Bytedance Second Chance?

President Trump has thrown TikTok yet another lifeline, granting the video app a 75-day extension that allows the company additional time to separate from Beijing and comply with the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act. The app’s future in the U.S. remains uncertain, underscoring broader tensions between government oversight and global tech platforms. 

While the executive order offers the app some breathing room – despite it technically operating in violation of federal law – negotiations remain stalled. A new report from Axios notes there remains confusion over who’s overseeing the process, further delaying talks with potential U.S. buyers.

Meanwhile, TikTok continues to demonstrate its growing economic influence. A recent report from TikTok and Oxford Economics estimates the platform's contribution to the U.S. economy at $84 billion, driven by e-commerce, advertising and job creation. U.S. creators generated over $9 billion in value, with the platform supporting over 730,000 jobs in the U.S.

As companies like Oracle and Amazon – led by Trump allies Larry Ellison and Jeff Bezos – position themselves as potential buyers, the outcome of this standoff could set a precedent for how the U.S. regulates foreign-owned tech platforms, balancing free speech, national security and economic innovation in an increasingly digital world.

For more stories like this, subscribe to the FGS Global Digital Insights newsletter.

In 2025 in the United States, the only certainty is uncertainty – and the need to manage it. Crisis preparation is imperative for businesses to successfully navigate potential threats to reputation, shareholder value and operational resilience. 

While not every crisis can be avoided, most can be anticipated and mitigated with the right preparation. In a recently published Chambers Guide, our crisis management colleagues outline some of the leading U.S. trends that will impact crisis management in the current dynamic and unpredictable environment:

• The information divide: Trust in traditional media has eroded, with a growing reliance on social media and unconventional “newsfluencers.” Organizations must actively monitor misinformation and cultivate direct communication channels to ensure their messages reach key stakeholders, including policymakers.

• A new political playbook: The Trump 2.0 administration brings unpredictability in antitrust enforcement, trade policy and labor relations. Protectionist rhetoric and transactional policymaking will require businesses to assess their supply chains, anticipate scrutiny and build coalitions to navigate shifting priorities.

• Litigation on the rise: Increased government investigations and lawsuit financing are driving higher litigation risks. Companies should expand legal budgets and integrate communications strategies to protect their reputations during high-stakes disputes.

• DEI backlash: Challenges to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs are reshaping corporate culture. Organizations must balance legal compliance with stakeholder expectations, all while staying aligned with their values.

• Cybersecurity and AI risks: Escalating cyber risks and generative AI-driven attacks, like deepfakes, demand robust defenses. Proactive planning, AI-enabled threat detection and transparent communication are now table stakes for managing digital crises.

To learn more, contact FGS Global’s U.S. Crisis Management team at USTeam-Crisis@fgsglobal.com. 

Over a third of Americans (36%) say they are or will be participating in economic boycotts of companies — including Amazon, Target and Tesla — that have changed their policies in accordance with Trump’s agenda. Driven by values and activism, many consumers are using their spending habits to send a message. Our Research and Insights team has gathered the data:

Who’s leading the boycotts?

• 53% of Gen Z and Black Americans

• 51% of Hispanic Americans

• 49% of Democrats

• 46% of Millennials

• 32% of Independents

• 29% of Republicans

Top reasons for boycotting:

• 53% want to show consumer influence

• 49% boycott in opposition to the administration’s policies

• 46% want to avoid supporting companies rolling back DEI policies

Are boycotts effective?

• 74% of political boycotters say they’ve successfully reduced or stopped purchases

• 61% have cut back spending but say quitting entirely is too difficult

• 68% try to offset by spending more at companies that share their values

• 51% say it’s challenging to change shopping patterns

Age differences in boycott commitment:

• 88% of Americans over 55 stick to boycotts

• 61% of those under 35 say the same

• 60% of younger Americans report difficulty shifting shopping habits 

• 33% of those over 55 say the same

In addition to long-term boycotts, many Americans are also embracing symbolic, short-term protests. On February 28th, over a quarter of U.S. adults participated in “No Buy Day,” a grassroots campaign encouraging people to avoid all non-essential purchases for 24 hours in protest of corporate greed.

Participation by age group:

• 32% of participants were under 35

• 24% were aged 35–54

• 25% were over 55

How 'No Buy Day' compares to other lifestyle challenges in the past year:

• 27% of Americans reported participating in No Buy Day

• 21% reported partaking in religious fasting

• 16% participated in Dry January

• 17% participated in Movember/No Shave November

• 10% participated in Meatless Mondays