WASHINGTON – With his hands folded on his lap and a black tumbler with a TikTok logo in front of him, TikTok chief executive Chew Shou Zi was a picture of calm facing a sea of photojournalists snapping his picture in the 10 minutes before the start of Thursdays House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing.
But as impassive as he was under fire, Mr Chew whom the Washington Post described as soft-spoken, earnest and temperate during a heated hearing that lasted five hours could not convince the congressmen that the social media app did not pose a national security threat to the United States.
The minds of the more than 50 congressmen who grilled the Singaporean CEO appeared mostly made up from the start. Many were vocally sceptical that TikTok was truly not beholden to Beijing, given its ownership by Chinese parent company ByteDance.
The app, used by more than 150 million Americans, has been accused of being anything from a Chinese espionage tool to a method of indoctrinating children amid soaring US-China tensions, though lawmakers have not presented evidence of such occurrences.
We do not trust TikTok will ever embrace American values, said committee chairman Cathy Rodgers in her opening statement, which she read out before posing questions to Mr Chew. TikTok has repeatedly chosen the path for more control, more surveillance and more manipulation. Your platform should be banned. Remote video URL Mr Frank Pallone Jr, the committees top Democrat, was dismissive of Mr Chews characterisation of TikTok as performing a public service.
Im not convinced that the benefits outweigh the risks that it poses to Americans in its present form, he said.
Several Republican congressmen came armed with montages of problematic TikTok clips, as well as poster displays which aides held up behind them for the cameras.
Republican Gus Bilirakis of Florida, who grilled Mr Chew on his content moderation policies, aired several TikTok videos that encouraged suicide, adding that such videos drove Long Island teen Chase Nasca to take his own life in 2022.
His parents Dean and Michelle Nasca, who were in the audience, sobbed as Mr Bilirakis told Mr Chew that his company had destroyed their lives.
His For You page was sadly a window to discover suicide, said the lawmaker, referring to TikToks feed of algorithmically recommended videos. Its unacceptable, sir!
His party colleague Kat Cammack, also of Florida, showed a video of a gun with a caption threatening the committee with violence, and asked Mr Chew why it had been allowed to remain up for 41 days.
He was not given a chance to respond, though the clip was taken down shortly afterwards. Remote video URL US lawmakers grill TikToks Singaporean CEO Chew Shou Zi. With five minutes each, the lawmakers hurried through their prepared lines of questioning, pressing Mr Chew for yes or no replies and dismissing his caveats on technical questions. He was also repeatedly talked over or dismissed mid-sentence.
You have not given straightforward answers. We do not find you credible on these things, said Republican Neal Dunn of Florida, who said TikTok would censor content on behalf of the Communist Party of China.
Mr Chew replied: Congressman, you have given me no time to answer your questions. I reject the characterisations. More On This Topic TikTok attacked for China ties as US lawmakers push for ban 5 key moments from TikTok CEO S'porean Chew Shou Zis combative hearing in US Congress He was evasive particularly on ByteDances current access to TikToks US user data and repeatedly dodged questions on the Chinese governments treatment of Uighur Muslims, which elicited audible sighs from several lawmakers.
Republican Kelly Armstrong of North Dakota, referring to the Communist Party of China, said: You have absolutely tied yourself in knots to avoid criticising the CCPs treatment of the Uighur population and I think it begs the question if the CCP demanded that ByteDance hand over all the data that they had on US users and ByteDance refused, I wonder what would happen?
Mr Chew at times stressed his Singaporean roots as he tried to distance himself and TikTok from China, recounting in his opening remarks how he had met his wife while studying in America.
He also told Congress that his two children, who live in Singapore, were not on TikTok because the platform is not available there for children under 13 years old. @shou.time
magician for hire, anyone? #metgala2022 #magic ? Perfect – Bellaaa The New York Times wrote that the hearing had been harsher in tone than previous congressional hearings featuring American executives of social media companies, a point that Mr Chew also alluded to throughout his testimony.
When Democrat Darren Soto of Florida said that TikTok should be an American company with American values, Mr Chew hit back a rare instance in the hearing as he argued that American ownership did not guarantee data standards.
With a lot of respect, American social (media) companies do not have a good track record with data privacy and user security. Look at Facebook and Cambridge Analytica, he said, in a jibe at its data misuse scandal.
It is not clear how lawmakers will proceed after the hearing, or how quickly they might pass legislation to strengthen the Biden administrations legal powers to ban TikTok.
Mr Brandon Clark, a member of the public who attended the hearing, told The Straits Times that he found the insistence on yes or no answers harsh, typical American s***.
You just want to get a simplified answer when the response requires a bit more clarity and detail, said Mr Clark, whose gummy company BDE Gummy advertises on TikTok. @tiktok
Our CEO, Shou Chew, shares a special message on behalf of the entire TikTok team to thank our community of 150 million Americans ahead of his congressional hearing later this week. ? original sound – TikTok More On This Topic From Facebook intern to TikTok CEO: Who is S'porean Chew Shou Zi? TikToks CEO grilled in Congress: Whats next for the platform in the US? He said that Mr Chew appeared frustrated, like he was constantly hitting a brick wall with the congressmen.
Its like hes being led into these questions where there is no win, said Mr Clark. Hes scared, but rightfully so. You can have all the money in the world, but this is influence and power. This is regulation, a very different domain.
Musician Greg Spero, one of the dozen or so TikTok content creators in the audience, told ST that Mr Chew and the congressmen appeared to be talking past each other.
In this hearing, it seems that nobody wants to know the benefits of TikTok and whats actually being done, but they want to create a public spectacle, he said.
On the flip side, Mr Spero said, Democrat Jamaal Bowman, a congressman who spoke against a TikTok ban at a Wednesday press conference, focused on the apps upsides without addressing the concerns around it.
I wish I could witness something where people are sitting down and having a discussion that clearly outlines the positives and negatives of what were daling with, Mr Spero said. @straitstimes
ICYMI: Heres what went down during the hearing between TikToks CEO Chew Shou Zi and the US Congress ? #TikTok #TikTokNews #Congress #TikTokCEO #ShouZiChew #ChewShouZi #Wifi #internet #congressionalhearing #TikTokban #tiktokhearing #SGNews ? original sound – The Straits Times – The Straits Times Remote video URL More On This Topic TikTok users protest against proposals for US ban at Congress TikTok caught in US-China battle over its powerful algorithm
Almost 7,000 Afghan nationals are being relocated to the UK following a massive data breach by the British military that successive governments tried to keep secret with a superinjunction.
The blunder exposed the personal information of close to 20,000 individuals, endangering them and their families – with as many as 100,000 people impacted in total.
The UK only informed everyone on Tuesday – three-and-a-half years after their data was compromised.
The Ministry of Defence (MoD) said the relocation costs alone directly linked to the data breach will be around £850m. An internal government document from February this year said the cost could rise to £7bn, but an MoD spokesperson said that this was an outdated figure.
However, the total cost to the taxpayer of existing schemes to assist Afghans who are deemed eligible for British support, as well as the additional cost from the breach, will come to at least £6bn.
In addition, litigation against the UK arising from the mistake could add additional cost, as well as whatever the government has already spent on the superinjunction.
Details about the blunder can finally be made public after a judge lifted the injunction that had been sought by the government.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:46
Defence secretary on Afghan leak
Barings Law, a law firm that is representing around 1,000 of the victims, accused the government of trying to hide the truth from the public following a lengthy legal battle.
Defence Secretary John Healey offered a “sincere apology” for the data breach in a statement to MPs in the House of Commons on Tuesday afternoon.
He said he had felt “deeply concerned about the lack of transparency” around the data breach, adding: “No government wishes to withhold information from the British public, from parliamentarians or the press in this manner.”
The previous Conservative government set up a secret scheme in 2023 – which can only now be revealed – to relocate Afghan nationals impacted by the data breach but who were not eligible for an existing programme to relocate and assist individuals who had worked for the British government in Afghanistan.
Some 6,900 Afghans – comprising 1,500 people named on the list as well as their dependents – are being relocated to the UK as part of this programme.
Image: Afghan co-workers and their families board a plane during the Kabul airlift in August 2021. Pic: South Korean Defense Ministry/ZUMA Press Wire/Shutterstock
This comes on top of the many thousands more who are being moved until the Afghan Relocation and Assistance Policy (ARAP). A lot of these individuals are also caught up in the data breach.
The Times, which has been battling the injunction, said a total of 18,500 people have so far been relocated to the UK, including those directly impacted plus their dependents.
Spotify
This content is provided by Spotify, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spotify cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spotify cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spotify cookies for this session only.
Some 5,400 more Afghans who have already received invitation letters will be flown to the UK in the coming weeks, bringing the total number of Afghans affected by the breach being brought to the UK to 23,900. The rest of the affected Afghans will be left behind, the newspaper reported.
How did the data breach happen?
The disaster is thought to have been triggered by the careless handling of an email that contained a list of the names and other details of 18,714 Afghan nationals. They had been trying to apply to a British government scheme to support those who helped or worked with UK forces in Afghanistan that were fighting the Taliban between 2001 and 2021.
Image: People gathered desperately near evacuation control checkpoints during the crisis. Pic: AP
Image: The evacuation at Kabul airport was chaotic. Pic: AP
The collapse of the western-backed Afghan government that year saw the Taliban return to power. The new government regards anyone who worked with British or other foreign forces during the previous two decades as a traitor.
A source said a small number of people named on the list are known to have subsequently been killed, though it is not clear if this was a direct result of the data breach.
It is also not clear whether the Taliban has the list – only that the MoD lost control of the information.
Image: Taliban members on the second anniversary of the fall of Kabul. Pic: Reuters
Adnan Malik, head of data protection at Barings Law, said: “This is an incredibly serious data breach, which the Ministry of Defence has repeatedly tried to hide from the British public.
“It involved the loss of personal and identifying information about Afghan nationals who have helped British forces to defeat terrorism and support security and stability in the region.
“A total of around 20,000 individuals have been affected, putting them and their loved ones at serious risk of violence from opponents and armed groups.”
The law firm is working with around 1,000 of those impacted “to pursue potential legal action”.
It is thought that only a minority of the names on the list – about 10 to 15% – would have been eligible for help under the Afghan Relocation and Assistance Policy (ARAP).
The breach occurred in February 2022, when Boris Johnson was prime minister, but was only discovered by the British military in August 2023.
A superinjunction – preventing the reporting of the mistake – was imposed in September of that year.
It meant the extraordinary – and costly – plan to transport thousands of Afghans to the UK took place in secret until now.
Sir Keir Starmer’s government inherited the scandal.
What is a superinjunction?
In UK law, a superinjunction prevents the publication of certain information.
However, unlike a regular injunction, it also prevents the media from reporting on the existence of the injunction itself.
Superinjunctions can only be granted by the high court, with applicants required to meet stringent legal tests of necessity, proportionality and the risk of serious harm.
They are most commonly used in cases involving breaches of privacy, confidential business information, or where there is a risk of significant reputational damage.
Why was superinjunction lifted?
An internal review into the affair was launched at the start of this year by Paul Rimmer, a retired civil servant.
It played down the risk to those whose data is included in the breached dataset should it fall into the hands of the Taliban.
The review said it was “unlikely to substantially change an individual’s existing exposure given the volume of data already available”.
It also concluded that “it appears unlikely that merely being on the dataset would be grounds for targeting” and it is “therefore also unlikely that family members… will be targeted simply because the ‘principal’ appears… in the dataset”.
This is why a High Court judge ruled that the superinjunction could be lifted.
Mr Malik, however, said that he believes there is still a risk to those named in the breach.
He added: “Our claimants continue to live with the fear of reprisal against them and their families, when they should have been met with gratitude and discretion for their service.
“We would expect substantial financial payments for each claimant in any future legal action. While this will not fully undo the harm they have been exposed to, it will enable them to move forward and rebuild their lives.”
Latest MoD data breach
While the MoD’s data breach is by far the largest involving Afghan nationals, it is not the first.
Earlier this month, the MoD said Afghans impacted by a separate mistake could claim up to £4,000 in compensation four years after the incident happened.
Human error resulted in the personal information of 265 Afghans who had worked alongside British troops being shared with hundreds of others who were on the same email distribution list in September 2021.
In December 2023, the UK Information Commissioner fined the MoD £350,000 and said the “egregious” breach could have been life-threatening.
An Afghan man who worked for the British military has told Sky News he feels betrayed and “completely lost (his) mind” after his identity formed part of a massive data breach.
The man, who spoke anonymously to Sky News from Afghanistan, says that for more than 10 years he worked for British forces
But now he says he regrets working alongside troops, who were first deployed to Afghanistan in 2001.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:59
Afghans being relocated after data breach
“I have done everything for the British forces… I regret that – why (did) I put my family in danger because of that? Is this is justice?
“We work for them, for [the] British, we help them. So now we are left behind, right now. And from today, I don’t know about my future.”
He described receiving an email warning him that his details had been revealed.
He said: “When I saw this one story… I completely lost my mind. I just thought… about my future… my family’s.
“I’ve got two kids. All my family are… in danger. Right now… I’m just completely lost.”
Spotify
This content is provided by Spotify, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spotify cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spotify cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spotify cookies for this session only.
The mistake by the Ministry of Defence in early 2022 ranks among the worst security breaches in modern British history because of the cost and risk posed to the lives of thousands of Afghans.
On Tuesday, a court order – preventing the media reporting details of a secret relocation programme – was lifted.
Defence Secretary John Healey said about 6,900 Afghans and their family members have been relocated or were on their way to the UK under the previously secret scheme.
He said no one else from Afghanistan would be offered asylum, after a government review found little evidence of intent from the Taliban to seek retribution.
But the anonymous Afghan man who spoke to Sky News disputed this. He claimed the Taliban, who returned to power in 2021, were actively seeking people who worked with British forces.
“My family is finished,” he said. “I request… kindly request from the British government… the King… please evacuate us.
“Maybe tomorrow we will not be anymore. Please, please help us.”
Mr Trump is expected to travel to Scotland in the coming weeks to visit his golf courses ahead of an official state visit in September.
“We’re going to be meeting with the British prime minister, very respectful, and we are going to have a meeting with him, probably in Aberdeen, and we’re going to do a lot of different things.
“We’re going to also refine the trade deal that we’ve made.
“So we’ll be meeting mostly […] at probably one of my properties, or maybe not, depending on what happens, but we’ll be in Aberdeen, in Scotland, meeting with the prime minister.”
Image: Donald Trump speaks to reporters outside the White House. Pic: Reuters
The UK and US signed a trade deal earlier this year that reduced car and aerospace tariffs, but questions have remained about a promise from Washington to slash steel tariffs.
In May, the White House said it would exempt the UK from plans for a 25% tariff on global steel imports but that is yet to be ratified and the levy has since been doubled on all other countries.
Mr Trump had insisted that unless Britain could finalise the details of a metals trade deal with the US by 9 July, when wider “Liberation Day” tariff pauses were expected to expire, he would slap the UK with a 50% rate as well.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:49
Who will be positively impacted by the UK-US trade deal?
However that pause was extended until 1 August, with the US president saying nations would instead get letters informing them of his plans.
Downing Street is still hoping it can secure 0% tariffs on steel.
Spotify
This content is provided by Spotify, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spotify cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spotify cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spotify cookies for this session only.
On Tuesday, a Downing Street spokesperson played down the significance of the meeting in Scotland, stressing it was a private trip so it “will not be a formal bilateral”.
Since taking office in January, Mr Trump has imposed tariffs on countries across the world in a bid to boost domestic production and address trade deficits.
As well as sector specific tariffs, there is a baseline tariff of 10% for most other imports, though some countries face higher rates.
The UK was the first to hash out a deal on exemptions after a successful charm offensive by Sir Keir.
Mr Trump has praised the PM, telling the BBC earlier on Tuesday: “I really like the prime minister a lot, even though he’s a liberal.”
There are also plans for Scottish First Minister John Swinney to meet Mr Trump during his trip.
It will be followed by the official state visit between 17-19 September, when Mr Trump will be hosted by the King and Queen at Windsor Castle and accompanied by his wife Melania.
It will be Mr Trump’s second state visit to the UK, having previously been hosted during his first term in 2019.