I'm not really a fan of direct open censorship of the US like this so I wouldn't personally support that over a ban either. My main point is just the US can simply act under the principle of trade reciprocity by saying if you don't allow our corporations (including news) operate within your country without undue interference, your corporations don't get to operate in ours. "Undue interference" would be defined by the US (or jointly by the US and China through some negotiation), but it wouldn't be just China that decides since well this is US legislation we're talking about that.
Nothing there would go against the principles of free trade or even free speech really. China would be free to open up if they want to engage in those activities. But if China didn't want that, then it wouldn't mean that the US is somehow acting rashly or wrong by reciprocating economically.
As far as I'm seeing here you're describing the same end result. I'm not going to disagree with you because at the end of the day I only care about that end result.
However I also think this plan will prove way more unwieldy and easy to abuse than a more direct and honest ban that makes it clear China has none of our trust and is recognized as a proper hostile state.
I'm not sure why you're being so argumentative. You and I are largely saying the same thing. I don't think it would be unreasonable for the US to ban the certain Chinese companies (e.g. Tiktok) _until_ China changes its laws and trade practices.
Nothing there would go against the principles of free trade or even free speech really. China would be free to open up if they want to engage in those activities. But if China didn't want that, then it wouldn't mean that the US is somehow acting rashly or wrong by reciprocating economically.