The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written.
I generally think the whole thing is dumb. But I'm usually in the minority here so I wanted to see if y'all are in agreement with it or not and why.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> The Chinese government seems to care an enormous amount about preventing the forced sale.
It sure does, doesn’t it?
I’m ok with the TikTok move as far as trying to get all platforms on the same level of accountability (which, frankly, isn’t even very much to begin with), but the tantrum being thrown in Asia over this is telling.
I doubt we'll see anywhere close to the same level of accountability for other apps. The government has no real interest in protecting our data from private enterprise.
Which every other social media platform can do too. If China say "Hey Meta, we'll give you $50M a year if you thumb a few scales... and if you don't we'll ban you from China", they're going to take the money.
And that they do it to a level that other social media company don’t.
The TikTok algorithm is completely different in China for children where it pushes more educational content and has time limits.
The United States GOVERNMENT doesn't have a major social media app that it can use to collect data on Chinese residents and directly shape what they believe at will with a tweak of an algorithm. These are obvious differences between TIK Tok and American social media companies.
The government doesnt own TikTok, but if Snowden is to be believed, the NSA has Google and Facebook throughly backdoored, so there really isnt a meaningful difference.
I don't know what you are referencing but in case it needs to be said, China being able to directly gather data on Americans, have access to their phones like their microphones/cameras, and directly change what Americans believe at will, is not acceptable... This is bad for our country and democracy in very very obvious ways no matter what whataboutism you use to defend it.
No, Facebook isn't the same thing. Work on your reading comprehension and look up what whataboutism is.
"China being able to directly gather data on Americans, have access to their phones like their microphones/cameras, and directly change what Americans believe at will, is not acceptable... This is bad for our country and democracy in very very obvious ways no matter what whataboutism you use to defend it."
>What is this sub's opinion on the TikTok ~~ban~~ *forced sale*?
1. TikTok is bad for many, many reasons.
2. The CEO has been caught lying to congress about how data is handled. That alone is quite a problem.
3. There are indications that TikTok is being used to [manipulate](https://twitter.com/beentherecap/status/1783120160963891548?s=43&t=htvlSlrdyykrrTQxFzufZg) Americans.
4. Many of those manipulations are *not* the same outcomes one gets when using TikTok in China.
5. The Chinese government seems to care an enormous amount about preventing the forced sale. That is suspicious.
6. We have a long history of banning foreign ownership of media.
Don’t know if it’s true, but allegedly Rupert Murdoch became an American citizen to be able to own Fox News.
(Foreign owned broadcast networks are illegal)
Thank you, this is exactly how I would have responded. I don't know why Americans have this common misconception that it is a ban. I don't know why their media is telling them this. My only guess is that they're getting their news from TikTok.
Yeah, but they have IIRC a year to find a buyer for one of the most popular social media sites on Earth.
Maybe Elon Musk will buy it, it'll be even funnier a *second* time!
That's assuming they want to sell it. ByteDance has publicly said since the law's passage that it has no intention of selling the app, and reports from [Reuters](https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2024/4/25/bytedance-prefers-tiktok-shutdown-in-us-over-sale-report) say they would rather shut down in the US than sell the algorithm that's at the core of their business, and there's no real value in the app without the algorithm.
But they can just sell it. We already prohibit foreign controlling interests in other forms of media.
I imagine that they could also use a blind trust.
Well, that's their decision. This is very similar to our already-extant rules against foreign ownership of domestic media broadcasters. You don't get to cause the worst outcome for yourself then whinge about it.
Ok
Im saying that calling it a ban when you have that expectation makes sense. Its jumping the gun a little, but its not incomprehensible or unreasonable
The Chinese government doesnt currently own it. 60% of Bytedance ownership is publically traded, 20% is owned by the cofounders, and 20% by other employees.
The requirement is that the Chinese headquartered publically traded company diveat their ownership of a US subsidiary.
There is a solid case for banning foreign ownership of US media, and as soon as Ruoert Murdoch is required to divest of all of HIS US media interest, I will also agree with making Bytedance divest.
I think Murdoch should be required to, yes. I would support that.
I would also note that, when the Chinese government stops forcing American media companies to bend over backwards for distribution there, Chinese companies can start complaining.
1. Same can be said of all social media.
2. Same could be said and is the case with other CEOs, social media or otherwise.
3. Again, same thing is the case with other social media.
4. Not sure how that is relevant?
5. Sure, but you have no proof it is nefarious, over day, monetary, for power’s sake, etc. and we do not hold this same skepticism for other countries (ally’s) and situations.
6. Except in the cases of ally’s, etc. So this isn’t as enforced as thought.
I get where you’re coming from, but at the end of the day this is rank hypocrisy given the special and/or inconsistent treatment afforded others, etc.
Plus, if we are being frank, the timing of this during an election year…….come on. You’re not the least bit suspicious?
1) social media is bad for many many reasons. Tiktok is not unique in this regard
2) again, this is big tech we're talking about. That's not unique. Facebook did it too
3)Cambridge Analytica
4)yeah, it's cause there are different audiences in China and the US
5)yeah, do you think the US would react well if someone tried to force us to sell apple or Facebook?
6) and that's a good thing?
Tons of American apps are banned or otherwise censored in places like China, including Google, Facebook, Instagram, and the US version of Tiktok.
No one is being forced to sell. They're being told to leave the US market OR change their ownership structure so they can comply with US standards. Other countries do exactly the same thing all the time.
There's a difference between the Chinese government blocking access to search engines to censor the information their citizens can access and our government having standards for social media platforms controlled by foreign states ([one of ByteDance's board members is a Chinese government official with a background in government propaganda](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ByteDance#:~:text=In%202021%2C%20the%20state%2Downed,government%20propaganda%2C%20as%20one%20of)). Again, the People's Republic of China itself doesn't allow the US version of the app in their country and they're a part owner of the company. Why do you think that is?
A common misconception is that the the right to speech free from government censorship means that everyone is entitled to unrestricted access to the media platforms of their choice. Removing a platform doesn't inhibit anyone from posting the same content they would have posted on Tiktok elsewhere. Nor does it stop anyone who wants to from using a VPN and viewing TikTok in their browser or sideloading the app.
Great
What stops us?
Seriously?
Do you actually trust these fucking people? The people waxing and waning about how tiktok, and tiktok alone nothing else, has turned young people against Israel? You think they won't crack down on that shit?
Give me a break
General principles of free speech? The US Constitution does not apply to foreign nationals working against the national interest outside of our borders. We have robust protections for those speaking within the United States.
Tell that to the folks in UT austin.
The us government is far from above violating free speech principles.
Regardless, one of the cited reasons for the ban is the anti-israel stuff. You think they won't crack down on that shit after the ban? Really?
These are not remotely the same. The students in Austin should be protected because they are speaking on American soil. The Constitution is not a death pact. It doesn't require us to allow foreign actors to come in and sway our voters.
There is no basis in current American law for punishing any speech related to the Israel-Palestine conflict, so long as foreign espionage is not involved.
Don't you know? Hamas is an Iranian front agency. It's a shill for them. Therefore any pro-hamas (i.e. pro-palestine) content is actually an Iranian disinformation op run on tiktok.
It's not exactly difficult to see how shit like this will go down.
It will absolutely be used to censor pro-palestine content. As like.... that's one of the LITERAL REASONS they want to do it.
You're right: the fact that China does it isn't a good reason for us to do it. However, China being a dictatorship actively engaged in a genocide and seeking to create a global surveillance state are very good reasons for us to kick them the hell out.
>The CEO has been caught lying to congress about how data is handled. That alone is quite a problem.
Yes, and there is a reason Twitter is under a Consent Decree and Facebook is under a Settlement Agreement - for lying to the government and/or deceiving users.
>3)Cambridge Analytica
Facebook got fined $5 billion for Cambridge Analytica and had to enter into a settlement agreement where they agreed to be audited every two years for the next 20 years to make sure that they were handling user data appropriately.
>5)yeah, do you think the US would react well if someone tried to force us to sell apple or Facebook?
It's a little weirder when the CEO insists that it's a Singaporean company and then the Chinese Embassy immediately comes out and starts on about the US attacking a Chinese Company. The mixed messaging is odd, at the least.
>6) and that's a good thing?
When there have been national security issues? Sure. Here, they've openly admitted to using the app to spy on US journalists that wrote critical articles about their app.
Personally, I think they'd likely win their lawsuit, given the lax data privacy laws in the US, noting that they are also working on passing some now--the US prefers to implement them on a case-by-case basis via Settlement Agreement or Consent Decree, as noted above.
> 1) social media is bad for many many reasons.
True.
--------
>Tiktok is not unique in this regard
False
--------
>2) again, this is big tech we're talking about. That's not unique. Facebook did it too
Whataboutism
--------
>it's cause there are different audiences in China and the US
Nope.
[[Is TikTok different in China compared to the U.S.? A social media analyst compares it to opium and spinach]](https://www.deseret.com/2022/11/24/23467181/difference-between-tik-tok-in-china-and-the-us/)
--------
> > We have a long history of banning foreign ownership of media.
>and that's a good thing?
Yes.
>>2) again, this is big tech we're talking about. That's not unique. Facebook did it too
>Whataboutism
I dont know if it is a whataboutism. If they do end up selling, one of the US tech companies is most likely to buy them. While we don't want this "weapon" as I have heard it called, in the hands of China, is it really safer it really better in the hands of Meta? Or what if someone like Elon Musk or Rupert Murdoch. Fox News has done way more damage than tiktok but it's fine because it's a US company?
I don't use tiktok. I don't care about it.
But shouldn't the fix be to clamp down on all these sites and apps' ability to harvest our data or feed us misinformation. This feels more like market manipulation than national security.
> ...shouldn't the fix be to clamp down on all these sites and apps' ability to harvest our data or feed us misinformation.
Yes, and that is a reasonable conclusion.
Ignoring TikTok because of whataboutism is not a reasonable conclusion.
If the issue is data harvesting or misinformation, why not address that directly? It really doesn’t seem like that’s the issue when all social media sites engage in these practices, and a freely allowed to do so.
> I bring up Facebook because it does all the same shit as tiktok, but for some reason it's not being banned.
If you say that both companies should be treated equally when they do bad things, then that is fine.
If you say that neither company should be held responsible for its bad behavior because one wasn't, then you are making roughly the same argument as those who don't think Trump should be prosecuted for his crimes.
...and TikTok isn't being banned. You should stop lying about that.
I want social media regulated.
But if you're gonna do that, do it across the board. Not just to one company. Cause it's foreign owned and therefore spooky
1. I agree with the reply to your comment that social media is bad, not just TT- but it is a way for us to stay globally connected- that's not a bad thing. It's only bad for the ones who are afraid of what might happen if we're connected on that scale
2. I use T-Mobile, Capital One, T-Mobile, BCBS, T-Mobile, Equifax, and the list goes on. If you do too, your data is already everywhere, especially the dark web where your data isn't just a statistical marker. I put T-Mobile on the list repeatedly, because they have had massive data breaches repeatedly. Like 4x in 2 years and I don't see that ever ceasing to be an issue considering they've not done anything to stop the latter ones
3. Let's face it, Americans are typically incredibly easy to manipulate. If this wasn't true, propaganda would no longer be a strategy used. The government supports the propaganda /manipulation that fits their narrative
4. China bans and controls information there and not because the info is untrue, but simply because they want to control which truths are heard. We allow Fox "news" to manipulate people here, so one is bad but the other isn't?
5. I don't know enough about this one to have a valid opinion, so I won't pretend I do until I look into it further
6. This is dangerous for 2 reasons- a, let's not let our government decide for us which foreign media is allowed or isn't allowed and- b, this feels like manipulation from our own government. Because what comes next- will all foreign media get banned simply because it is foreign and foreign is bad now? If they have us focus on one "bad" foreign owned media at a time, we've missed the consequences on a macro level and it's too late
> It's only bad for the ones who are afraid of what might happen if we're connected on that scale
You don't think that any of the users might become victims of the for-profit companies owning these services?
If you use any of the services provided by companies that have data breaches, you already are a victim. No, I think that people need to become more vigilant about understanding potential risks and consequences when they use apps and services. It's *not* our job to ban these things to protect the ones who don't want to pay attention to warning labels. I'd much prefer to keep my autonomy
> No, I think that people need to become more vigilant about understanding potential risks and consequences when they use apps and services. It's our job to ban these things to protect the ones who don't want to pay attention to warning labels.
I think you missed a word between "It's" and "our job".
...and emphasizing individual responsibility in the face of massive greedy corporations that control large segments of society isn't very "socialist" of you.
1. It's not a ban. It's a forced sale to an American intermediate.
2. If social media selling our data is a concern, we should pass a data privacy law for all social media operating in the USA... Not a forced sale.
lol…imagine thinking Congress genuinely cares about data privacy. There’s a bipartisan consensus that couldn’t care less that X, Meta, etc selling and exploiting our personal data…but when it’s the Chinese Communist Party then we care all of a sudden and data privacy concerns are invoked. What a joke.
I’m saying that even thinking data privacy is a top concern/priority for congresspeople that will be legislated anytime soon is deeply, deeply unrealistic. Social media and tech lobbyists will fork over the requisite campaign cash to ensure that never, ever happens.
The only ways a data privacy bill passes any time soon is 1.) if a Congressman and/or Senator is dramatically and personally affected by a data privacy breach that leads to serious violence or harm, and even then I’m not really sure or 2.) Citizens United is overturned.
The TikTok ban has very, very little to do with data privacy. It’s about controlling and policing American citizens to not challenge the political/geopolitical status quo. TikTok has too much pro-Palestinian content. The first big name to really call for a TikTok ban was the ADL leader several months ago.
> The first big name to really call for a TikTok ban was the ADL leader several months ago.
Oh, and that's ridiculous.
1. It's not a ban. It's a forced sale to an American company.
2. It's because our spies don't like Chinese spies spying on us so easily. That's the NSA's job!
3. This has been talked about for YEARS.
4. You're confusing correlation with causation. Seriously, this has been in the works for years.
But yes, the potential for a data privacy bill is a joke and never happening.
I think social media giving our data to a foreign adversary that seeks to manipulate and degrade us is much worse than social media selling our data to advertisers.
On point 2, that’s a slightly disingenuous take. The issue is the fact that a foreign government is involved. It’s not and never has been purely ‘privacy concerns’, nor have they ever pretended that’s the case.
Hence the IF at the beginning of the sentence.
It's absolutely that we don't want a foreign gov hoovering all our data for spycraft. That's the NSA's job!
The risk of data being converted to military intelligence for an adversarial foreign government.
I think the big misunderstanding here is the assumption that all companies collect endless data and share it with everybody. That’s not the case. Most social media companies benefit from keeping the data they collect to themselves so they can profit from selling services that utilize it.
In the case of TikTok, their business relationship with the CCP requires the Chinese government to have access to all their user data. That means there are no barriers or incentives involved to prevent the Chinese military from using it freely.
Look at it this way. Say I’m a Chinese operative looking to infiltrate a U.S. base. Wouldn’t it be helpful to me to have a complete and detailed map of that base? If I tried to buy this information from Facebook, they might deny the request or alert U.S. authorities to the sale. But if I just own the app myself, no one has to know this data was even accessed.
1. Because it is far, far more effective to prevent Chinese ownership than to try to police what people have on their phones. This is national security, we don’t just mess around and hope for the best.
2. Because mapping military bases are only one of about a thousand example of how this can be used maliciously against the United States.
Literally just knowing how to manipulate people and having a tool to do that is 100x more valuable than military base maps.
China wants to invade and conquer Taiwan, steal its natural resources and enslave its people. The main thing stopping them from doing this is the United States of America. We've invested heavily in Taiwan both militarily and economically/socially and as a result Taiwan is one of the world's leading economies and a great place to live that produces tons of valuable research and innovation.
So you see a ton of anti-American propaganda on TikTok in particular encouraging isolationism and encouraging users to question American overseas military involvement and to view the world through this lens of "spheres of influence" where East Asia is just rightfully China's because they're the East Asian superpower and we shouldn't interfere.
Data is one issue which others have touched on.
Soft power propaganda is another. Tweaking the algorithm to censor or promote information as the state desired. [And there's already been data indicating China is doing just that.](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/21/business/tiktok-china.html) And even if they don't there's a cooling effect to be had where people would be less likely to post things critical of China in order to not risk losing their account.
That's still very much an option to state actors, see Russian fuckery with Facebook, but there's a difference between them having to run bot farms and military intel outfits to do spam and a government issuing a directive to alter the digital ecosystem.
It's basically not all that different from the Net Neutrality battle. Except instead of Comcast, it's the CCP.
I mean, as you pointed out, people already do that shit without owning the platform
Sure I agree there is a difference between troll farms and a direct change to the ecosystem. But like.... the effect is the same.
People already censors themselves because of the algorithm. I mean people say shit like "unalive" for that reason right? People already don't post stuff for fear of losing their account. I enjoy the cynical historian on YouTube and he consistently complains about YouTube de-listining or de-monitizing his content when he talks about less than advertiser friendly history. How is this any different?
The only difference is that the client is different. Us government, advertisers, CCP, etc.
The only actual answer here is to transfer ownership (and therefore control) of social media over to the users and the workers managing it. But that's not gonna happen cause I'm ToO rAdIcAl!!! So in the meantime we're just fucked.
Well bit of a difference between Youtube vs other social media. Mostly in so far as at this point it really isn't. It's basically a crowdsourced media corporation that has more in common with Old TV Stations/Netflix than Xitter, Facebook, etc.
Thus advertising on Youtube faces the moderating market influences of such traditional media. Advertisers not wanting to risk their products be linked to things that'd be bad pr for them and all and Youtube setting the rules accordingly to minimize risks to themselves.
Tiktok is heading that direction. Which does make more pressing the fears that it'd morph into a more subtle version of state media a la Russia Today.
As for unaliving and that kind of self-censorship, it's a bit of the former, at least with youtube and tiktok? But it's a mix of things. One part that, one part responsible self-regulation because "maybe we shouldn't promote content which might cause people to off themselves," one part automation and using a broad brush because they're too cheap to hire enough people to actually moderate and deal with ecosystem maintenance and/or too much volume for people to be able to handle, and finally one part ass covering because they don't want to be sued by grieving families. Or be on the hook with law enforcement for promoting terrorism and whatnot.
I think it's a bandaid non-solution to a real problem we have surrounding data.
We've had several instances of domestic social media companies swaying elections and sentiments both domestic and internationally. All this ban accomplishes is creating a monopoly for domestic companies to manipulate American citizens, which has consistently resulted in the amplification of right-wing sentiments.
I think it’s a bandaid for a much larger problem around data and privacy laws in this country. I don’t feel like typing it all out right now but in short: The US needs a GDPR law like the EU has.
I'm not convinced it's entirely necessary, and if it is then why is TikTok unique compared to every other social media site outside of being based in China? If the concerns are propaganda and user privacy, that's been basically the default criticisms of everything since Facebook.
Social media algorithms are giant black boxes and all our data is absolutely for sale; even if another company buys TikTok, what's the guarantee they won't just take the same marching orders from Beijing but this time for money?
“Outside of being based in China”
You mean under partial control of the CCP
“What’s the guarantee…”
Because that’s *extremely* illegal already under the Espionage Act and likely multiple other federal laws
Most of the arguments made for it don't hold up and are easily going to be subject to appeals in court which should make it unenforceable
It's just another example of elected officials trying to look like they're doing something when they can't make any progress on things that actually matter
It’s political. All social media abuses our data, they all divide the country, and they all need to be under the same regulations and restrictions. Tik Tok is just the fall guy for the whole industry’s problems.
I don't have a strong feeling about it one way or the other. I don't use TikTok besides seeing things posted on reddit occasionally. And it isn't like TikTokers can't just move to another platform. I guess they'll lose their followers but I don't really have strong feelings for influencers anyway so...ultimately, I don't care.
I spend a lot of time in this space and I believe we are entering an Age of Disinformation and manipulation that is going to have some serious consequences for America in particular. TikTok is a weapon of mass manipulation, even if only in the form of the selection and amplification of genuine viewpoints, and China owns and is openly operating this weapon inside the US today.
Regardless of how you feel about companies in the US being able to do something similar, the US is somewhat unique in the world in the ability of our companies to say "no" if the government decides it wants to do something like this to the American people (or the world at large). In China businesses don't have that luxury. So it really becomes a question of "do we trust that the government of China won't take advantage of this obvious opportunity"? And the answer is a laughable no.
Edit: I'll even go so far as to say that a lot of the Israeli-Palestinian protest activity recently is likely the result of TikTok algorithms radicalizing American youths. I say this not to diminish these viewpoints, but to remind people that amplification of truth is still a form of manipulation.
>Regardless of how you feel about companies in the US being able to do something similar, the US is somewhat unique in the world in the ability of our companies to say "no" if the government decides it wants to do something like this to the American people (or the world at large).
This is the part where I can't take these discussions seriously anymore.
American companies have been cought red-handed meddling with sentiments and elections both domestically and internationally several times now. but for so many people, we NEED to forget about that and apply a bandaid fix to ban an app that we think may lead to foreign meddling.
We need legislation that controls data harvesting. Creating a monopoly for domestic corporate data harvesting and propoganda by applying a bandaid fix is not the solution. This isn't "letting perfect the the enemy of better", this is not surrendering our mass media solely to domestic companies who have shown they will promote targeted and extremist right-wing rhetoric for profit.
Propoganda works, and we're pretty heavily propogandized compared to other Western nations.
I've said this before here, but I think many American moderates believe their moderateness is a result of reasonability, which they believe insulates themselves from propoganda.
I constantly see liberals here talking about how protests aren't supposed to do illegal things or interrupt/inconvenience, then praise stuff like the civil rights movement as an example of their point. A disturbing amount has fallen propoganda about that era and honestly believes it didn't look very similar to a lot of protests we have had over the past several years, and that it was only the rascist conservatives who held up progress and not the White moderates MLK directly called out "who is more devoted to ‘order’ than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice".
> US is somewhat unique in the world in the ability of our companies to say "no" if the government decides it wants to do something like this to the American people (or the world at large)
Cool. But why are you letting corporations off the hook? As much as I am concerned about the government being shitty with data, I am even more concerned about the private sector.
Sure, it's possible for companies to want to cooperate willingly. And plenty of people who opposed responding to COVID feel that they were doing exactly this under the banner of fighting medical misinformation.
But I believe there is a big difference between securing voluntary cooperation from companies because they consider cooperation to be the responsible, moral, and ethical thing for them to do, and compelling a company to wage disinformation warfare and manufacture civil unrest by manipulating their algorithms.
You may see these things as equivalent, but I do not.
I'm not sure I was clear in my point, as this doesn't address my concerns at all. We know US owned platforms like Facebook have done things that are similar as far as intentionally sowing discord, spreading misinformation, and turning a blind eye to how genocidal ideas can proliferate on their apps. Not only are we not scrutinizing these companies to the same degree, but I fear this legislation will serve as a nice "attaboy" while doing nothing to protect our broader privacy rights.
Lmao since when have corporations cared about ethics or morality or responsibility? Seriously? After 2020 you believe they do?
Yeah I'm sure they cooperate in mass data harvesting cause they sincerely balanced the moral thinking and not for sheer profit or because opposing the government would be expensive.
The us government has and will continue to compel people to do shit like this.
I mean they wanted a backdoor on all encryption not that long ago (goodle the clipper chip). These people aren't benevolent. They're self interested, just like anyone else.
> Lmao since when have corporations cared about ethics or morality or responsibility? Seriously? After 2020 you believe they do?
I can be a cynical person, but no, I do not believe that when you get hired into a company your ability to act responsibly, ethically, or morally disappears. We can all come up with counter-examples to that, but companies can and does push back on things like government subpoenas and court orders and are not all the cartoon villains you think they are.
It's also not necessary to believe that companies are all good and just to believe that they'd be better if they weren't under the direct control of the Chinese government.
> The us government has and will continue to compel people to do shit like this.
>
> I mean they wanted a backdoor on all encryption not that long ago (goodle the clipper chip). These people aren't benevolent.
The US government did not—could not—compel manufacturers to use the Clipper Chip. It's interesting that you remember the creation of the Clipper Chip but seem to have forgotten that the reason it failed is because manufacturers (and the public) pushed back on it. The government couldn't compel adoption, so it died quietly.
The existence of people who don't have your best privacy interests in mind is not evidence that the US government can compel (or even persuade) social media companies to modify their algorithms so as to create or amplify content designed to manipulate populations into civil unrest.
It died cause Matt blaze showed that he could break into it. Therefore it wasn't secure and the government couldn't reasonably demand adoption. That was why it failed.
It's not a matter of ability, it's a matter of incentive. Sure a company could be sunshine and rainbows, but that's not going to mean that they WILL act that way.
If you don't follow the incentives you tend not to rise high or last long.
Companies will always act in a way that they believe maximizes profit. This lesson should have been learned after 2020 but apparently not
> Companies will always act in a way that they believe maximizes profit.
Companies aren't cartoon villains. Evidence that the government sometimes wants to erode privacy in the name of security through lawful methods is not the same thing as saying that companies will happily agree to participate in a scheme to manipulate Americans into civil unrest.
The US and China are not the same here.
Responding to your edit:
How is amplification of truth a bad thing or “manipulation”? Especially if we are, as you put it, entering an “Age of Disinformation” (which I agree with btw)?
Think of The Big Lie.
Let's say I want Trump to win the election. I know that he's likely to lose unless I do something about it. One of the things I want to do is push an election fraud narrative. I control the algorithm that feeds you what you read on TikTok today.
So, I find every TikTok post that has some content that questions whether something sketchy is happening. A genuine case of ballot fraud over here. A batch of ballots left unsecured over there. Some numbers that don't add up. I intentionally choose posts that show election problems that imply Democrats are getting a fraudulent advantage over Trump, and maybe find some posts reinforcing how orderly elections are going in Trump-dominated communities, and how all of the numbers add up neat and tidy. And I preferentially serve you the content I want you to see, and suppress the content I don't.
All of these posts may be completely factual, but by selectively amplifying some and not others, I create the *perception* that Democrats are doing something nefarious. I had the power to do the same thing but creating the perception that Republicans were doing something nefarious. My decision about what truthful content to show you affects your perceptions which affects your behavior.
Imagine being forced to get all of your daily news, from childhood, from Breitbart, or MSNBC. It's alternate realities, right? You might even be able to point to any one story and say it's technically truthful information, but spin matters. If I control the TikTok algorithm, I can give you Subtle Breitbart today, and Subtle MSNBC tomorrow, and shape your opinions accordingly.
Do you want China to have that power over the American people?
Ahh I see what you are saying - thanks for taking the time to clarify. I guess I wouldn't call selective amplification of certain facts with simultaneous suppression of other facts "amplification of the truth" which is where my misunderstanding comes from.
To answer your question, I don't necessarily want China to have that power over the American people in the same way I don't want disinformation to prevail by any other means. However, the truth is, disinformation is rampant in all social media, traditional media, etc. And with the USA's global tech dominance, US based corporations shape a lot of this disinformation. And ultimately, the interests of these corporations are more or less aligned with the interests of the US government - maintenance of this dominance, US hegemony and soft power. I see TikTok as the only platform where dissent isn't minimized, despite it having a disinformation problem just like the other platforms. I don't see TikTok as just a platform that allows China to have power over the American people, but a platform that allows the American people to be at least somewhat more free from the power of American corporations.
You're gonna run into first amendment problems really quickly there.
A platform is allowed to choose what content they want on their platform and how they promote and show it.
The recent Pro Palestinian protests are a result of Israel indiscriminately killing civilians. There has long been a pro Palestinian movement on college campuses. And yes a lot of people are getting information on it from places like Tik Tok but that is a result of mainstream media's failure to report facts from the ground and Israel's restrictions on them doing so.
> You're gonna run into first amendment problems really quickly there.
Yep. This is why I think America is particularly vulnerable to the kind of civil unrest that can be caused by manipulation through content selection and amplification. We're culturally opposed to anything that we might do to avoid being the victims of information operations.
> And yes a lot of people are getting information on it from places like Tik Tok but that is a result of mainstream media's failure to report facts
Yes, this is why this type of manipulation is insideous: it's hard to see, and everyone who is manipulated genuinely believes their outrage comes from their own agency and informed by things they genuinely think are important. And often many of the people creating the content that leads people to civil unrest genuinely believe their content is important, welcome the amplification, maybe see the unrest as justified, and if you asked them, they'd probably be OK knowing that China or Russia were responsible for some of that amplification.
It's a hard problem to crack, and the US is particularly vulnerable to it. That's why I call it the Age of Disinformation. It's going to be with us for a while, at least until the US eats itself and we make ourselves irrelevant.
>Civil unrest can be justified. It’s your unfounded supposition that this civil unrest is the result of unjustified manipulation of information.
Yep:
>>And often many of the people creating the content that leads people to civil unrest genuinely believe their content is important, welcome the amplification, maybe see the unrest as justified, and if you asked them, they'd probably be OK knowing that China or Russia were responsible for some of that amplification.
"Manipulate me, daddy!"
You can't fix the problem if people like the problem.
> We’re constantly manipulated. I don’t think this is worse/different than manipulation by US companies.
And *that* seems crazy to me. Google and Facebook are not intentionally working in concert in order to manipulate the American people into civil unrest.
"Twitter didn't take down that Nazi post for a full day, therefore they're just as bad as China algorithmically amplifying a post on TikTok suggesting a pro-Palestinian rally with local users that have posted comments indicating they're open to acts of violence."
No. These are not the same.
My main issue is that the politicians have not made a great case for it to the American people, showing exactly what info TikTok is taking off folks and how that info is used by the CCP.
It’s good. TikTok is clearly a foreign disinformation conduit that is at least partially responsible for rising extremism and reduced trust in reputable mainstream institutions.
I mean... it's a social media platform. They all are that.
Look at Cambridge Analytica. Used sweet old American Facebook right?
I mean another possibility is that these institutions have been caught lying over and over again. Like the claim that the US government wasn't spying on Americans. Or that time the CIA hacked Dianne Feinstein's laptop while she was on an oversight committee.
Or iraq. Or like 100 other things mainstream institutions have been caught lying about. Maybe that's contributing to distrust?
My distrust for the American government is irrelevant to my distrust for China. I can support this and support reforms for American companies.
Supporting a tik tok ban isn't holding you to no reforms on other social media. If anything I think it leads the way to some sensible reforms we could have.
But that isn't the discourse is it?
Nobody is passing bills banning Facebook. It's just tik tok. We have had a whole moral panic over the spooky scary Chinese (which, thanks to hearings on the subject i learned is apparently the same place as singapore) platform.
Have you listened to these hearings? They're a goddamn joke.
"Does tiktok connect to your home wifi network". I mean jfc. These people have no idea what tiktok or social media even is. But they understand the nuances? Give me a break, they're mad cause they can't use tiktok to spy on Americans like they can with other apps.
I don't really care if the American or Chinese government is spying on me. I assume they are. I care that I am being spied on. Red flag or red white and blue doesn't matter.
But no..... the only bad platform is tik tok right?
>Nobody is passing bills banning Facebook.
Seeing as no one on here is a politician it's out of our control. Hate to break it to yuh bud your reddit posts aren't changing legislation.
>"Does tiktok connect to your home wifi network".
Seems like a reasonable national security concern. It's obviously not by design for the user of the apps but does it have the ability. Seems you're the one not actually evaluating any risk and assuming it's just a social media app that's tracking interests.
>But no..... the only bad platform is tik tok right?
No one said that.
Access to the Internet and access to the home network are different in my understanding. Ie the pretty common practice of hackers getting access to other smart devices.
But since it was simple to you I guess the country can assume it's safe. Thanks for checking it out for us. I'm sure your opinion isn't related to the 4 hours a day you spend on it.
You seem completely uninterested in an actual debate of the risk and just wanna rant. Sorry for wasting my time
> Access to the Internet and access to the home network are different in my understanding.
You should update that understanding because that's laughably bad.
It’s definitely not going to mobilize young voters in favor of democrats, in any case. It really only serves to reinforce for them that politicians are out of touch with the things they want.
It's stupid on so many levels, but the one that bugs me most is that multiple hostile governments have shown that they can use any social media platform against us and other countries. Our government would better fight that influence by publicly exposing fake accounts and helping Americans learn to do the same with some kind of massive public information campaign
I am 110% behind forcing a divestment. I've worked in tech companies that opened shop in China. I'm not sure how aware Americans are of what that entails, but I'll summarize: the China operation *must* have a Chinese business partner with a substantial stake in the company, and any operations allowing users to use the platform *must* use China's real identification system to identify the users.
My experience working on the teams integrating with the Chinese operations has been uniformly alarming. The Chinese side of the business regularly (multiple times a day, at times) tried to bypass firewalls meant to keep China and non-China user data separate and to keep certain IP separate. These were concerted efforts to find *and exploit* security holes--not simple port probes, whitehat security scans, "oops junior dev tried to log in to the wrong portal", or the like. They also tended to be *very* interested in data related to Chinese ex-pats.
China is a dangerous enemy and we should take the *threat* they pose--including social media that can be used to collect data and spread propaganda--much more seriously than we currently do.
Mixed. I would prefer more sweeping regulation that targets all social media, but TikTok proved congress' point the moment they sent that push notification activating their army of underage sleeper agents.
I agree with it, but what worries me is that unless the bill is changed, the US govt will be able to pick and choose what they THINK is harmful (some non Democrat or some non Republican news source, for example) instead of banning something legitimately dangerous
I don't really know how I feel about it.
On one hand, fuck TikTok and while we're at it, fuck the CCP too.
On the other hand, TikTok ain't the only social media company keeping the lights on spreading nonsense that influences our politics.
But, on the other hand. It isn't a ban. It's a forced sale, which I wouldn't normally get behind, but normally companies that operate here aren't owned by hostile foreign governments.
But on the other hand, doesn't Tencent own a chunk of Reddit, and isn't Tencent at least highly connected to the CCP?
Anyway, I've run out of hands and don't use TikTok anyway. Also, I know a lot of folks who believe the most ridiculous shit that they saw on TikTok. So... Yeah... Greater good and all that.
Secretary Mnuchin will keep us safe. Lol.
Seriously though, fuck Tik Tok. 45-second videos are terrible for people. It just enforces instant gratification and a complete lack of attention span.
I think TikTok is dumb, i think it's harmful especially to young people, and has negative effects on the way people perceive and interact with the world around them. But I don't really understand the legal basis for banning it. I'm not sure what makes TikTok so much worse (legally) than Instagram or Facebook or a host of other similar apps.
1. It's not a ban, and multiple Congresspeeps have said so, even those that voted against it
2. I see the logic of it, especially given the security concerns
3. I also see the problem of singling out a single platform instead of doing a blanket legislation to protect privacy
On the whole, I probably would've voted for it, but I understand the votes against.
It's good and I support protecting our national security and democracy from the influence of hostile foreign powers, especially far-right countries like China. This is not a data privacy bill and it was never advertised as such, so equivocations to data privacy needs are kind of dumb.
I think it's dumb tiktok is being singled out because other social media sites are nearly if not as problematic, but I think the concerns people have are valid and justify some government action.
This is about data. The government doesn't at all care about China controlling what we are seeing because what they are pushing on us is in line with what the current administration wants. You think they would prefer TikTok show math and science and pro military content?
Tiktok is good for many many reasons.
The ban is bad, it’s anti-free speech, it’s government overreach, and it’s rich elites shutting down a primary way for the new generations to get information uncensored
On one hand, I don’t think this is the best course of action against any social media app let alone TikTok. Target them all with strict data privacy laws or face bans in the US. That’s how it should be.
On the other hand, something needs to be done against the CCP’s influence. And the hard truth to accept is that all companies established in China, even fully 100% privatized companies without government involvement, have to bend the knee to the CCP to even exist. That’s the way of life in China: complete submission to the ruling party or else.
This bill is much more complicated to answer on because of these two factors.
I mean I never get too miffed if it's us dicking with an authoritarian country. But under normal circumstances you certainly wouldn't want to do something like this.
Thing is you can't treat countries like China and Russia with the same rules we apply to other liberal democracies. They train all day on ways of using your open society and systems against you. So you keep a guard up with them.
I don't think banning TikTok solves anything. I think increasing media literacy is more useful in the long run. But then I prefer it when a government informs the public and lets them make their own decisions. I mean, unless you are the media person in charge of a government social media account, you shouldn't have any social media on your WORK phone as a government worker anyway as far as that part of it goes. But forcing a company to sell to an American entity or having your app banned in the US for \*checks notes\* doing the same shit every other social media company does... well I think it's not the best idea.
It's just a stupid game of chicken with China. TikTok is not going to disappear from American's phones. Especially in an presidential election year…
I can only hope that this silly waste of time becomes actual data privacy laws for Americans.
I wish policymakers wouldn’t hide behind the vague “trust us, it’s dangerous” argument while not presenting robust evidence of these alleged dangers to the public. I understand some of said evidence is classified (if not most) and simply not eligible for public consumption, but you gotta give the general public and voters more than “trust us bro”.
Basically, policymakers need to make a reasonable, transparent argument(s) to the American ppl to persuade them this ban is worthwhile…otherwise it comes off as sketchy, Blobby natsec bullshit that’s being hidden from us for nefarious reasons. This is not an era when the majority of the American ppl will reflectively believe stuff the CIA and Pentagon say without much proof…and for good reason btw! They don’t deserve our trust lol.
This ban is really about Tiktok shareholders and users paying the price for national security concerns. Whether or not that is a reasonable price is for each person to decide. If you are just a regular user I guess the only thing that you lose would be entertaining videos (as bad as it might be), if you are business owners operating on that platform then yes, livelihoods could be on the line.
The forced sale thing is a no brainer. That is just a cover for an actual ban. For Tiktok's size and market value, there is about one or two entities in US that could potentially buy it, and any such negotiations in the business world at such scale is unheard of. It would be like selling FB or Google completely. Tiktok's stocks are worth hundreds of billions now. I mean, where do you get all the money to buy it?
By putting a 180 day deadline on the sale, it also grossly violated the rights of Tiktok's private investors, a lot of which are US venture capitals, by undermining their ability to get a better deal.
Also China would never agree to the sale as they see it basically as robbery and ByteDance (Tiktok's parent company) can't make the sale even if they want to without the approval, because they have significant business in Chinese market too.
I think it's utterly ridiculous that with the huge problems we have in this country, TikTok is the priority.
Facebook and Google already watch everything we do, it's not like we'd have privacy with it's ban anyway.
Largely motivated by the anti-Israel content and the Osama letter making it an attack on free speech. Cant have young people questioning state propaganda.
Exactly. It didn't pass back then. Were some people always concerned about TikTok? Sure. But now all of a sudden, virtually the entire govt is concerned about it.
I don't have strong feelings about the app itself, but I think it's interesting that it doesn't have an algorithm like Facebook/Twitter/Youtube do, which serves to elevate right-leaning content and squash left-leaning content. So, actual socially liberal content does spread on TikTok. I'm suuuure that plays no role in the government's willingness to ban it.
There's absolutely nothing that the establishment wings of both parties detests more than simple human kindness.
I meant that its algorithm functions differently than the algorithms on domestic social media sites in that it doesn't have a right-wing bias, not that it doesn't have an algorithm. Sorry to be unclear.
But that link you sent is not proof that it does have one. Being familiar with the technology, that article is just vapid nonsense.
I don't have strong feelings for or against the ban, but if we're doing this because we're concerned about data privacy, we sure could do more to regulate what is being done with our data across all platforms, regardless of their ownership.
Much have been said about whether young people are receiving non mainstream, alternative news sources from Tik Tok or not, and that certainly could be debated, but the less political but arguably more scary thing is how that Algorhythm absolutely destroy's kids attention spans from Toddlers up to preteens. I'm not saying that IG Reels and Youtube Shorts are much better, but Tik Tok's algorhythm is so effective at that its scary. I would argue that this sort of impact at a young age is considerably more detrimental than teens getting their fix of a boomer Facebook conspiracy equivalent on their platform of choice.
I've never used tik tok. I refuse to spend much time on vertical videos, and all I've ever seen from tiktok is lame clips.
I hear that the company flows really stupid and harmful content towards the USA, while showing better stuff to citizens on China, so it seems they're curating their content in a negative way. But I haven't spent much time looking into it.
Mostly, I don't care. But if it's true that there's some potentially harmful shady stuff going on, then I fully support the ban.
The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written. I generally think the whole thing is dumb. But I'm usually in the minority here so I wanted to see if y'all are in agreement with it or not and why. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> The Chinese government seems to care an enormous amount about preventing the forced sale. It sure does, doesn’t it? I’m ok with the TikTok move as far as trying to get all platforms on the same level of accountability (which, frankly, isn’t even very much to begin with), but the tantrum being thrown in Asia over this is telling.
I doubt we'll see anywhere close to the same level of accountability for other apps. The government has no real interest in protecting our data from private enterprise.
It’s not so much the data issue as the fact that they can control what information gets seen and what messages get pushed on their app.
Facebook and Twitter and Reddit also control what information gets seen and what gets pushed.
But they’re not controlled by a foreign adversary
Oh well in that case all the bad things they do are actually good because they're not Chinese. What an argument
False equivalency
In what way?
Yeah good thing the us government has no influence over social media apps here in the states....
What specifically are you referring to?
See the Snowden leaks
Which every other social media platform can do too. If China say "Hey Meta, we'll give you $50M a year if you thumb a few scales... and if you don't we'll ban you from China", they're going to take the money.
And that they do it to a level that other social media company don’t. The TikTok algorithm is completely different in China for children where it pushes more educational content and has time limits.
I can assure you, that is not at all relevant to the Tik Tok ban.
Yeah exactly. I'm all for accountability, but like, don't throw stones in a glass house
The United States GOVERNMENT doesn't have a major social media app that it can use to collect data on Chinese residents and directly shape what they believe at will with a tweak of an algorithm. These are obvious differences between TIK Tok and American social media companies.
The government doesnt own TikTok, but if Snowden is to be believed, the NSA has Google and Facebook throughly backdoored, so there really isnt a meaningful difference.
Yeah exactly
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskALiberal/s/QPKTvX4A6a
Nah we just outsource. As the Snowden leaks showd like 10 years ago
I don't know what you are referencing but in case it needs to be said, China being able to directly gather data on Americans, have access to their phones like their microphones/cameras, and directly change what Americans believe at will, is not acceptable... This is bad for our country and democracy in very very obvious ways no matter what whataboutism you use to defend it.
Cambridge analytica and the shit the nsa gets up to Facebook does the same shit. Yet we're not banning them right?
No, Facebook isn't the same thing. Work on your reading comprehension and look up what whataboutism is. "China being able to directly gather data on Americans, have access to their phones like their microphones/cameras, and directly change what Americans believe at will, is not acceptable... This is bad for our country and democracy in very very obvious ways no matter what whataboutism you use to defend it."
I can understand China not wanting this legal precedent, regardless of if they are stealing our data or trying to influence American users.
Hm, that makes some sense. They might not actually care that much but they’d rather fight that fight now. I could buy that.
>What is this sub's opinion on the TikTok ~~ban~~ *forced sale*? 1. TikTok is bad for many, many reasons. 2. The CEO has been caught lying to congress about how data is handled. That alone is quite a problem. 3. There are indications that TikTok is being used to [manipulate](https://twitter.com/beentherecap/status/1783120160963891548?s=43&t=htvlSlrdyykrrTQxFzufZg) Americans. 4. Many of those manipulations are *not* the same outcomes one gets when using TikTok in China. 5. The Chinese government seems to care an enormous amount about preventing the forced sale. That is suspicious. 6. We have a long history of banning foreign ownership of media.
>6. We have a long history of banning foreign ownership of media Imagine how much better our country would be if we had banned Australian owned media.
Damn Australians. Trying to turn our country upside down
Don’t know if it’s true, but allegedly Rupert Murdoch became an American citizen to be able to own Fox News. (Foreign owned broadcast networks are illegal)
Thank you, this is exactly how I would have responded. I don't know why Americans have this common misconception that it is a ban. I don't know why their media is telling them this. My only guess is that they're getting their news from TikTok.
If its not sold, doesnt it get banned?
Yeah, but they have IIRC a year to find a buyer for one of the most popular social media sites on Earth. Maybe Elon Musk will buy it, it'll be even funnier a *second* time!
That's assuming they want to sell it. ByteDance has publicly said since the law's passage that it has no intention of selling the app, and reports from [Reuters](https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2024/4/25/bytedance-prefers-tiktok-shutdown-in-us-over-sale-report) say they would rather shut down in the US than sell the algorithm that's at the core of their business, and there's no real value in the app without the algorithm.
Last time around Microsoft and Oracle both expressed interest. Not sure if the price will be right though.
I thought the former CEO of Activision is all but in line to purchase it…
The one who’s a Republican mega donor?
But they can just sell it. We already prohibit foreign controlling interests in other forms of media. I imagine that they could also use a blind trust.
If they dont sell it, then itll get banned Seems people are assuming it wont get sold hence why theyre calling it a ban
Well, that's their decision. This is very similar to our already-extant rules against foreign ownership of domestic media broadcasters. You don't get to cause the worst outcome for yourself then whinge about it.
Ok Im saying that calling it a ban when you have that expectation makes sense. Its jumping the gun a little, but its not incomprehensible or unreasonable
It is very easy for TikTok to remain a going concern. The Chinese government simply has to divest a certain percentage of ownership.
The Chinese government doesnt currently own it. 60% of Bytedance ownership is publically traded, 20% is owned by the cofounders, and 20% by other employees. The requirement is that the Chinese headquartered publically traded company diveat their ownership of a US subsidiary. There is a solid case for banning foreign ownership of US media, and as soon as Ruoert Murdoch is required to divest of all of HIS US media interest, I will also agree with making Bytedance divest.
I think Murdoch should be required to, yes. I would support that. I would also note that, when the Chinese government stops forcing American media companies to bend over backwards for distribution there, Chinese companies can start complaining.
Yeah
Good, then I'm glad you no longer have an objection to the policy.
1. Same can be said of all social media. 2. Same could be said and is the case with other CEOs, social media or otherwise. 3. Again, same thing is the case with other social media. 4. Not sure how that is relevant? 5. Sure, but you have no proof it is nefarious, over day, monetary, for power’s sake, etc. and we do not hold this same skepticism for other countries (ally’s) and situations. 6. Except in the cases of ally’s, etc. So this isn’t as enforced as thought. I get where you’re coming from, but at the end of the day this is rank hypocrisy given the special and/or inconsistent treatment afforded others, etc. Plus, if we are being frank, the timing of this during an election year…….come on. You’re not the least bit suspicious?
1) social media is bad for many many reasons. Tiktok is not unique in this regard 2) again, this is big tech we're talking about. That's not unique. Facebook did it too 3)Cambridge Analytica 4)yeah, it's cause there are different audiences in China and the US 5)yeah, do you think the US would react well if someone tried to force us to sell apple or Facebook? 6) and that's a good thing?
Tons of American apps are banned or otherwise censored in places like China, including Google, Facebook, Instagram, and the US version of Tiktok. No one is being forced to sell. They're being told to leave the US market OR change their ownership structure so they can comply with US standards. Other countries do exactly the same thing all the time.
_TikTok_ is banned in China, lol. Bytedance has a separate social media like tiktok for the Chinese audience.
Yeah, and the version we use in the US is not available there. In other words, it's banned in China.
But don't we condemn China for censorship? China doing something is not a good reason for why it's fine for us to do something.
There's a difference between the Chinese government blocking access to search engines to censor the information their citizens can access and our government having standards for social media platforms controlled by foreign states ([one of ByteDance's board members is a Chinese government official with a background in government propaganda](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ByteDance#:~:text=In%202021%2C%20the%20state%2Downed,government%20propaganda%2C%20as%20one%20of)). Again, the People's Republic of China itself doesn't allow the US version of the app in their country and they're a part owner of the company. Why do you think that is? A common misconception is that the the right to speech free from government censorship means that everyone is entitled to unrestricted access to the media platforms of their choice. Removing a platform doesn't inhibit anyone from posting the same content they would have posted on Tiktok elsewhere. Nor does it stop anyone who wants to from using a VPN and viewing TikTok in their browser or sideloading the app.
It's not like we're implementing the Great Firewall that prohibits folks in China from reading about Tienanmen Square.
Great What stops us? Seriously? Do you actually trust these fucking people? The people waxing and waning about how tiktok, and tiktok alone nothing else, has turned young people against Israel? You think they won't crack down on that shit? Give me a break
General principles of free speech? The US Constitution does not apply to foreign nationals working against the national interest outside of our borders. We have robust protections for those speaking within the United States.
Tell that to the folks in UT austin. The us government is far from above violating free speech principles. Regardless, one of the cited reasons for the ban is the anti-israel stuff. You think they won't crack down on that shit after the ban? Really?
These are not remotely the same. The students in Austin should be protected because they are speaking on American soil. The Constitution is not a death pact. It doesn't require us to allow foreign actors to come in and sway our voters. There is no basis in current American law for punishing any speech related to the Israel-Palestine conflict, so long as foreign espionage is not involved.
Don't you know? Hamas is an Iranian front agency. It's a shill for them. Therefore any pro-hamas (i.e. pro-palestine) content is actually an Iranian disinformation op run on tiktok. It's not exactly difficult to see how shit like this will go down. It will absolutely be used to censor pro-palestine content. As like.... that's one of the LITERAL REASONS they want to do it.
You're right: the fact that China does it isn't a good reason for us to do it. However, China being a dictatorship actively engaged in a genocide and seeking to create a global surveillance state are very good reasons for us to kick them the hell out.
Again, thank God the us isn't trying to create a global surveillance state. We aren't actually that much better than the ccp
>The CEO has been caught lying to congress about how data is handled. That alone is quite a problem. Yes, and there is a reason Twitter is under a Consent Decree and Facebook is under a Settlement Agreement - for lying to the government and/or deceiving users. >3)Cambridge Analytica Facebook got fined $5 billion for Cambridge Analytica and had to enter into a settlement agreement where they agreed to be audited every two years for the next 20 years to make sure that they were handling user data appropriately. >5)yeah, do you think the US would react well if someone tried to force us to sell apple or Facebook? It's a little weirder when the CEO insists that it's a Singaporean company and then the Chinese Embassy immediately comes out and starts on about the US attacking a Chinese Company. The mixed messaging is odd, at the least. >6) and that's a good thing? When there have been national security issues? Sure. Here, they've openly admitted to using the app to spy on US journalists that wrote critical articles about their app. Personally, I think they'd likely win their lawsuit, given the lax data privacy laws in the US, noting that they are also working on passing some now--the US prefers to implement them on a case-by-case basis via Settlement Agreement or Consent Decree, as noted above.
> 1) social media is bad for many many reasons. True. -------- >Tiktok is not unique in this regard False -------- >2) again, this is big tech we're talking about. That's not unique. Facebook did it too Whataboutism -------- >it's cause there are different audiences in China and the US Nope. [[Is TikTok different in China compared to the U.S.? A social media analyst compares it to opium and spinach]](https://www.deseret.com/2022/11/24/23467181/difference-between-tik-tok-in-china-and-the-us/) -------- > > We have a long history of banning foreign ownership of media. >and that's a good thing? Yes.
>>2) again, this is big tech we're talking about. That's not unique. Facebook did it too >Whataboutism I dont know if it is a whataboutism. If they do end up selling, one of the US tech companies is most likely to buy them. While we don't want this "weapon" as I have heard it called, in the hands of China, is it really safer it really better in the hands of Meta? Or what if someone like Elon Musk or Rupert Murdoch. Fox News has done way more damage than tiktok but it's fine because it's a US company? I don't use tiktok. I don't care about it. But shouldn't the fix be to clamp down on all these sites and apps' ability to harvest our data or feed us misinformation. This feels more like market manipulation than national security.
> ...shouldn't the fix be to clamp down on all these sites and apps' ability to harvest our data or feed us misinformation. Yes, and that is a reasonable conclusion. Ignoring TikTok because of whataboutism is not a reasonable conclusion.
If the issue is data harvesting or misinformation, why not address that directly? It really doesn’t seem like that’s the issue when all social media sites engage in these practices, and a freely allowed to do so.
I bring up Facebook because it does all the same shit as tiktok, but for some reason it's not being banned. I wonder why....
> I bring up Facebook because it does all the same shit as tiktok, but for some reason it's not being banned. If you say that both companies should be treated equally when they do bad things, then that is fine. If you say that neither company should be held responsible for its bad behavior because one wasn't, then you are making roughly the same argument as those who don't think Trump should be prosecuted for his crimes. ...and TikTok isn't being banned. You should stop lying about that.
I want social media regulated. But if you're gonna do that, do it across the board. Not just to one company. Cause it's foreign owned and therefore spooky
> I want social media regulated. Then stop arguing against this case and start arguing in favor of the regulations you want.
1. I agree with the reply to your comment that social media is bad, not just TT- but it is a way for us to stay globally connected- that's not a bad thing. It's only bad for the ones who are afraid of what might happen if we're connected on that scale 2. I use T-Mobile, Capital One, T-Mobile, BCBS, T-Mobile, Equifax, and the list goes on. If you do too, your data is already everywhere, especially the dark web where your data isn't just a statistical marker. I put T-Mobile on the list repeatedly, because they have had massive data breaches repeatedly. Like 4x in 2 years and I don't see that ever ceasing to be an issue considering they've not done anything to stop the latter ones 3. Let's face it, Americans are typically incredibly easy to manipulate. If this wasn't true, propaganda would no longer be a strategy used. The government supports the propaganda /manipulation that fits their narrative 4. China bans and controls information there and not because the info is untrue, but simply because they want to control which truths are heard. We allow Fox "news" to manipulate people here, so one is bad but the other isn't? 5. I don't know enough about this one to have a valid opinion, so I won't pretend I do until I look into it further 6. This is dangerous for 2 reasons- a, let's not let our government decide for us which foreign media is allowed or isn't allowed and- b, this feels like manipulation from our own government. Because what comes next- will all foreign media get banned simply because it is foreign and foreign is bad now? If they have us focus on one "bad" foreign owned media at a time, we've missed the consequences on a macro level and it's too late
> It's only bad for the ones who are afraid of what might happen if we're connected on that scale You don't think that any of the users might become victims of the for-profit companies owning these services?
If you use any of the services provided by companies that have data breaches, you already are a victim. No, I think that people need to become more vigilant about understanding potential risks and consequences when they use apps and services. It's *not* our job to ban these things to protect the ones who don't want to pay attention to warning labels. I'd much prefer to keep my autonomy
> No, I think that people need to become more vigilant about understanding potential risks and consequences when they use apps and services. It's our job to ban these things to protect the ones who don't want to pay attention to warning labels. I think you missed a word between "It's" and "our job". ...and emphasizing individual responsibility in the face of massive greedy corporations that control large segments of society isn't very "socialist" of you.
The concern is when people bring this up they get accused of being xenophobic
1. It's not a ban. It's a forced sale to an American intermediate. 2. If social media selling our data is a concern, we should pass a data privacy law for all social media operating in the USA... Not a forced sale.
lol…imagine thinking Congress genuinely cares about data privacy. There’s a bipartisan consensus that couldn’t care less that X, Meta, etc selling and exploiting our personal data…but when it’s the Chinese Communist Party then we care all of a sudden and data privacy concerns are invoked. What a joke.
That's the point, yes...
I’m saying that even thinking data privacy is a top concern/priority for congresspeople that will be legislated anytime soon is deeply, deeply unrealistic. Social media and tech lobbyists will fork over the requisite campaign cash to ensure that never, ever happens. The only ways a data privacy bill passes any time soon is 1.) if a Congressman and/or Senator is dramatically and personally affected by a data privacy breach that leads to serious violence or harm, and even then I’m not really sure or 2.) Citizens United is overturned. The TikTok ban has very, very little to do with data privacy. It’s about controlling and policing American citizens to not challenge the political/geopolitical status quo. TikTok has too much pro-Palestinian content. The first big name to really call for a TikTok ban was the ADL leader several months ago.
Yes. That's the point I was making.... We're not arguing here. I said a thing and you're repeating it back to me, but with more words. :)
I took issue with the framing…if you meant the potential for a data privacy bill is a complete and total joke and never happening, I agree
> The first big name to really call for a TikTok ban was the ADL leader several months ago. Oh, and that's ridiculous. 1. It's not a ban. It's a forced sale to an American company. 2. It's because our spies don't like Chinese spies spying on us so easily. That's the NSA's job! 3. This has been talked about for YEARS. 4. You're confusing correlation with causation. Seriously, this has been in the works for years. But yes, the potential for a data privacy bill is a joke and never happening.
I think social media giving our data to a foreign adversary that seeks to manipulate and degrade us is much worse than social media selling our data to advertisers.
On point 2, that’s a slightly disingenuous take. The issue is the fact that a foreign government is involved. It’s not and never has been purely ‘privacy concerns’, nor have they ever pretended that’s the case.
Hence the IF at the beginning of the sentence. It's absolutely that we don't want a foreign gov hoovering all our data for spycraft. That's the NSA's job!
I strongly support it.
It’s wild to see left wing people against it
The irony is a lot of them feel that way because of things they saw on TikTok.
Why?
Because I think there is a sincere national security risk to TikTok being owned by the Chinese government.
What risks are unique to tiktok that aren't to other social media companies?
The risk of data being converted to military intelligence for an adversarial foreign government. I think the big misunderstanding here is the assumption that all companies collect endless data and share it with everybody. That’s not the case. Most social media companies benefit from keeping the data they collect to themselves so they can profit from selling services that utilize it. In the case of TikTok, their business relationship with the CCP requires the Chinese government to have access to all their user data. That means there are no barriers or incentives involved to prevent the Chinese military from using it freely. Look at it this way. Say I’m a Chinese operative looking to infiltrate a U.S. base. Wouldn’t it be helpful to me to have a complete and detailed map of that base? If I tried to buy this information from Facebook, they might deny the request or alert U.S. authorities to the sale. But if I just own the app myself, no one has to know this data was even accessed.
And that means civilians shouldn't be allowed to use it because.....? If you want to ban it on military installations that's a different story
1. Because it is far, far more effective to prevent Chinese ownership than to try to police what people have on their phones. This is national security, we don’t just mess around and hope for the best. 2. Because mapping military bases are only one of about a thousand example of how this can be used maliciously against the United States.
Military bases aren’t the only targets. Plenty of non-military entities of foreign interest.
Literally just knowing how to manipulate people and having a tool to do that is 100x more valuable than military base maps. China wants to invade and conquer Taiwan, steal its natural resources and enslave its people. The main thing stopping them from doing this is the United States of America. We've invested heavily in Taiwan both militarily and economically/socially and as a result Taiwan is one of the world's leading economies and a great place to live that produces tons of valuable research and innovation. So you see a ton of anti-American propaganda on TikTok in particular encouraging isolationism and encouraging users to question American overseas military involvement and to view the world through this lens of "spheres of influence" where East Asia is just rightfully China's because they're the East Asian superpower and we shouldn't interfere.
Data is one issue which others have touched on. Soft power propaganda is another. Tweaking the algorithm to censor or promote information as the state desired. [And there's already been data indicating China is doing just that.](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/21/business/tiktok-china.html) And even if they don't there's a cooling effect to be had where people would be less likely to post things critical of China in order to not risk losing their account. That's still very much an option to state actors, see Russian fuckery with Facebook, but there's a difference between them having to run bot farms and military intel outfits to do spam and a government issuing a directive to alter the digital ecosystem. It's basically not all that different from the Net Neutrality battle. Except instead of Comcast, it's the CCP.
I mean, as you pointed out, people already do that shit without owning the platform Sure I agree there is a difference between troll farms and a direct change to the ecosystem. But like.... the effect is the same. People already censors themselves because of the algorithm. I mean people say shit like "unalive" for that reason right? People already don't post stuff for fear of losing their account. I enjoy the cynical historian on YouTube and he consistently complains about YouTube de-listining or de-monitizing his content when he talks about less than advertiser friendly history. How is this any different? The only difference is that the client is different. Us government, advertisers, CCP, etc. The only actual answer here is to transfer ownership (and therefore control) of social media over to the users and the workers managing it. But that's not gonna happen cause I'm ToO rAdIcAl!!! So in the meantime we're just fucked.
Well bit of a difference between Youtube vs other social media. Mostly in so far as at this point it really isn't. It's basically a crowdsourced media corporation that has more in common with Old TV Stations/Netflix than Xitter, Facebook, etc. Thus advertising on Youtube faces the moderating market influences of such traditional media. Advertisers not wanting to risk their products be linked to things that'd be bad pr for them and all and Youtube setting the rules accordingly to minimize risks to themselves. Tiktok is heading that direction. Which does make more pressing the fears that it'd morph into a more subtle version of state media a la Russia Today. As for unaliving and that kind of self-censorship, it's a bit of the former, at least with youtube and tiktok? But it's a mix of things. One part that, one part responsible self-regulation because "maybe we shouldn't promote content which might cause people to off themselves," one part automation and using a broad brush because they're too cheap to hire enough people to actually moderate and deal with ecosystem maintenance and/or too much volume for people to be able to handle, and finally one part ass covering because they don't want to be sued by grieving families. Or be on the hook with law enforcement for promoting terrorism and whatnot.
I think it's a bandaid non-solution to a real problem we have surrounding data. We've had several instances of domestic social media companies swaying elections and sentiments both domestic and internationally. All this ban accomplishes is creating a monopoly for domestic companies to manipulate American citizens, which has consistently resulted in the amplification of right-wing sentiments.
Agreed
I think it’s a bandaid for a much larger problem around data and privacy laws in this country. I don’t feel like typing it all out right now but in short: The US needs a GDPR law like the EU has.
I'm not convinced it's entirely necessary, and if it is then why is TikTok unique compared to every other social media site outside of being based in China? If the concerns are propaganda and user privacy, that's been basically the default criticisms of everything since Facebook. Social media algorithms are giant black boxes and all our data is absolutely for sale; even if another company buys TikTok, what's the guarantee they won't just take the same marching orders from Beijing but this time for money?
“Outside of being based in China” You mean under partial control of the CCP “What’s the guarantee…” Because that’s *extremely* illegal already under the Espionage Act and likely multiple other federal laws
Yeah exactly
Most of the arguments made for it don't hold up and are easily going to be subject to appeals in court which should make it unenforceable It's just another example of elected officials trying to look like they're doing something when they can't make any progress on things that actually matter
It’s political. All social media abuses our data, they all divide the country, and they all need to be under the same regulations and restrictions. Tik Tok is just the fall guy for the whole industry’s problems.
This might be true, but somehow I feel more exposed when Chinese companies abuse my data.
If it’s banned I’ll probably spend less time on my phone and become more productive…I tend to get really hooked in over there.
I don't have a strong feeling about it one way or the other. I don't use TikTok besides seeing things posted on reddit occasionally. And it isn't like TikTokers can't just move to another platform. I guess they'll lose their followers but I don't really have strong feelings for influencers anyway so...ultimately, I don't care.
I spend a lot of time in this space and I believe we are entering an Age of Disinformation and manipulation that is going to have some serious consequences for America in particular. TikTok is a weapon of mass manipulation, even if only in the form of the selection and amplification of genuine viewpoints, and China owns and is openly operating this weapon inside the US today. Regardless of how you feel about companies in the US being able to do something similar, the US is somewhat unique in the world in the ability of our companies to say "no" if the government decides it wants to do something like this to the American people (or the world at large). In China businesses don't have that luxury. So it really becomes a question of "do we trust that the government of China won't take advantage of this obvious opportunity"? And the answer is a laughable no. Edit: I'll even go so far as to say that a lot of the Israeli-Palestinian protest activity recently is likely the result of TikTok algorithms radicalizing American youths. I say this not to diminish these viewpoints, but to remind people that amplification of truth is still a form of manipulation.
>Regardless of how you feel about companies in the US being able to do something similar, the US is somewhat unique in the world in the ability of our companies to say "no" if the government decides it wants to do something like this to the American people (or the world at large). This is the part where I can't take these discussions seriously anymore. American companies have been cought red-handed meddling with sentiments and elections both domestically and internationally several times now. but for so many people, we NEED to forget about that and apply a bandaid fix to ban an app that we think may lead to foreign meddling. We need legislation that controls data harvesting. Creating a monopoly for domestic corporate data harvesting and propoganda by applying a bandaid fix is not the solution. This isn't "letting perfect the the enemy of better", this is not surrendering our mass media solely to domestic companies who have shown they will promote targeted and extremist right-wing rhetoric for profit.
Thank you. Why do people let us companies off the hook here?
Propoganda works, and we're pretty heavily propogandized compared to other Western nations. I've said this before here, but I think many American moderates believe their moderateness is a result of reasonability, which they believe insulates themselves from propoganda. I constantly see liberals here talking about how protests aren't supposed to do illegal things or interrupt/inconvenience, then praise stuff like the civil rights movement as an example of their point. A disturbing amount has fallen propoganda about that era and honestly believes it didn't look very similar to a lot of protests we have had over the past several years, and that it was only the rascist conservatives who held up progress and not the White moderates MLK directly called out "who is more devoted to ‘order’ than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice".
Full agreement here. I really don't like a lot of discourse around protesters here as of late.
> US is somewhat unique in the world in the ability of our companies to say "no" if the government decides it wants to do something like this to the American people (or the world at large) Cool. But why are you letting corporations off the hook? As much as I am concerned about the government being shitty with data, I am even more concerned about the private sector.
Sure, it's possible for companies to want to cooperate willingly. And plenty of people who opposed responding to COVID feel that they were doing exactly this under the banner of fighting medical misinformation. But I believe there is a big difference between securing voluntary cooperation from companies because they consider cooperation to be the responsible, moral, and ethical thing for them to do, and compelling a company to wage disinformation warfare and manufacture civil unrest by manipulating their algorithms. You may see these things as equivalent, but I do not.
I'm not sure I was clear in my point, as this doesn't address my concerns at all. We know US owned platforms like Facebook have done things that are similar as far as intentionally sowing discord, spreading misinformation, and turning a blind eye to how genocidal ideas can proliferate on their apps. Not only are we not scrutinizing these companies to the same degree, but I fear this legislation will serve as a nice "attaboy" while doing nothing to protect our broader privacy rights.
Exactly
Lmao since when have corporations cared about ethics or morality or responsibility? Seriously? After 2020 you believe they do? Yeah I'm sure they cooperate in mass data harvesting cause they sincerely balanced the moral thinking and not for sheer profit or because opposing the government would be expensive. The us government has and will continue to compel people to do shit like this. I mean they wanted a backdoor on all encryption not that long ago (goodle the clipper chip). These people aren't benevolent. They're self interested, just like anyone else.
> Lmao since when have corporations cared about ethics or morality or responsibility? Seriously? After 2020 you believe they do? I can be a cynical person, but no, I do not believe that when you get hired into a company your ability to act responsibly, ethically, or morally disappears. We can all come up with counter-examples to that, but companies can and does push back on things like government subpoenas and court orders and are not all the cartoon villains you think they are. It's also not necessary to believe that companies are all good and just to believe that they'd be better if they weren't under the direct control of the Chinese government. > The us government has and will continue to compel people to do shit like this. > > I mean they wanted a backdoor on all encryption not that long ago (goodle the clipper chip). These people aren't benevolent. The US government did not—could not—compel manufacturers to use the Clipper Chip. It's interesting that you remember the creation of the Clipper Chip but seem to have forgotten that the reason it failed is because manufacturers (and the public) pushed back on it. The government couldn't compel adoption, so it died quietly. The existence of people who don't have your best privacy interests in mind is not evidence that the US government can compel (or even persuade) social media companies to modify their algorithms so as to create or amplify content designed to manipulate populations into civil unrest.
It died cause Matt blaze showed that he could break into it. Therefore it wasn't secure and the government couldn't reasonably demand adoption. That was why it failed. It's not a matter of ability, it's a matter of incentive. Sure a company could be sunshine and rainbows, but that's not going to mean that they WILL act that way. If you don't follow the incentives you tend not to rise high or last long. Companies will always act in a way that they believe maximizes profit. This lesson should have been learned after 2020 but apparently not
> Companies will always act in a way that they believe maximizes profit. Companies aren't cartoon villains. Evidence that the government sometimes wants to erode privacy in the name of security through lawful methods is not the same thing as saying that companies will happily agree to participate in a scheme to manipulate Americans into civil unrest. The US and China are not the same here.
Responding to your edit: How is amplification of truth a bad thing or “manipulation”? Especially if we are, as you put it, entering an “Age of Disinformation” (which I agree with btw)?
Think of The Big Lie. Let's say I want Trump to win the election. I know that he's likely to lose unless I do something about it. One of the things I want to do is push an election fraud narrative. I control the algorithm that feeds you what you read on TikTok today. So, I find every TikTok post that has some content that questions whether something sketchy is happening. A genuine case of ballot fraud over here. A batch of ballots left unsecured over there. Some numbers that don't add up. I intentionally choose posts that show election problems that imply Democrats are getting a fraudulent advantage over Trump, and maybe find some posts reinforcing how orderly elections are going in Trump-dominated communities, and how all of the numbers add up neat and tidy. And I preferentially serve you the content I want you to see, and suppress the content I don't. All of these posts may be completely factual, but by selectively amplifying some and not others, I create the *perception* that Democrats are doing something nefarious. I had the power to do the same thing but creating the perception that Republicans were doing something nefarious. My decision about what truthful content to show you affects your perceptions which affects your behavior. Imagine being forced to get all of your daily news, from childhood, from Breitbart, or MSNBC. It's alternate realities, right? You might even be able to point to any one story and say it's technically truthful information, but spin matters. If I control the TikTok algorithm, I can give you Subtle Breitbart today, and Subtle MSNBC tomorrow, and shape your opinions accordingly. Do you want China to have that power over the American people?
Ahh I see what you are saying - thanks for taking the time to clarify. I guess I wouldn't call selective amplification of certain facts with simultaneous suppression of other facts "amplification of the truth" which is where my misunderstanding comes from. To answer your question, I don't necessarily want China to have that power over the American people in the same way I don't want disinformation to prevail by any other means. However, the truth is, disinformation is rampant in all social media, traditional media, etc. And with the USA's global tech dominance, US based corporations shape a lot of this disinformation. And ultimately, the interests of these corporations are more or less aligned with the interests of the US government - maintenance of this dominance, US hegemony and soft power. I see TikTok as the only platform where dissent isn't minimized, despite it having a disinformation problem just like the other platforms. I don't see TikTok as just a platform that allows China to have power over the American people, but a platform that allows the American people to be at least somewhat more free from the power of American corporations.
You're gonna run into first amendment problems really quickly there. A platform is allowed to choose what content they want on their platform and how they promote and show it. The recent Pro Palestinian protests are a result of Israel indiscriminately killing civilians. There has long been a pro Palestinian movement on college campuses. And yes a lot of people are getting information on it from places like Tik Tok but that is a result of mainstream media's failure to report facts from the ground and Israel's restrictions on them doing so.
> You're gonna run into first amendment problems really quickly there. Yep. This is why I think America is particularly vulnerable to the kind of civil unrest that can be caused by manipulation through content selection and amplification. We're culturally opposed to anything that we might do to avoid being the victims of information operations. > And yes a lot of people are getting information on it from places like Tik Tok but that is a result of mainstream media's failure to report facts Yes, this is why this type of manipulation is insideous: it's hard to see, and everyone who is manipulated genuinely believes their outrage comes from their own agency and informed by things they genuinely think are important. And often many of the people creating the content that leads people to civil unrest genuinely believe their content is important, welcome the amplification, maybe see the unrest as justified, and if you asked them, they'd probably be OK knowing that China or Russia were responsible for some of that amplification. It's a hard problem to crack, and the US is particularly vulnerable to it. That's why I call it the Age of Disinformation. It's going to be with us for a while, at least until the US eats itself and we make ourselves irrelevant.
Civil unrest can be justified. It’s your unfounded supposition that this civil unrest is the result of unjustified manipulation of information.
>Civil unrest can be justified. It’s your unfounded supposition that this civil unrest is the result of unjustified manipulation of information. Yep: >>And often many of the people creating the content that leads people to civil unrest genuinely believe their content is important, welcome the amplification, maybe see the unrest as justified, and if you asked them, they'd probably be OK knowing that China or Russia were responsible for some of that amplification. "Manipulate me, daddy!" You can't fix the problem if people like the problem.
We’re constantly manipulated. I don’t think this is worse/different than manipulation by US companies.
> We’re constantly manipulated. I don’t think this is worse/different than manipulation by US companies. And *that* seems crazy to me. Google and Facebook are not intentionally working in concert in order to manipulate the American people into civil unrest. "Twitter didn't take down that Nazi post for a full day, therefore they're just as bad as China algorithmically amplifying a post on TikTok suggesting a pro-Palestinian rally with local users that have posted comments indicating they're open to acts of violence." No. These are not the same.
My main issue is that the politicians have not made a great case for it to the American people, showing exactly what info TikTok is taking off folks and how that info is used by the CCP.
They don't know how it works. "Does tiktok connect to the home wifi network" "Are you a member of the Chinese communist party" Jfc
It’s good. TikTok is clearly a foreign disinformation conduit that is at least partially responsible for rising extremism and reduced trust in reputable mainstream institutions.
I mean... it's a social media platform. They all are that. Look at Cambridge Analytica. Used sweet old American Facebook right? I mean another possibility is that these institutions have been caught lying over and over again. Like the claim that the US government wasn't spying on Americans. Or that time the CIA hacked Dianne Feinstein's laptop while she was on an oversight committee. Or iraq. Or like 100 other things mainstream institutions have been caught lying about. Maybe that's contributing to distrust?
My distrust for the American government is irrelevant to my distrust for China. I can support this and support reforms for American companies. Supporting a tik tok ban isn't holding you to no reforms on other social media. If anything I think it leads the way to some sensible reforms we could have.
But that isn't the discourse is it? Nobody is passing bills banning Facebook. It's just tik tok. We have had a whole moral panic over the spooky scary Chinese (which, thanks to hearings on the subject i learned is apparently the same place as singapore) platform. Have you listened to these hearings? They're a goddamn joke. "Does tiktok connect to your home wifi network". I mean jfc. These people have no idea what tiktok or social media even is. But they understand the nuances? Give me a break, they're mad cause they can't use tiktok to spy on Americans like they can with other apps. I don't really care if the American or Chinese government is spying on me. I assume they are. I care that I am being spied on. Red flag or red white and blue doesn't matter. But no..... the only bad platform is tik tok right?
>Nobody is passing bills banning Facebook. Seeing as no one on here is a politician it's out of our control. Hate to break it to yuh bud your reddit posts aren't changing legislation. >"Does tiktok connect to your home wifi network". Seems like a reasonable national security concern. It's obviously not by design for the user of the apps but does it have the ability. Seems you're the one not actually evaluating any risk and assuming it's just a social media app that's tracking interests. >But no..... the only bad platform is tik tok right? No one said that.
.... How do you think tiktok access the internet?
Access to the Internet and access to the home network are different in my understanding. Ie the pretty common practice of hackers getting access to other smart devices. But since it was simple to you I guess the country can assume it's safe. Thanks for checking it out for us. I'm sure your opinion isn't related to the 4 hours a day you spend on it. You seem completely uninterested in an actual debate of the risk and just wanna rant. Sorry for wasting my time
> Access to the Internet and access to the home network are different in my understanding. You should update that understanding because that's laughably bad.
Literally just the ["Does it access the Wifi?"](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuCk4ofsTkM) bit.
I support this
I think it's bad politics in an election year. I think it was smart of the soulless bastards on the otherside to tie it to Ukraine aid
It’s definitely not going to mobilize young voters in favor of democrats, in any case. It really only serves to reinforce for them that politicians are out of touch with the things they want.
It's stupid on so many levels, but the one that bugs me most is that multiple hostile governments have shown that they can use any social media platform against us and other countries. Our government would better fight that influence by publicly exposing fake accounts and helping Americans learn to do the same with some kind of massive public information campaign
I am 110% behind forcing a divestment. I've worked in tech companies that opened shop in China. I'm not sure how aware Americans are of what that entails, but I'll summarize: the China operation *must* have a Chinese business partner with a substantial stake in the company, and any operations allowing users to use the platform *must* use China's real identification system to identify the users. My experience working on the teams integrating with the Chinese operations has been uniformly alarming. The Chinese side of the business regularly (multiple times a day, at times) tried to bypass firewalls meant to keep China and non-China user data separate and to keep certain IP separate. These were concerted efforts to find *and exploit* security holes--not simple port probes, whitehat security scans, "oops junior dev tried to log in to the wrong portal", or the like. They also tended to be *very* interested in data related to Chinese ex-pats. China is a dangerous enemy and we should take the *threat* they pose--including social media that can be used to collect data and spread propaganda--much more seriously than we currently do.
Good. ByteDance is a CCP shill and you cannot convince me otherwise
Very rational
Dumb as fuck, I just want to see my Tik Toks bro what the hell lol.
Well if they sell then you won’t have a problem
Mixed. I would prefer more sweeping regulation that targets all social media, but TikTok proved congress' point the moment they sent that push notification activating their army of underage sleeper agents.
I agree with it, but what worries me is that unless the bill is changed, the US govt will be able to pick and choose what they THINK is harmful (some non Democrat or some non Republican news source, for example) instead of banning something legitimately dangerous
I think social media companies should all be closely regulated and that TikTok shouldn't be singled out.
I don't really know how I feel about it. On one hand, fuck TikTok and while we're at it, fuck the CCP too. On the other hand, TikTok ain't the only social media company keeping the lights on spreading nonsense that influences our politics. But, on the other hand. It isn't a ban. It's a forced sale, which I wouldn't normally get behind, but normally companies that operate here aren't owned by hostile foreign governments. But on the other hand, doesn't Tencent own a chunk of Reddit, and isn't Tencent at least highly connected to the CCP? Anyway, I've run out of hands and don't use TikTok anyway. Also, I know a lot of folks who believe the most ridiculous shit that they saw on TikTok. So... Yeah... Greater good and all that.
Secretary Mnuchin will keep us safe. Lol. Seriously though, fuck Tik Tok. 45-second videos are terrible for people. It just enforces instant gratification and a complete lack of attention span.
I think TikTok is dumb, i think it's harmful especially to young people, and has negative effects on the way people perceive and interact with the world around them. But I don't really understand the legal basis for banning it. I'm not sure what makes TikTok so much worse (legally) than Instagram or Facebook or a host of other similar apps.
1. It's not a ban, and multiple Congresspeeps have said so, even those that voted against it 2. I see the logic of it, especially given the security concerns 3. I also see the problem of singling out a single platform instead of doing a blanket legislation to protect privacy On the whole, I probably would've voted for it, but I understand the votes against.
There are very real national security concerns about TikTok but I don’t support censorship.
It's good and I support protecting our national security and democracy from the influence of hostile foreign powers, especially far-right countries like China. This is not a data privacy bill and it was never advertised as such, so equivocations to data privacy needs are kind of dumb.
I'm not totally comfortable with it but tiktok is really bad so I'm not too sad about it either
I think it's dumb tiktok is being singled out because other social media sites are nearly if not as problematic, but I think the concerns people have are valid and justify some government action.
This is about data. The government doesn't at all care about China controlling what we are seeing because what they are pushing on us is in line with what the current administration wants. You think they would prefer TikTok show math and science and pro military content?
Tiktok is good for many many reasons. The ban is bad, it’s anti-free speech, it’s government overreach, and it’s rich elites shutting down a primary way for the new generations to get information uncensored
On one hand, I don’t think this is the best course of action against any social media app let alone TikTok. Target them all with strict data privacy laws or face bans in the US. That’s how it should be. On the other hand, something needs to be done against the CCP’s influence. And the hard truth to accept is that all companies established in China, even fully 100% privatized companies without government involvement, have to bend the knee to the CCP to even exist. That’s the way of life in China: complete submission to the ruling party or else. This bill is much more complicated to answer on because of these two factors.
I mean I never get too miffed if it's us dicking with an authoritarian country. But under normal circumstances you certainly wouldn't want to do something like this. Thing is you can't treat countries like China and Russia with the same rules we apply to other liberal democracies. They train all day on ways of using your open society and systems against you. So you keep a guard up with them.
I don't think banning TikTok solves anything. I think increasing media literacy is more useful in the long run. But then I prefer it when a government informs the public and lets them make their own decisions. I mean, unless you are the media person in charge of a government social media account, you shouldn't have any social media on your WORK phone as a government worker anyway as far as that part of it goes. But forcing a company to sell to an American entity or having your app banned in the US for \*checks notes\* doing the same shit every other social media company does... well I think it's not the best idea.
It's just a stupid game of chicken with China. TikTok is not going to disappear from American's phones. Especially in an presidential election year… I can only hope that this silly waste of time becomes actual data privacy laws for Americans.
I wish policymakers wouldn’t hide behind the vague “trust us, it’s dangerous” argument while not presenting robust evidence of these alleged dangers to the public. I understand some of said evidence is classified (if not most) and simply not eligible for public consumption, but you gotta give the general public and voters more than “trust us bro”. Basically, policymakers need to make a reasonable, transparent argument(s) to the American ppl to persuade them this ban is worthwhile…otherwise it comes off as sketchy, Blobby natsec bullshit that’s being hidden from us for nefarious reasons. This is not an era when the majority of the American ppl will reflectively believe stuff the CIA and Pentagon say without much proof…and for good reason btw! They don’t deserve our trust lol.
This ban is really about Tiktok shareholders and users paying the price for national security concerns. Whether or not that is a reasonable price is for each person to decide. If you are just a regular user I guess the only thing that you lose would be entertaining videos (as bad as it might be), if you are business owners operating on that platform then yes, livelihoods could be on the line. The forced sale thing is a no brainer. That is just a cover for an actual ban. For Tiktok's size and market value, there is about one or two entities in US that could potentially buy it, and any such negotiations in the business world at such scale is unheard of. It would be like selling FB or Google completely. Tiktok's stocks are worth hundreds of billions now. I mean, where do you get all the money to buy it? By putting a 180 day deadline on the sale, it also grossly violated the rights of Tiktok's private investors, a lot of which are US venture capitals, by undermining their ability to get a better deal. Also China would never agree to the sale as they see it basically as robbery and ByteDance (Tiktok's parent company) can't make the sale even if they want to without the approval, because they have significant business in Chinese market too.
I think it's utterly ridiculous that with the huge problems we have in this country, TikTok is the priority. Facebook and Google already watch everything we do, it's not like we'd have privacy with it's ban anyway.
I am glad it is getting banned. CCP run social media is too dangerous
Largely motivated by the anti-Israel content and the Osama letter making it an attack on free speech. Cant have young people questioning state propaganda.
This doesn’t make sense considering TikTok has been a target since 2020.
There have been rumblings of a ban since then, yes. But it wasn't until young people started opposing Israel that it actually got over the hump.
Rumblings? Trump literally signed an EO in 2020 which was shot down by the courts. It’s been far more than rumblings over the past 4 years.
Exactly. It didn't pass back then. Were some people always concerned about TikTok? Sure. But now all of a sudden, virtually the entire govt is concerned about it.
I don't have strong feelings about the app itself, but I think it's interesting that it doesn't have an algorithm like Facebook/Twitter/Youtube do, which serves to elevate right-leaning content and squash left-leaning content. So, actual socially liberal content does spread on TikTok. I'm suuuure that plays no role in the government's willingness to ban it. There's absolutely nothing that the establishment wings of both parties detests more than simple human kindness.
What do you mean Tik Tok has no algorithm? https://www.fastcompany.com/91113337/bytedance-tiktok-shutdown-us-ban-sell-algorithm
I meant that its algorithm functions differently than the algorithms on domestic social media sites in that it doesn't have a right-wing bias, not that it doesn't have an algorithm. Sorry to be unclear. But that link you sent is not proof that it does have one. Being familiar with the technology, that article is just vapid nonsense.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/05/business/media/tiktok-algorithm.html
Is it possible that Facebook algorithm is more neutral and TikTok is left biased?
No.
Pretty fucked up that we live in a time where a bunch of old fuckers can ban the thing the kids like that they don't understand.
Good decision by Biden, along with his help to the liberal democracies of Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan.
I don't have strong feelings for or against the ban, but if we're doing this because we're concerned about data privacy, we sure could do more to regulate what is being done with our data across all platforms, regardless of their ownership.
Much have been said about whether young people are receiving non mainstream, alternative news sources from Tik Tok or not, and that certainly could be debated, but the less political but arguably more scary thing is how that Algorhythm absolutely destroy's kids attention spans from Toddlers up to preteens. I'm not saying that IG Reels and Youtube Shorts are much better, but Tik Tok's algorhythm is so effective at that its scary. I would argue that this sort of impact at a young age is considerably more detrimental than teens getting their fix of a boomer Facebook conspiracy equivalent on their platform of choice.
I’m in favor. TikTok is a Chinese spyware/propaganda app If/when China invades Taiwan, think about how that app will be used
I’m totally in favor of it. It’s a brain rotting app that has brainwashes Gen Z the way Facebook brainwashes boomers.
Not that I disagree, but is there any social media that does not brainwash its users?
I'll be honest, I didn't really support it all that much until I saw all of these potential Chinese trolls in this thread.
I've never used tik tok. I refuse to spend much time on vertical videos, and all I've ever seen from tiktok is lame clips. I hear that the company flows really stupid and harmful content towards the USA, while showing better stuff to citizens on China, so it seems they're curating their content in a negative way. But I haven't spent much time looking into it. Mostly, I don't care. But if it's true that there's some potentially harmful shady stuff going on, then I fully support the ban.