Diyi Liu

The governance of online speech is increasingly a battleground shaped by competing social expectations. This study investigates TikTok’s content moderation in Indonesia and Pakistan, two countries with vast market potential and delicate social and moral stances. Through document analysis and in-depth interviews with government officials, industry representatives, and civil society experts, it examines how stakeholders navigate normative and pragmatic considerations in global speech governance. The findings first highlight distinct regulatory approaches: Indonesia’s collaborative yet paternalistic model preferring fines over bans. It emphasizes administrative compliance through jurisdictional control over platform rules. In contrast, Pakistan’s defensive stance prioritizes infrastructure-level monitoring and restrictions, often resorting to platform bans to enforce control over moral and religious content. Unlike its Silicon Valley counterparts, TikTok demonstrates strategic compliance, deliberately sidestepping controversy by delegating sensitive decisions to state authorities and avoiding political roles. While normative consensus on appropriate content remains elusive, civil society organizations mediate crucial accountability relationships through strategic activism, coalition-building, and international networks. The study discusses the tensions and cost-benefit appraisals of each actor group, identifies essential principles for legitimate speech governance, and examines challenges in translating these principles into actionable frameworks.

The internet has become an increasingly vital platform for health-related information, especially in upper-middle-income countries such as China. While previous research has suggested that online health information seeking (OHIS) can significantly impact individuals’ engagement in health behaviors, most research focused on patient-centered health communication. This study aims to examine how OHIS influences health behavior engagement among Chinese internet users, focusing on the role of eHealth literacy and perceived information quality in influencing relationships. Methods:An online cross-sectional survey was conducted in November 2021 among 10,000 Chinese internet users, using quota sampling based on sex, age, and urban and rural residence, in line with the 48th Statistical Report on Internet Development of China. Nonparametric tests were used to examine the differences in eHealth literacy across sociodemographic groups. Partial correlation analysis and stepwise linear regression were conducted to test the associations between key variables. Confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling were conducted to test the hypotheses. Our study identified significant disparities in functional and critical eHealth literacy between urban and rural residents across age groups, income levels, education backgrounds, and health conditions (all P<.001). In terms of sex and regional differences, we found higher functional literacy among female users than male users, and critical literacy varied significantly across different regions. The proposed structural model showed excellent fit (χ2404=4183.6, χ2404=10.4,P<.001; root mean square error of approximation value of 0.031, 95% CI 0.030-.031; standardized root mean square residual value of 0.029; and comparative fit index value of 0.955), highlighting reciprocal associations between 2 types of eHealth literacy and OHIS. Participants’ functional eHealth literacy, critical eHealth literacy, and OHIS have positive impacts on their health behavioral engagement. Perceived information quality was found to mediate the influence of OHIS on health behavior (b=0.003, 95% CI 0.002-0.003; P<.001). The study revealed the pathways linking sociodemographic factors, eHealth literacy, OHIS, and perceived information quality and how they together influenced health outcomes. The findings underscore the significance of enhancing eHealth literacy and improving information quality to promote better health outcomes among Chinese internet users.

Content moderation comes with trade-offs and moral dilemmas, particularly for transnational platforms governing borderline content where the boundaries of acceptability are subject to debate. While extensive research has explored the legality and legitimacy of platformised speech governance in established democracies, few address the complexities of less-than-democratic developing nations. Through sociolegal analysis and controversy mapping of TikTok’s localised moderation in South and Southeast Asia, the study examines how major actors negotiate the shifting boundaries of online speech. The analysis reveals that neither the platform nor regional states are well-positioned to achieve sound governance of borderline content. Primarily, TikTok localises its moderation based on pragmatic necessity rather than moral obligations, deliberately sidestepping contentious political controversies. Governments demonstrate determined efforts to control online discourse, leveraging legal uncertainty to further political agendas. Thus, local content governance often relies on vague rationales around securitisation and morality. The contradictory motives of (de)politicising borderline moderation seemingly counterbalance each other, yet in practice lead to an accountability vacuum where legitimate interests are sidelined. Given the lack of normative common ground, ensuring procedural justice and encouraging civic participation are essential to counteract rhetoric that rationalises imposition of certain speech norms hinging on imbalanced political power.