in regulating technology. While national security concerns over Chinese-owned apps are legitimate, the Trump administration’s handling of these issues has been erratic and self-serving. The lack of a coherent policy framework has left the U.S. vulnerable to both foreign influence and domestic manipulation. Instead of addressing these vulnerabilities, Trump has used the issue to score political points, undermining trust in both government and technology.
The intersection of Trump’s presidency and Big Tech highlights the fragility of democratic institutions in the digital age. Platforms like TikTok, Twitter, and Facebook wield immense power over what information is seen, shared, and believed. Yet their primary allegiance is to their shareholders, not the public. This creates a dangerous dynamic where decisions about content moderation, algorithm design, and platform governance are driven by profit motives rather than democratic principles.
Trump’s actions exacerbate this problem. By framing his conflicts with Big Tech as a battle for free speech, he distracts from the real issues: the lack of accountability for both political leaders and technology companies. His ability to dominate the narrative, even when deplatformed, demonstrates how easily the system can be manipulated by those who understand its weaknesses.
As Trump navigates his second term, his relationship with Big Tech will continue to shape the political and digital landscape. The TikTok controversy is not an isolated incident but part of a broader strategy that prioritizes spectacle over substance. Trump’s ability to exploit both the platforms’ flaws and their attempts to regulate him reveals the urgent need for systemic reform.
But the challenge goes beyond Trump. The real question is how to build a digital infrastructure that supports democratic values rather than undermining them. This will require not just better regulation of Big Tech but also a reevaluation of the role of political leaders in shaping the digital public square. Until these issues are addressed, the dance between Trump and Big Tech will remain a dangerous spectacle, one that puts the future of democracy at risk.
Written by Ananya Karthik
