Korean students seek 'digital undertakers' amid US visa social media screening

Purpose of social media screening

• Many see the policy as “security theatre”: ineffective at stopping terrorism or crime because bad actors can create burner or purchased accounts.
• Others argue the real goal is to deter or exclude political opposition, especially foreign students engaged in activism.
• A minority supports “vigorous vetting” of non‑citizens, framing entry as a privilege and screening of posts, networks, and associations as common‑sense risk management.

Free speech, human rights, and foreigners

• Strong disagreement over whether foreign visitors should enjoy meaningful free speech and freedom of assembly.
• One camp: universal human rights (speech, assembly) apply regardless of citizenship; suppressing foreign dissent undermines what the US claims to be.
• Opposing camp: foreigners are “guests” who should be “respectful and quiet”; political rights properly belong only to citizens, and it’s acceptable to keep out “anti‑American” voices.

What counts as “anti‑American”?

• Several point out the term is highly fluid and can be weaponized against mainstream positions (e.g., criticism of Israel, views on Jan 6).
• There is concern that whoever controls the executive branch effectively defines “Americanism” and can impose de facto political purity tests on visas.

Effectiveness, fraud, and data permanence

• Debate over whether omitting or deactivating accounts is visa fraud, and how enforceable that is.
• Some note that entry can be denied for claiming “no social media,” making selective disclosure de facto possible.
• Many emphasize that deleted or private posts are unlikely to be truly gone; big platforms probably retain data that may surface years later.
• Anecdotes: visa applicants and students have been asked for social media passwords or to make accounts public well before this news cycle.

Racism, Israel, and broader political agenda

• Several tie the policy to a broader nativist project: ending birthright citizenship, mass deportations, and moving toward a white ethnostate.
• Others argue it is specifically about shielding Israel from criticism and punishing pro‑Palestinian activism.
• Some see knock‑on effects: declining tourism, talented students staying away, and erosion of US credibility on free speech and human rights.