Without specified limitations on what views are granted promotion, those of us falling under marginalized umbrellas are left anxious and deeply concerned.

In the latest rendition of social media activism, the gimmicky, short-video-generated app TikTok made headway in 2019 as an advocacy-driven platform. After hitting an estimated one billion installs in February, teenagers in the US, Europe, and China began promoting content related to climate change, medical activism, queer content, and a plethora of videos revealing the horrors of authoritarian governments. Along with more “meme-able” content, of course.

And while the prospect of a user-generated, non-censored platform to discuss social issues seems in line with American values of Free Speech, I can’t help but wonder–just who’s speech are we promoting?

Sure, the answer is easy when students of color are posting about Ivy League universities’ absurd lack of POC resources. But when news platforms give TikTok credibility–and teenagers are granted free range–we have to look at the potential messages that could be spread to billions of impressionable kids. Particularly when politics are involved.

BuzzFeed News is eager to involve themselves in the first round of TikTok’s Free Speech experiments. After announcing they would be hiring “Teen Ambassadors” to create 2020 election coverage content through original TikTok and Instagram videos, BuzzFeed News proposes to give teenagers the same platform as their Pulitzer Prize-winning journalists. The idea behind it: “videos for Gen Z platforms by Gen Z users.”

Though unsurprisingly, BuzzFeed News gives no clear indication of the type of individual they are looking to hire–other than generic messages about being passionate and creative–nor what political views these ambassadors would promote. Bipartisan? Clear liberal or conservative views? A mix between them? Without specified limitations on what views are granted promotion, those of us falling under marginalized umbrellas are left anxious and deeply concerned.

Potentially, these new ambassadors could reveal the nuanced experiences of what it is like to be a queer liberal in Arizona, or how young black teens address racial issues with an overwhelmingly white candidate selection. Or, they could be the newest “deep dive” into the life of a teen Neo-Nazi. The only thing for certain is that BuzzFeed is granting them the resources and branding of a journalist–without any of the ethical training.

From a marketing perspective, it’s genius. Teens are much more likely to absorb information from other teens than a forty-something news reporter. But from a moral perspective, it’s terrifying. Children between the ages of sixteen to nineteen are now in charge of presenting information on the United States’ largest political election, in a time where skepticism against journalism is rampant.

The most frightening part is how truly effective the concept might be. Not only does TikTok have a large scope, but proper use of their algorithms has already led to concerning instances of teh app being used as image management. Police have certainly found it–and are using it to distract from police brutality in some regions. When used effectively, TikTok has unquestionably influenced viewers in a way that is equal parts awe-inspiring and eerie.

Without knowing who is being granted TikTok’s unfiltered Free Speech powers, BuzzFeed’s actions remain questionable. As for the platform itself, the only thing we know for sure is that teens will keep using it to bolster their views and activism. We, as consumers, will have to be the ones discerning the activist content from the propaganda.