Privacy Governance in the Digital Age: The Paradox Unveiled Through TikTok Refugees

The Unfolding of a Paradox

In the digitalization of everyday communication, social media is not only a window through which we share our lives but also an invisible data collection machine. Billions of TikTok users voluntarily submit their interests, habits, and preferences to the platform (Rauhofer, 2008). These behavioral data are the raw materials of the recommendation algorithm, creating a utopian world that belongs to the users themselves. However, as a communication tool, the platform is invisibly eroding data privacy. The privacy paradox behavior of social media users is reflected in the trade-off between privacy rights and free online services. Although most people claim to care about privacy, their actions often contradict their words (Flew, 2021). The struggle for privacy rights seems an ongoing and circular game. However, when data is leaked and abused by AI, it will be an adventure of enjoyment with illusion.

As one of the most popular social platforms in the world, TikTok’s data security risks have also attracted the attention of government regulators. Governments of different countries have imposed sanctions or bans on TikTok. Recently, the US government proposed to formally ban or force the sale of TikTok because it may threaten national security. This ban was strongly opposed by TikTok users, giving rise to the #TikTok refugees phenomenon (Bonet, 2025). It is worth thinking about what really affects the data rights of users. In the era of social media, the privacy dilemma has always been an issue that needs urgent attention. When algorithms dominate the flow of information, where do the user’s privacy rights go? From state control over privacy, to the invisible domination of platform algorithms, to the abuse of AI technology in data breach, privacy issues have become increasingly complex in the digital age.

From TikTok Refugee Perspective: How America Controls Privacy

TikTok is the international version of the Chinese company, Bytedance-owned app Douyin, available in over 150 countries (Grandinetti & Bruinsma, 2023).  The platform has been dragged into the geopolitical competition between China and the United States due to its potential links with China and has become a political symbol. Due to its political sensitivity and influence, the US government initially suspended the ban under pressure, but in 2024, the US Congress passed the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Application Act (PAFACA), requiring TikTok to be separated from its Chinese parent company ByteDance within a specified time. On January 19, 2025, the bill came into effect, prohibiting websites, desktop applications, mobile applications, and enhanced or immersive technology applications operated directly or indirectly by ByteDance Company Ltd. or TikTok. Also, India had already banned TikTok and other Chinese apps as early as 2020, with authorities citing concerns about data security and privacy and safeguarding India’s sovereignty and integrity. (Bhalla, 2025). With strict ban regulations, does user privacy really become safer? Will user behavior really follow the policy? 

Digital Protest: The Rise of TikTok Refugees

The answer is no, TikTok is on the verge of being banned, and TikTok users with nowhere to go call themselves “TikTok refugees” (Ewe, 2025). Instead of waiting passively, they took action. From the initial demonstrations to the current data protest, they have turned to another Chinese social media platform, Xiaohongshu (Little Red Book or RedNote), to seek shelter and comfort from losing TikTok. They resisted and chose to provide personal data, which aggravated the concerns of the United States. On January 14, RedNote hosted a live chat about “TikTok refugees,” with more than 50,000 users from the United States and China joining the chat room (Reporter, 2025). In the past two days, RedNote’s downloads in the United States have increased by more than 200% year-over-year, with more than 700,000 new users (Reporter, 2025). Many users expressed their feelings: 

I don’t have anything that China doesn’t have, and if they want my data so badly, they can get it.

I will continue to try to attract fans there and see what new connections, friendships or opportunities it can bring me.

The Privacy Paradox in User Psychology

Even though Trump has suggested that TikTok tracks and builds dossiers of personal information for blackmail and conducts corporate espionage (Tidy, 2024), and even though FBI Director Christopher Wray has told US lawmakers that the Chinese government can control recommendation algorithms and use them for influence operations (Tucker, 2022), TikTok users still chose to protest the ban. Privacy is inevitable for them, but there is only one TikTok that makes a sense of happiness. This also reveals the core of the privacy paradox, which has become entrenched as users get used to and immersed in social media.

At the same time, privacy rights are not in the hands of users, the purpose of banning TikTok is to cut off the possibility of data flowing to China. On the surface, it is to protect citizens’ privacy and reduce foreign forces’ control over domestic user data, but in fact, privacy rights are in the hands of the state. User data is still being collected by platforms other than TikTok, such as Instagram, YouTube, Snapchat, etc. The ban seems to have only transferred the privacy risk but did not solve the problem. As a result, the ban violates the freedom of speech protection of the platform’s 170 million users in the United States (Ewe, 2025). It shows that the US’s regulation of digital technology, driven by geopolitical competition, has seriously damaged the global Internet ecosystem environment (Xu, 2025). 

Freedom is Also a Policy

As De Sola Pool pointed out, emerging forms of electronic communication require policies that both ensure freedom and avoid government control (Flew, 2021). Although it may seem contradictory, freedom itself is a policy; true digital freedom policies should aim to minimize control and enable diverse expression rather than relying on bans or restrictions in the name of protection (Flew, 2021). The media community space created by TikTok precisely reflects the high plasticity of free expression. It meets the user’s deep needs for self-presentation, social interaction, and cultural participation. Therefore, compared with the privacy crisis caused by the Facebook–Cambridge Analytica data scandal, TikTok users rarely show the same strong privacy protest attitude. When the platform gives users more space for expression, privacy seems to be intentionally or unintentionally surrendered in the sense of participation, thus deepening the existence and complexity of the privacy paradox.

How TikTok Trains Users’ Choices

TikTok, as a video-based app, differentiates itself from platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube by offering a highly personalized recommendation algorithm. For You Pages are based on users’ previous and continued engagement with video content, including viewing time, likes, comments, and sharing (Klug et al., 2021). The algorithm constantly learns users’ preferences, Which curates content accordingly to provide users with information they like. In addition, TikTok suggests trending videos related to current events, enabling users to quickly catch up on and participate in popular topics.  This continuous stream of content not only increases user engagement, but also enhances users’ social interaction. Of course, TikTok is not only an information-receiving platform but also an ecosystem for user-generated content. Users can freely express their opinions, share their lives, and spread information in this space through self-discourse (Syamsuar et al., 2024).In other words, TikTok’s success is also due to its decentralized system that encourages innovation and maximizes personal freedom (Flew, 2021).

Stickiness & User Statistics

For TikTok Refugees, the platform is more than just entertainment; it is a tool for belonging, identity building, and social capital. They describe TikTok as a safe space where they can be themselves, be part of a community, and participate meaningfully, but paradoxically, the algorithm is seen as harmful because it attempts to manipulate and direct users to watch specific videos, thereby increasing their “addiction” to the platform (Ionescu & Licu, 2023). The platform has been downloaded more than 2 billion times since 2020, with 732 million monthly active users worldwide, most of whom are between the ages of 16 and 24. Users use the app an average of 19 times per day, spending around 89 minutes in total (Grandinetti & Bruinsma, 2023). In addition, we see in Figure 2.1 that the number of TikTok grew by about 15% year-over-year, reaching 755 million users by 2022, and continued to grow thereafter. This amazing user stickiness not only makes TikTok a dominant force for cultural dissemination but also gives it strong control over data collection and algorithmic influence. 

TikTok creates an illusion of choice by training users to continuously engage with content. Users often think they are actively choosing content, but in fact, they are being guided and shaped by algorithms. These algorithms accurately analyze user behavior and gradually train users to prioritize engagement over autonomy (Ionescu & Licu, 2023). As users become increasingly dependent on personalized recommendations, they become increasingly numb to the amount of data the platform has and their visibility in the system. Many people do not even realize that their data is being systematically collected, exposed, and monitored (Ionescu & Licu, 2023). Ultimately, the line between free expression and algorithmic manipulation becomes increasingly blurred, and we “voluntarily” give up control of our personal information in a seemingly open expression environment. This phenomenon is a true reflection of the privacy paradox at the platform level: people claim to value privacy, but in their behavior, they condone or even become accustomed to data sharing. How do we balance the privacy trade-offs and regain user privacy?

Reclaiming Privacy: Toward Resolving the Paradox

The “TikTok refugee” phenomenon provides a typical case. When some countries ban TikTok on the grounds of national security, it is not the platform itself that is marginalized but the user’s right to choose. Privacy protection measures prevent users from truly understanding and controlling how the platform uses their data. Users’ privacy judgments are not based on calm and rational choices but are constantly changing in a digital environment shaped by emotions, social expectations, and even digital habits (Cloarec et al., 2024). Therefore, it is not that users do not care about privacy but that they have gradually become accustomed to not questioning the loss of privacy.

Deepfake Case As a Warning

In 2024, the Deepfake scandal caused by AI technology in South Korea is a warning that when technology can easily tamper with, copy, and manipulate images, sounds, and behaviors, the identities and photos of innocent female users are stolen and spread in an obscene way (Oaten & Lee, 2024). As a result, the privacy risks far exceed the scope of data collection. From celebrities to ordinary users, everyone may become a victim of AI abuse without knowing it. The platform’s response to this is often vague and lacks a truly transparent supervision and accountability mechanism. Therefore, true privacy protection does not rely on bans, but on improving the data transparency of the platform and rebuilding users’ digital literacy and privacy awareness. As Zuckerberg pointed out, as the Internet continues to play an increasingly important role in daily life, the question we should care about is what the right regulation is (Flew, 2021).

First, the platform’s participation mechanism often conceals the true boundaries of data use. Without a mandatory data transparency policy, it is difficult for users to know when and how their privacy is leaked. Secondly, the reconstruction of privacy awareness requires not only the cooperation of the platform, but also the users’ awareness of personal data and privacy protection (Allahrakha, 2023). This not only means spending a few more minutes clicking to agree to the terms when registering but also questioning the logic behind algorithm recommendations in daily use. Digital literacy should be the essential ability of every online citizen. Finally, effective supervision should not prohibit and block, but the state should formulate policies to prevent the platform from disseminating third-party data, clarify the scope and conditions of data sharing, and prevent user data from being disseminated and abused in an unordered manner and at the same time, improving data transparency and giving users the right to know and maintain privacy. For example, Australia’s legal framework aims to balance the need for effective cybersecurity measures and the protection of personal privacy rights (Allahrakha, 2023).

From Paradox to Digital Privacy Right

In the digital world, privacy is often sacrificed because “you can’t have your cake and eat it too” (Dienlin & Breuer, 2022). Privacy may seem like a luxury right. If we want to enjoy the benefits of online platforms and free services, we cannot imagine that our data is fully controlled and perfectly protected (Dienlin & Breuer, 2022). However, the problem needs to be solved to minimize the harm, and individuals, platforms, and countries should work together to build a transparent, responsible data ecosystem with user rights at its core. Only through consensus and co-construction can privacy no longer be a paradoxical compromise but a basic right in the digital society.

---

References

Allahrakha, N. (2023). Balancing cyber-security and privacy: Legal and ethical considerations in the digital age. Legal Issues in the Digital Age, 4(2), 78–121. https://doi.org/10.17323/10.17323/2713-2749.2023.2.78.121

Bonet, I. (2025, January 17). US TikTok refugees flee to the Chinese app Xiaohongshu. EL PAÍS English. https://english.elpais.com/technology/2025-01-17/us-tiktok-refugees-flee-to-the-chinese-app-xiaohongshu.html

Bhalla, N. (2025, February 14). US TikTok ban: Which other countries have banned the app? Context. https://www.context.news/big-tech/us-tiktok-ban-which-other-countries-have-banned-the-app

Cloarec, J., Meyer‐Waarden, L., & Munzel, A. (2024). Transformative privacy calculus: Conceptualizing the personalization‐privacy paradox on social media. Psychology and Marketing, 41(7), 1574–1596. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21998

Dienlin, T., & Breuer, J. (2022). Privacy is dead, long live privacy! Journal of Media  Psychology Theories Methods and Applications, 35(3), 159–168.    https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105/a000357

Ewe, K. (2025, January 14). TikTok users flock to Chinese app RedNote before US ban. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c2475l7zpqyo

Flew, T. (2021) Regulating Platforms. Cambridge: Polity.

Grandinetti, J., & Bruinsma, J. (2023). The affective algorithms of conspiracy TikTok. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 67(3), 274–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2022.2140806

Ionescu, C. G., & Licu, M. (2023). Are TikTok Algorithms Influencing Users’ Self-Perceived Identities and Personal Values? A Mini Review. Social Sciences, 12(8), 465. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12080465

Oaten, J., & Lee, S. (2024, September 7). Deepfake pornography ring linked to South Korean university uncovered after years-long sting – ABC News. ABC News. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-08/south-korea-deepfake-pornography-telegram-app-sex-crimes/104314174

Rauhofer, J. (2008). Privacy is dead, get over it! 1 Information privacy and the dream of a risk-free society. Information & Communications Technology Law, 17(3), 185–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600830802472990

Reporter, G. S. (2025, January 14). More than half a million ‘TikTok refugees’ flock to China’s RedNote as ban looms. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/jan/14/tiktok-ban-rednote-app

Tidy, J. (2024, March 19). Is TikTok really a danger to the West? https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-64797355

Tucker, E. (2022, December 2). FBI director raises national security concerns about TikTok | AP News. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/technology-china-united-states-national-security-government-and-politics-ac5c29cafaa1fc6bee990ed7e1fe5afc

Xu, J. (2025, January 16). US ‘TikTok refugees’ are fleeing to Chinese app RedNote. It’s a new phase of the digital cold war. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/us-tiktok-refugees-are-fleeing-to-chinese-app-rednote-its-a-new-phase-of-the-digital-cold-war-247342