There's a difference between the officially stated reason and the real one. The government still tries to keep up the pretence of a functional democracy, so it can't outright say they are banning things that they don't like.
You're free to buy the party line but at least question whether the reasoning makes any sense. Does banning a handful of apps while increasing Chinese investments and imports really aling with the official stand that this was a retaliatory action?
Even a pretending government sometimes make the right decision, even if the motivation is at best questionable.
The nasty influence of TikTok outside China has been very clear for a long time. This is part of modern warfare, establishment is only really slow to process this fact. Also because of the misplaced idea that a democratic constitution with a rule of law is something that magically was always there and will forever be there, even if we sit passively down and see people rising that promise to break that constitution down.
> Nothing like freedom of a speech, government oversight etc. etc. the article is trying to portray.
There's not much freedom of speech in India: Only to an extent you don't ruffle any features and/or aren't influential enough to effect any outcome. Besides, the society itself enforces a crude form of censorship on whatever is taboo or controversial or fringe.
Nothing like freedom of a speech, government oversight etc. etc. the article is trying to portray.