I was homeless on and off for the first 18 years of my life. What got me out of that cycle was earning a full-ride scholarship for journalism back in 2011.
Despite the instability of my early years, I built a future for myself through storytelling. Journalism gave me a way out, a way to give people a voice I felt I didn’t have. But even with a solid foundation, life has a way of throwing unexpected twists.
Like the gut-punch feeling of waking up after an amazing night, only to realize something—or someone—you thought was secure has suddenly disappeared.
That’s exactly how I felt when my freshly made TikTok account—one that racked up over 10,000 views within a day—was permanently banned overnight. I had gone to bed excited about growing a platform dedicated to telling accurate stories about the Luigi Mangione case.
But instead of waking up to a feed full of random videos tailored to my latest thoughts, I was met with an ugly message: Your account has been permanently banned.
I reluctantly started my first TikTok account in 2020, fed up with the low-quality arguments dominating what used to be known as Twitter. TikTok felt different—friendlier, less competitive. It actually fostered a sense of community. No matter your niche, people were sharing knowledge that had once been gatekept.
I loved stumbling across videos with tips on how to go viral and build a following fast. I quickly adapted to the strategy of posting four times a day to get in the game—and it worked. Within a week, I went from a few hundred followers to my first thousand.
For years, I hovered around 70,000 followers. Then, everything changed when a certain murderer became a media sensation. The idea of a modern-day assassin on the loose fascinated me. I didn’t care about the politics—I wanted to know who they were, why they did it, and if they were going to own it.
From that moment on, I passionately followed the case as it unfolded, bringing me back to my journalistic roots.
What started as speculation about the case turned into on-the-ground reporting in New York in December, witnessing the chaos firsthand. My following exploded—I gained over 30,000 followers in less than a month. After attending the New York State court hearing, seeing Mangione, the alleged killer, in the flesh, and sharing my experience, my followers started calling me the “People’s Journalist.”
Then, the censorship began. After a month of covering the case, my videos started getting flagged for violating community guidelines. At first, it was sporadic. But after the U.S. threat to ban TikTok, every post I made suddenly violated some ridiculous guideline—Civic and Election Integrity, Synthetic and Manipulated Media (they claimed I used AI when I didn’t).
Each violation added to a growing warning on my account, the threat of permanent suspension looming over me.
Two days before the official U.S. ban, I got hit first. Permanent suspension.
And a few days ago, it happened again.
Viewpoint Discrimination
As a journalist, I take the First Amendment seriously—I couldn’t do my job without it, and more importantly, I couldn’t express myself. Viewpoint discrimination occurs when the government or a platform like TikTok regulates speech based on a specific opinion or perspective.
Engaging in viewpoint discrimination is a direct violation of the First Amendment in the U.S. because it suppresses certain viewpoints while allowing others.
I noticed a clear pattern: accounts that focused on Luigi Mangione’s looks, fan content, or anything lighthearted remained untouched. But any account with the potential to shift the conversation, influence public discourse, or challenge the mainstream narrative was flagged as a violation.
Legacy media can say his name without consequence, yet when independent creators attempt to educate the public, their content is taken down. This makes it clear—TikTok is actively suppressing balanced and unbiased reporting of the Mangione case.
Allowing selective content about someone who is innocent until proven guilty is a violation of the First Amendment. It’s a violation of my First Amendment rights. And I don’t know about you, but I don’t take kindly to being violated in any way.
First Amendment
TikTok legally has the right to regulate content, but it does not have the right to silence specific viewpoints protected under the First Amendment. While TikTok is a private company and not directly bound by the First Amendment, it functions as a modern public square and must take our rights into account.
The First Amendment protects against government censorship, not private company decisions. However, when a platform like TikTok becomes a dominant force in public communication, its ability to control speech raises serious constitutional and ethical concerns.
In Marsh v. Alabama, the Supreme Court ruled in Grace Marsh’s favor when she argued that her First Amendment rights were violated. She had been removed from a privately owned town that functioned as a public space. Because the town had public streets and served a public function, it was subject to constitutional scrutiny.
This ruling established the principle that when something privately owned functions like a public space and serves a public function, it must respect constitutional rights. So yes, even you, TikTok!
The issue becomes even more concerning when government officials pressure or collaborate with platforms to remove content, as this can be seen as an indirect form of government censorship.
TikTok’s suppression of independent journalists is a deeply troubling issue—not just for me, but for all creators. The implications set a dangerous precedent for how information is controlled in the digital age.
When a dominant social media platform like TikTok suppresses content that does not violate its community guidelines, it sends a clear message to independent creators: their ability to report, analyze, and question authority can be revoked at any time.
The banning of my accounts reinforces a system where only corporate media and government-approved narratives remain visible. This undermines the fundamental principle of a free press, which is essential for holding power accountable.
By silencing journalists who provide alternative viewpoints or investigative reporting, TikTok strengthens a landscape where only pre-approved narratives thrive. This not only stifles independent voices but also discourages future journalists from pursuing hard-hitting stories, knowing their work could be erased without warning. It conditions audiences to accept algorithm-driven information rather than engaging with diverse perspectives and critical thinking.
If this trend continues, social media will no longer serve as a tool for democratic discourse but rather as a mechanism for controlling what people see, think, and believe. This isn’t just a concern for TikTok users—it’s a direct threat to free speech, independent journalism, and public discourse as a whole.
The question isn’t whether censorship is happening. It’s whether we’re willing to let it continue.
We’re at a turning point. Social media was supposed to give independent voices a platform, but it’s turning into a tool for silencing dissent.
This isn’t just about me. It’s about every creator, journalist, and free thinker who dares to challenge the mainstream narrative.
Today, it’s my voice being censored. Tomorrow, it could be yours.
If you care about independent journalism, free speech, and the right to question power:
-
Share this article so more people know what’s happening.
-
Hold Big Tech accountable—demand transparency on how and why voices are silenced.
They want us to be silent. I refuse. Will you?