TaoTiao, on the other hand, is a subsidiary in China and is beholden to CNI, but the executive order has nothing to do with that company and there is no evidence that it receives data from TikTok.
https://chinamediaproject.org/2018/04/11/tech-shame-in-the-n...
Apple has forked over the same with it's subsidiary in China: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/03/apple-privacy...
> In addition, ByteDance on April 25, 2019, signed a strategic cooperation agreement with the Ministry of Public Security's Press and Publicity Bureau (公安部新聞宣傳局) in Beijing. The agreement was billed as "aiming to give full play to the professional technology and platform advantages of Toutiao and Tiktok in big data analysis," strengthen the creation and production of "public security new media works," boost "network influence and online discourse power," and enhance "public security propaganda, guidance, influence, and credibility," among other aspects.
https://www.indiatoday.in/news-analysis/story/china-national...
https://www.mannheimerswartling.se/globalassets/nyhetsbrev/m...
Do we really believe because, "legally", the company is not in China, is not subject to CCP control? It's not the law that binds them, it's party lines.
If Bytedance is not subject to said control, why do they ban content critical with China, knowing the possible backlash?
https://www.vox.com/open-sourced/2019/12/16/21013048/tiktok-...
US politicians’ concern over TikTok began with an investigation the Guardian published on September 25, which revealed leaked documents that showed TikTok instructing its moderators to censor videos that mentioned topics sensitive to the Communist Party of China: Tiananmen Square, Tibetan independence, and the religious group Falun Gong, for instance. The Guardian’s investigation came after the Washington Post noted that a search for Hong Kong-related topics on TikTok showed virtually zero content about the ongoing and widely publicized pro-democracy protests, which were a major topic on other social media sites at the time.