TikTok Blocks 'Epstein' Messages Days After Trump-Ally Takeover as EU Debates Its Own Surveillance Plans

TikTok users in the United States are reporting that direct messages containing the word "Epstein" are being blocked by the platform. The issues emerged just days after the app transferred to majority American ownership under a deal backed by President Donald Trump and his allies.

According to NPR, when some users attempt to send messages containing the name, an automatic prompt declares that the message "may be in violation of our Community Guidelines" and refuses to deliver it. TikTok said it is investigating the issue and that it has no rules against sharing the name.

A TikTok spokesman told NPR that the blocking is happening inconsistently, with some users able to send such messages while others cannot.

The New Ownership

The censorship allegations come less than a week after TikTok completed a deal transferring its US operations to a new entity called TikTok USDS Joint Venture LLC. According to Al Jazeera, the new ownership structure includes Oracle, Silver Lake, and Abu Dhabi-based MGX, each holding a 15 percent stake.

Oracle is led by Larry Ellison, a longtime Trump ally. ByteDance, the Chinese parent company, retains a 19.9 percent stake despite the original law requiring a full separation.

Trump thanked Chinese President Xi Jinping for approving the deal, according to Fortune, and said he would be remembered by those who use and love TikTok.

California Launches Investigation

California Governor Gavin Newsom announced he is launching a review into whether TikTok is violating state law by censoring Trump-critical content, NBC Los Angeles reported.

California Senator Scott Wiener said his video about legislation allowing people to sue ICE agents received zero views after posting. He wrote on X that TikTok is now "state-controlled media."

TikTok blamed the issues on a power outage at one of its data centers, according to CNBC, and said none of its content moderation rules have changed.

A Tale of Two Approaches: Private Censorship vs. State Surveillance

The TikTok controversy offers a stark contrast to ongoing debates in the European Union over the so-called "Chat Control" proposal.

In the US, the concern is that a private company with political ties might be filtering speech to protect the powerful. In the EU, the debate centers on whether governments themselves should be scanning private communications.

The EU's Child Sexual Abuse Regulation, known as "Chat Control," would have required platforms to scan encrypted messages for illegal content. After years of opposition led by Germany and privacy advocates, the mandatory scanning provisions were removed in November 2025, according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

The current proposal allows for "voluntary" scanning by platforms but no longer requires breaking encryption. Trilogue negotiations between the Council, Parliament, and Commission began in December 2025, with a final deal expected by mid-2026, according to EU Perspectives.

Privacy advocate and former MEP Patrick Breyer has warned that even "voluntary" provisions could create indirect pressure on platforms to scan content, and that age verification requirements still harm online anonymity.

The Privacy Paradox

Both cases illustrate the same fundamental tension: who should control what people can say online, and under what circumstances?

In the US, the fear is that platforms aligned with political figures will censor speech to protect allies. The Trump administration's connection to Jeffrey Epstein has been a recurring topic, and blocking the name from private messages raises obvious questions.

In the EU, the concern is different but related. Chat Control, even in its watered-down form, would create infrastructure for mass surveillance of private communications. Once built, such systems can be expanded. Today's child protection tool becomes tomorrow's political censorship machine.

The European Parliament has positioned itself against indiscriminate scanning of communications. Germany blocked the original proposal. This suggests that European democratic institutions are, for now, more skeptical of surveillance infrastructure than their American counterparts are of corporate influence over speech.

What It Means for Europe

For Europeans watching the TikTok situation, the lesson is clear: ownership matters. When platforms are controlled by political allies of those in power, content moderation becomes a political weapon.

The EU's Digital Services Act requires platforms to be transparent about content moderation. The TikTok case shows why such requirements exist. Without transparency, users cannot know if they are being silenced for political reasons.

Chat Control, even in its current form, would move in the opposite direction, creating scanning systems that operate by default rather than requiring transparency. The fact that European lawmakers have resisted this for three years is a sign that privacy still has defenders in Brussels.

Whether that resistance holds through 2026 remains to be seen.