Reciprocity in this case is supposed to mean "We allow your companies in as long as they follow the local laws, and you will allow our companies in as long as t

Reciprocity in this case is supposed to mean "We allow your companies in as long as they follow the local laws, and you will allow our companies in as long as they follow the local laws." TikTok is following American law, which is significantly more permissible in terms of speech than China. American social media giants thought it was too damaging to follow Chinese law and voluntarily retreated (Google), played the game until they got burned (Facebook) or silently comply (Bing/Microsoft). In the case of Facebook, they didn't want to share data on Uighur separatists, who organized protests on Facebook, which in turn left hundreds of people dead. Barring any kind of moral judgment, this obviously wouldn't fly in the US either. No, at the core of this issue is the realisation that a social media giant has enormous influence on the minds of the next generation, and having this be in the hands of foreign powers is very dangerous. Of course, the US doesn't want to be super open about this, since 4/5 global players in social media are American, and they'd rather not have other regions get similar thoughts. In the end, the reasoning is sound while the justification is hypocritical.