Trump’s TikTok Deal: Who Rules the Algorithm, Rules the Digital Public Square

Over the last two years, the fate of TikTok has been a source of constant speculation. New America’s Open Technology Institute has consistently said that this scrutiny of TikTok was never just about the app. It was about how the United States confronts foreign technology, who controls the platforms that shape our civic life, and whether the U.S. can develop strong accountability mechanisms for protecting Americans’ data.

Now that President Trump has signed an executive order setting up a deal to spin TikTok’s U.S. operations into a new American-controlled company, the White House is calling it a national security victory. However, when we measure the deal against critical benchmarks, it’s less a solution and more of a warning: an ideologically driven patch that ignores deeper problems while giving the U.S. government alarming power over who controls our algorithms.

In June, I proposed five principles for assessing any TikTok deal. Here’s how this one stacks up.

1. Big Tech Consolidation: The Circle Tightens

The stated goal of the TikTok ban was to protect Americans from foreign control. But just beneath that surface is a more familiar pattern: shifting market power from one giant to another. TikTok’s success in outpacing leading U.S. social media platforms has long made it a political target—and this deal hands a major victory to some of those very competitors. This restructured TikTok would be owned by Oracle, Silver Lake, and Andreessen Horowitz—all major forces in Silicon Valley and Wall Street. 

And while ByteDance’s ownership may be capped under 20 percent, some reports suggest they’ll still retain strong profits. Meanwhile, American consumers will see consolidation in a different direction with a structural trend that continues: fewer firms, bigger platforms, and tighter control in the hands of a familiar few.

2. Politically Connected Buyers: Credibility Undermined

One of the key risks flagged from the start was handing TikTok to politically connected insiders. With Oracle now positioned as a central player—led by one of Silicon Valley’s most politically entrenched executives—that concern has materialized. If Washington insists on calling this a “national security fix,” it will be difficult to push back against other governments that pursue similar takeovers under the same pretext. 

The geopolitical message is muddled, as is the domestic one. Ownership stakes tied to figures with clear ideological leanings, including backers who have expressed conservative views, blur the line between national security policy and partisan interest. Rather than depoliticizing TikTok, the deal risks deepening suspicions that this is less about safeguarding data, and more about consolidating influence.

3. Different Owner, Same Data Problems

This deal puts U.S. data under Oracle’s watch and promises a retrained algorithm based on American users, but it erects only a narrow fence around a single app in a vast, unregulated ecosystem. Without comprehensive federal privacy laws, Americans remain exposed—not just on TikTok, but across platforms like Instagram and the shadowy world of data brokers. Changing the ownership doesn’t fix the underlying vulnerability; the real problem is a systemic lack of meaningful safeguards across the entire digital landscape.

4. Compliance With the Law: Easier Said Than Done

The law required a clean break: no data sharing, no algorithm licensing, no operational ties. On paper, this deal claims to achieve that, but reports that Bytedance may continue to license the algorithm raise concerns. In practice, proving that every software update and algorithmic tweak is free of “foreign influence” will be a complex, ongoing challenge. Compliance isn’t a one-time check; it’s a continuous process that requires rigorous, transparent oversight—not just for TikTok, but for any other social media outlet subject to political or corporate pressure. 

5. Security or Symbolism?

Although this deal is being sold as a win for national security, what it most clearly secures is political cover. After months of deadline extensions and backroom negotiations, it’s obvious that enforcement of the threatened ban was flexible all along. Now, Americans keep their TikTok, and Washington gets to declare victory. But the real question—how to govern the algorithms that shape what we see, believe, and do—remains unanswered. For all the noise, the substance of platform accountability is still missing.

What Comes Next: Defining “Good Technology”

The TikTok deal may settle one political standoff, but it doesn’t chart a path forward. Real security requires more than reshuffling ownership; it requires redefining what we mean by “good technology.”

If this deal makes anything clear, it’s that we need to look under the hood of the corporate structure of our social media platforms—who owns our platforms, who profits from them, and whose interests they serve. That means scrutinizing the technical and operating structure to see how well they support foundational needs: open-source infrastructure, true data ownership, algorithmic transparency, and user control over content moderation and experience. It also means raising the bar for the public, equipping consumers to demand digital products that are transparent in their operations, accountable in how they’re governed, and equitable in their impact. Emerging platforms like Bluesky, and examples of companies experimenting with more ethical governance models, suggest that a different approach is possible. 

We need a public standard for technology worthy of our trust. Good technology should protect privacy, give users real control, and reinforce democratic values rather than erode them. Until we define and demand that standard, deals like TikTok’s will remain surface fixes that serve politics more than people.

TikTok’s “qualified divestiture” allows the app to continue operating, but it risks cementing a dangerous precedent where political theater substitutes for real governance of our digital public square. TikTok was never just about TikTok. If we want a digital future that works for people and democracy, not just for politics and profit, we must ask harder questions—and expect better answers.

Follow The Thread! Subscribe to The Thread monthly newsletter to get the latest in policy, equity, and culture in your inbox.