People who make rules in Europe (EU) are looking into a big company called TikTok because they think it might not be keeping kids safe. They want to see how TikTok works and if it's doing what it's supposed to do to protect children from bad things online. If TikTok is found to have done something wrong, the people who own it could get in trouble and have to pay a lot of money. This investigation comes after some people in New York said that social media platforms like TikTok are causing problems for young users' mental health. Read from source...

1. The headline is misleading and sensationalized. It implies that TikTok is under investigation for violating child protection rules by the EU, but it does not specify what these rules are or how they are being violated. This creates a negative impression of TikTok without providing any concrete evidence or context.
2. The article relies heavily on quotes from Breton and other officials, which gives the impression that there is some consensus or authority behind the investigation, but it does not provide any counterarguments or alternative perspectives from TikTok or its supporters. This creates a one-sided narrative that favors the EU's position over TikTok's.
3. The article mentions the Digital Services Act (DSA) and how it requires online platforms to take more stringent measures against illegal content and public security risks, but it does not explain what these measures are or how they apply to TikTok specifically. This leaves readers uninformed about the actual requirements and expectations of the DSA and how they affect TikTok's operations.
4. The article focuses on the potential fines that ByteDance could face if TikTok is found guilty of breaching the DSA rules, but it does not mention any other consequences or implications for TikTok users, creators, or the platform itself. This creates a narrow and superficial understanding of the situation and its impact on stakeholders.
5. The article connects TikTok's investigation to the New York City's legal action against major social media platforms for allegedly causing mental health issues among young users, but it does not provide any evidence or details about these claims or their validity. This creates a weak and unsubstantiated link between two separate issues that may or may not be related.
6. The article also mentions TikTok's decision to join Joe Biden's campaign, which sparked bipartisan criticism from lawmakers over national security and data privacy concerns, but it does not explain how this decision relates to the investigation or the DSA rules. This introduces an irrelevant and confusing aspect to the article that distracts from the main topic.
7. The article ends with a photo of Sheldon Whitehouse criticizing big tech platforms for failing to police themselves, which reinforces the negative tone and bias of the article against TikTok and other online platforms. This does not offer any constructive or balanced feedback on how to improve the situation or address the challenges faced by online platforms and their users.