OP said "buying TikTok was about hiding information from people", and the people who bought TikTok are trying to suppress certain information on TikTok.

Whether you or I think that's effective or not is up for debate, I also avoid social media, but OP made a statement about intentions.

(And, aside, the current intentions appear far more pointed and ideological than when it was owned by ByteDance as a lottery winner with a surprise overseas success, optimizing for youth engagement.)

> The forced US hosted tik-tok sale is all about hiding information from the US public that most people in the rest of the world have easy access to.

Restating the OP ^

I don't know exactly what the OP intended, and they are welcome to clarify, but based on the words above I read it as selling TikTok is a means of suppressing information that the rest of the world has access to from Americans. I disagree with the notion because what matters is whether or not information is suppressed holistically, not whether or not information is suppressed in a limited manner on a platform. If you think it's a problem, by the way, you should reach out to the EU, China, India, and every other major government that influences what content is posted on social media platforms including but not limited to TikTok.

If you want to argue the US obtaining control of the content from TikTok in America is tantamount to information suppression, you can only do so by also arguing it's true only for people who use TikTok. In which case it's an improvement anyway since the CCP is no longer influencing content.