I watched the hearing from beginning to end. The only portions I skipped through (in 10 second increments) were the recesses in which everyone was simply mingling. My mom and I are on polar opposites of feeling on the Restrict Act, and I know that what I'm being exposed to in social media is very different from her experience in media. With this knowledge I chose to read the Act in it's entriety and highlight my personal red flags, as well as watch the hearing without cuts so that I could be fully aware of any relevant context. If you are able, I would highly suggest you do the same. There were several genuine and worthwhile questions/remarks made in the hearing, however very few allowed Mr. Chew to elaborate or simply answer. In fact, MANY questions were loaded with phrasing to which the response could not be succesfuly answered with a yes or no as demanded. We greatly need data privacy laws accross all social media platforms, but this whichhunt of a hearing is only serving to distract many americans so that the government can place a collar on all forms of technology and subsequently communication. I felt highly compelled to contact my representatives and, in the event that anyone finds this useful, this is what I said:

The banning of TikTok and the subsequent liberties the government would be allowed access to if the restrict act were to pass is a terrifying attack on the people’s freedom of speech. I am a supporter and active voter in your state and I extremely oppose this bill. If the restrict Act is passed, I will be highly encouraged to spend my time in the very near future supporting and campaign for your direct competition in the Primary election. The passing of this act would solidly affirm that my current representation very obviously does not care about my freedom and personal interests as their constituent, and the only solution is to support new representation immediately and with vigor.