Latest stories

Taiwan needs to get ready for Trump 2.0

'Climate finance' saddles Pacific island nations with more debt

Palestine's outlook dark to bleak under Trump 2.0

Claiming - without offering any discernible evidence - that national security risks are so severe that they can't even be shared with the public means citizens are essentially being told they can continue using the app but at their own risk.

Such an obvious appeal to fear, uncertainty and doubt seems to be intentionally crafted to create cognitive dissonance. It not only reinforces an authoritarian stance but more importantly erodes everyone's understanding of security, risk and privacy.

Secrecy: Security by obscurity

By opting for a secretive national security review, Canada has avoided releasing specifics about the alleged risks. Such actions set a dangerous precedent, promoting a“guilty until proven innocent” mindset. This opaque approach could also foster a chilling effect, dissuading foreign investment in Canada – especially in digital sectors.

The secrecy surrounding this decision raises questions about its underlying motivations. It suggests a potential inclination toward controlling information of public interest rather than sharing it with stakeholders.

Whether this was intended to send a message to other Chinese companies in Canada remains to be seen, but such firms currently operate in the retail, e-commerce, banking, energy and resources sectors and are no doubt closely watching the proceedings. That's particularly true given that five other China-linked companies in Canada have been unceremoniously shut down in the past two years.

As a result, it seems more likely than not that Canadian companies operating in China - Magna, Bombardier, Saputo and the Bank of Montreal, among others - may soon face some retaliatory headwinds when it comes to doing business in the Asian country.

Setting a risky precedent

If it's censoring a platform primarily due to foreign ownership, Canada could be setting a precedent that threatens global standards for internet freedom. Such actions risk empowering governments worldwide to impose restrictions on platforms and services in the name of security, potentially stifling freedom of expression and access to information.

When I previously wrote about Zoom and how its obscure development and IP-access practices posed a particular risk to the privacy and confidentiality of children and students during the Covid-19 pandemic, I argued:

Once TikTok's offices are shut down and hundreds of employees are laid off, it will likely be difficult for Canadians to get access to information about the company's safety procedures, ask about online moderation and initiate Privacy Commissioner investigations, simply because TikTok will no longer exist in our country.

Impact on government credibility

I certainly don't expect to have access to privileged information. But the secretive nature of Canada's expulsion of TikTok (or is it truly aimed at its parent company, ByteDance ?) risks undermining public trust in government decisions at a time when it could far better serve as an ideal opportunity for raising awareness among Canadians about genuine security concerns.