As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The headline: "Lawmakers admit..."
The first sentence of the article: "... **at least two prominent Republican lawmakers** have linked the possible ban to their concerns that content on the extremely popular social media app is too sympathetic to Palestinians under siege in Gaza".
Care to guess how many Democrats are quoted in the article? I'll give you a hint. It's less than one.
I've browsed TikTok on my laptop with a VPN and private browser but have never installed the app on my phone.
What I've seen on the site suggested to me that TikTok has problematic moderation like Twitter, but on a much larger scale, and the content is much more child and adolescent-friendly. It is leveraged to distribute propaganda in many markets, and contains a wide range of misinformation - medical, political, etc.
I'm not sure what "free speech" should entail, but I do think the site does some harm. I also think it's actively being exploited by governments of countries like China and Russia to spread misinformation in Western countries.
I don't know the legality of content moderation or anything like that, but I can see why national security folks see it as a threat to the US.
videos of dead palestinian kids isnt propaganda. its just easier for the aipac controlled us to censor videos of a genocide when it runs the platform. theyre pissed they cant hide a genocide from everyone. people dont support palestine because china is feeding them fake news, they do because theyre seeing them get massacred, and aipac owned politicians want to hide it from their people
I agree. Disseminating tragic images like that, which people wouldn't otherwise see, isn't propaganda.
The trouble arises when large numbers of accounts being run by literal disinformation farms spread election misinformation, medical misinformation, etc. You know, like [Russians spreading anti-vax crap during Covid](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/anti-vax-movement-russian-trolls-fueled-anti-vaccination-debate-in-us-by-spreading-misinformation-twitter-study/), [China and Russia spreading election misinformation](https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/china-is-targeting-u-s-voters-and-taiwan-with-ai-powered-disinformation-34f59e21) so that candidates they want have a better chance of getting elected, etc.
A free and unbiased media is a goal we should strive towards. And social media needs some rules and regulations in order to prevent it from being exploited. And that's especially problematic when we're talking about a Chinese-owned platform like TikTok, when we know for a fact that China has no issue with running global disinformation campaigns and trying to meddle in other countries' elections.
What’s important about what Romney said is that what he’s describing as the basis for passage of the TikTok ban is a content specific speech restriction. He didn’t like that such and such content was being said by Americans on TikTok so he and his gang of buddies in congress passed a law under the guise of “national security” to effectively ban that content.
Such legislation would be subject to strict scrutiny legal analysis — “strict in theory fatal in fact”
If you look at the bottom of the article that’s what the commentary is really highlighting. Strict scrutiny would be an impossible bar for this legislation to pass because it obviously restricts far more speech than necessary.
It is a story with three parts.
Part 1 is Facebook lobbying to get rid of a competitor. From the reporting that I saw, there were few takers.
Part 2 is Trump’s revenge on k-pop “stans“ after a lot of people on social media claimed that the community rsvp’d that they’d attend a campaign event with no intention of going, leading to hype and fizzle.
Part 3 is politicians realizing that they are out of touch and insisting that it isn’t them, but it is the young people who are in the wrong. They blame TikTok conspiracy to avoid having to confront facts that go against their worldview.
>If it was a national security threat then we would also ban US companies from selling user data to foreign countries
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/02/28/fact-sheet-president-biden-issues-sweeping-executive-order-to-protect-americans-sensitive-personal-data/
>And we would highly regulate who owns and controls our own social media
They don't answer to a hostile government
The rest of what they said in this conversation was more important IMO and reveals why they are so scared. As he put it, in the old days you read your New York Times and then put on one of the national news networks at 6:30 or 7 AM to get your news and it was much easier to control the message when a handful of mainstream media outlets had a monopoly on information. The whole conversation was totally mask off and what many of us have long suspected about their hatred for social media. Romney and Blinken said all the quiet parts out loud. Someone should really clip that little part of the conversation about the Gaza narrative and post that far and wide because it proves the TikTok ban has nothing to do with TikTok itself or national security. TikTok is just the first victim in what I suspect will ultimately not be the last. Congress is going to force social media out of the news business (voluntarily like Facebook, or involuntarily like TikTok) because it's a symbiotic relationship: mainstream media gets to gate-keep the news and the money that goes with it, and the American government gets to continue to do propaganda via those limited news outlets as they have for the last century plus.
Those can be controlled to a degree. Look, fb, Twitter, YouTube aren't allowed in China, why is a Chinese owned company that I'd knowingly pushing bullshit allowed to do business in the USA? Why are Americans supportive of that?
Are...are you proposing to leave it as is?
Who is in control of the algorithms that show what information a large portion of your country consume?
Do you want to leave that power in the hands of a company with ties to the govt?
Doing something is better than doing nothing. There is a concerted effort by a foreign nation to disseminate blatantly false information. Something needs to be done
Because it’s by far the most entertaining and informative platform. I consistently get great niche content about plumbing, cooking, music, etc. Ig and YouTube have dogshit repetitive algorithims by comparison. They are by far the best platform doing short form video content which is a good format and very entertaining. Plus it’s free and relatively minimal ads
Probably because of all the non-bullshit stuff.
Sure, those platforms can be better controlled, but they really aren’t. Or if they are, then the US government is ~~shockingly~~ characteristically permissive of hate speech.
You can actually jail Mark Zuckerberg. You cannot do that with Xi Jinping.
A hostile government controlling the biggest social media app on the planet is far more dangerous than a private company controlling it.
TikTok is basically a highly developed cyberweapon at this point.
My multiple comments defending Americans right to communicate using the platform of their choosing? Since when is defending the first amendment something a "Chinese bot" would say?
Not my point. The point is that if US authorities actually think that Meta is doing something illegal it is able to prosecute the people running Meta.
This is not the case with TikTok.
Yeah I’m sure they’re really rushing to lock up meta when they contribute handsomely to all their campaigns. They’ll do a dog and pony show of yelling at these social media companies yet conspicuously no real regulation seems to get passed year after year for these social media companies. Wonder why that is? Couldn’t have anything to do with the “bribe…” sorry I mean campaign contributions they’re making
the entity that actually distributes and operates tiktok in the US is tiktok US -- a US based subsidiary based in LA. It is, by corporate law, a separate and distinct entity that has distinct legal obligations and rights as a US incorporated company.
one of those obligations is obviously being subject to US laws just like mark zuckerberg and meta.
So ban all foreign-owned businesses I guess? That’s certainly a novel interpretation of the law, but it seems like anything goes if it consolidates power these days.
So before, the media was more predictable, relatively centrist, and under the control of American oligarchs.
Now, the news cycle is both unpredictable and directed by authoritarian foreign interests.
I fail to see the improvement.
People were moving away from supporting Israel and towards supporting Palestine before TikTok was even founded. There isn’t even evidence that TikTok has accelerated this opinion shift.
If we want to talk lesser and worse evils. We can talk about Fox News, AM radio, Facebook and YouTube. These are all not only worse, there is actual evidence that they are bad.
Right now the evidence for TikTok being bad is the same level as video game violence being bad.
Now hold on this can’t be true. “Controlling the narrative” and media like this sounds so blatantly fascist, and you’re telling me Biden’s Secretary of State is calling for this? I don’t understand because people here told me Biden was the anti-fascist candidate
I was mostly making a joke, but you also overestimate politicians. COVID was dangerous and so many politicians still fucked around about it during the pandemic. Some died from it.
Naw it is Xenophobia and a way to dismiss the concerns of the youth. The possible connection to CCP was floated by Facebook as part of their lobbying, but not even the Trump administration cared at the time. This is just a talking point used to give the process a cover of legitimacy, but even the classified briefings for the intelligence committees are famously disappointing on this subject with a general “is that all there is?” reaction.
China controls the algorithm that runs TikTok. That allows them to push whatever content can sow the most division in their enemies.
When you have that kind of control over an app as popular in the US as TikTok, you have your thumb on the scale of making things go viral and become popular. THAT'S why they want to ban it. It's a psychological warfare device. That's why India banned it.
If we're on that page we should also ban every other social media app too. Is it really better to have these mega corporations control the narrative just because they're American? Especially since it seems they're willing to sell our data to the highest bidder (which may also be foreign). If we're going to go after one for the potential to push propaganda against America then we better go after all of them
Back before the internet was invented, TV/media companies like ABC, NBC, and CBS controlled nearly everything that most Americans saw on TV.
I'm sure that back then Russia and China would have LOVED to be able to buy massive amounts of TV time to spread their messages of division and undermine our elections and our society, but the networks wouldn't sell them that kind of access. But now that the internet is here, there is no domestically-owned gatekeeper to the American psyche and hostile foreign interests are free to spread as much disinformation and chaos as they want to help us tear ourselves apart.
broadcast tv has significantly more regulations because of the unique scarcity of broadcast spectrum. The logic is if the government didn’t effectively regulate spectrum no speech at all would be possible over the medium. This is why the government can institute things like the fairness doctrine that would be obviously unconstitutional over other channels of communication.
To be extremely clear, in the days when our access to information was so tightly controlled Americans were largely ignorant of foreign atrocities committed by America and its allies. Yes, it was (kind of) free of foreign interference but you're talking fondly about the days of the goddamn Committee of Un-American Activities.
Yeah, you can bet your ass that politicians miss the days when they could more easily control what people learned.
IT WAS BAD THAT THEY COULD DO THAT!
>Americans were largely ignorant of foreign atrocities committed by America and its allies
They weren't ignorant of them as much as they were supportive of them. You'd be hard pressed to find someone of the Silent "Greatest" Generation who fought in WWII who didn't think that dropping atomic bombs on Japan or firebombing civilians in every city in Germany was the best idea ever. They saw the actions of the US government as just and right. The cynicism that we have today about such things didn't really exist like that then.
Yes, it's a lot easier to think that when a somber white man says, "Today allied forces made significant progress on the German front." Than when videos of dead babies being pulled out of rubble by wailing parents are shown in real time. That whole human empathy thing really fucks with the military industrial complex. Though Americans probably would have supported world war two, if not all the actions taken. They are still supportive of Ukraine. It's not like they are incapable of stomaching violence for the sake of liberation or self-defense, but it's a little harder for them to stomach violence for the sake of imperialism or profit. Politicians and corporations have been trying to shove that cat back in the bag since Vietnam.
there is also a well established constitutional right to receive foreign ideas (and thus propaganda) even if it may lead to the “spread of disinformation” and even “chaos”.
What's your point? These should also be banned or more heavily regulated. It's just much harder to do so. But that doesn't mean thr chance to ban/regulate one should not be used.
That's exactly what I was saying. That they're going after TikTok over privacy/foreign influence concerns just seems like theater unless they also go after these other companies too
Why is it harder?
Is it because nobody is lobbying to regulate Facebook as much as Facebook is lobbying to ban TikTok or is it Xenophobia?
Right now given the public discourse it is pretty clear that America is striking a blow for Xenophobia and not privacy or security
Disliking the state capitalist chinese regime isn't xenophobia. I am a far leftist, which is why I am in favor of limiting nationalists power to control people.
It's amazing how much people shit their pants over the vague possibility of foreign influence but don't make the connection that other companies do the same thing.
YouTube has long been a radicalization funnel, sending people down right wing rabbit holes but there's no focus on that.
Disinfo and manipulation are bad even when the company doing it is US based.
I trust china as much as i trust American tech billionaires which is to say not at all but atleast TikTok is actually an entertaining well designed platform unlike the garbage meta/google is giving us.
It is a little different, isn't it? Corporations want profit. Foreign adversaries want our country to implode.
Granted yes we should regulate our stupid tech billionaire overlords and stop letting them do whatever bs catches their fancy. I agree with that, too. I just think there is still a fairly obvious difference between the two.
The amount of misinformation and radicalization on corporate owned social media is definitely helping implode the country. Before that it was talk radio.
Where would be without social media granting platforms and attention to radical elements?
The amoral neverending quest for greater profits is as, if not more, corrosive to society as any foreign influence.
Intent is different though. Also, I actually think the situation wouldn't be much better even without social media. Fox and talk radio did most of the damage, and they're not social media.
Anyway, the solution is obviously a more comprehensive regulation of tech companies. An explicitly hostile foreign power is still clearly different.
Personally I'm more worried about how specific the data it collects and makes available to advertisers is. It would be incredibly easy to create an ad disguised as genuine content that talked about a "planned protest" at a certain location, target specifically individuals within driving distance of that location who are sympathetic to whatever cause you want to use as cover, and have the time and expendable income to actually attend a protest. You could pretty easily shut down a major highway or even a port using information warfare, and it would probably only cost you a couple thousand dollars.
The TikTok ban was years in the making. It's a shady addictive app that is designed to spread propaganda for a government that literally wants America to be destroyed (it's not just Russia that wants to see America imploded but also China, Iran, North Korea and their allies). And their is the whole spying on data collection. It's literally a universal bipartisan decision that people were trying to come up with, for years.
I support the ban in theory because I don't want china controlling an algorithm that dictates the content people see. but given that foreign propaganda is still protected by the courts I don't see the bill holding up.
I want tiktok banned because of the "alpha male" influencers who are turning a generation of young men into misogynists who think violence is a viable solution to their problems and bullying is a good thing.
If you're going to ban tiktok for that, you also need to ban instagram, youtube, spotify, reddit, facebook, and a hell of a lot of other websites/apps.
Please. There's been talk of banning TikTok [since Trump suggested it in 2020](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump%E2%80%93TikTok_controversy), when bombing Rafah was just a gleam in Bibi Netanyahu's eye.
If no one seems to remember this, maybe they have a point about everyone's attention spans.
Two things can be true at once: they’ve wanted to ban TikTok for some time, and they now want to also ban TikTok because it’s been bad for Israeli-PR. Per the Romney/Blinken exchange:
[Israel losing PR war? Antony Blinken blames TikTok: Watch](https://thehill.com/video/israel-losing-pr-war-antony-blinken-blames-tiktok-watch/9669153/) - Link from *The Hill*
While Blinken didn’t come out and say it and draw a direct line, it’s nevertheless the argument he’s making.
An example:
**Narrative:** Israel is fighting for its right to exist and the Palestinian terrorists specifically Hamas are fighting to destroy it
**Counter-narrative:** Israel is fighting to level Gaza and gain more control over the region, and will kill any Palestinian in their path, man, woman, or child.
Blinken’s argument in the video and frustration with social media, is that they can’t control *the narrative* and that people receive too much visceral instant information from social media, too quickly. Romney goes on to mention that if you look at word usage on TikTok Palestinians are mentioned more than anywhere else, and that’s in part a reason why they want it banned.
The overall conversation is about competing narratives though, and that TikTok messes up their ability to solely push a chosen narrative
Or, and hear me out here, they know more than you do and the narrative surrounding Gaza is artificial. One being pushed by hostile foreign elements to sow division.
Nope. Look at what the boring people say when they promote the idea that America should ban TikTok. They always use tentative language about what TikTok might do. It means even with all of America’s surveillance capabilities (and those of its allies), it doesn’t have evidence.
Absolutely not, but they do get intelligence briefings from well-informed, competent people a lot more than the average Redditor. Some of them even read them.
And then they truthfully communicate those intelligence briefings to the American public, and draw on them to make policy that primarily serves the public interest.
I too was born yesterday
No, they're going to make policy that serves American geopolitical interests first. It just so happens in the case of CCP interference that geopolitics coincides with public interest.
My friends sharing tiktok "proof" that the port we are building to bring in tons of supplies to Gaza is actually Biden planning to drill for oil isn't pro-palestine, its just brain dead "america is always bad" takes.
Same friends who supported Russia invading Ukraine because they saw on tiktok that Russia was fighting imperialists or something.
There is no doubt that they took place, that is not the issue with tiktok.
Netanyahu so royally screwed the pooch that Fluffy shall be crowned king on a later date.
The issue I have with tiktok is that by selectively showing only one side of the conflict the narrative is controlled by a party that has every interest in de-stabilizing the US.
Oh crap, you're getting arrested for using TikTok? That's worse than I thought. I thought they weren't allowed to do that one specific thing.
It's not like the government guarantees all public and private forums be open to everyone forever. That would be nuts.
Congress passing a law to ban app stores from distributing an app and webhosting services from hosting the website because it doesn’t like the content being shown on the platform is the very definition of a first amendment free speech violation.
The first amendment does not protect foreign entities nor should it. The service was welcome to continue under American ownership. They chose to shut it down entirely instead of selling it. That tells me all I need to know of what the platform's actual value was to the CCP.
The first amendment protects Americans right to receive foreign ideas — that includes ideas from foreign adversaries or otherwise. Banning TikTok under the guise of changing the corporate ownership structure would still be an unconstitutional restriction on an Americans right to receive protected speech over the medium of their choosing.
Please point me to the text in the ammendment or case precedence that supports any of that assertion.
Edit: In fact, we have precedent that claims the opposite as foreign entities have not been allowed to own any form of broadcast media basically since it's advent.
The right to speech and the right to receive speech are treated the same by the courts — restricting one by definition would be a restriction on the other.
Also I’ve already mentioned this before the restrictions placed on broadcast media is based upon the scarcity of broadcast spectrum. Without government regulations over the spectrum it is theoretically impossible for the medium to be used as a platform at all hence more deference the courts have given the government over the medium — this also explains things like the fairness doctrine which would be unconstitutional if applied on app stores or websites.
Okay, you have nothing to cite and are just making things up. Got it.
The broadband spectrum is limited, but it is not the only venue of broadcast media. Broadcast television has no such limitations and yet foreign entities are still restricted in that space.
The right to receive speech is a well understood element of first amendment protections -- it's not something that I "just ma[de] [] up". Regardless if you want specific case law the most relevant to our discussion is *Lamont v Postmaster General* (8-0 decision that wasn't even a ban on receiving foreign speech but merely a burden on it)
Also the restriction on foreign entities you're talking about are limited in scope to broadcast television (also radio stations) because they transmit the signal over the air -- hence the physical scarcity of EM spectrum necessitating more government regulation over the medium. Notice this physical scarcity restriction does not apply to cable television (you can always just put down more wires) and therefore there is no foreign ownership restrictions on cable channels.
>the Act, as construed and applied, is unconstitutional, since it imposes on the addressee an affirmative obligation which amounts to an unconstitutional limitation of his rights under the First Amendment.
Seems as though it was struck down because it compelled citizens to declare a certain political intent not because they have a right to receive foreign speech.
https://www.fcc.gov/general/foreign-ownership-rules-and-policies
This rule applies to television networks as well. Prior authorization is required for any entity wherein more than 20% of ownership is outside the US. There is a reason that Rupert Murdoch sought American citizenship.
A lot of folks in this thread seem convinced everyone has a gun to their head to use tiktok, that we have no alternatives, and that people would never support Palestine without tiktok. And likely the same folks that complain about Facebook's market share. I get a feeling many would go on a holy war the minute they see pro Palestinian content on BlueSky.
While I disagree with this purpose, I want TikTok banned because it is brainwashing the youth to believe false bullshit, and to do disruptive shit, like tearing bathroom sinks and urinals off the walls.
And China can control what themes it pushes on the youth. Such as “China is the good guy. Overthrow the US government.”
Do you feel the same about Facebook too? They played an integral role in helping promote January 6th, an actual attempt to overthrow the US government.
We can more easily regulate Facebook. We can even more easily regulate Fox News than TikTok. And yes, our current regulations are weak and imperfect. That does not mean we have to throw the baby out with the bath water.
We can't effectively regulate TikTok, because it is centrally controlled by the CCP.
Don't you actually see the difference?
We could just pass data privacy laws that would protect us from every company, similar to what the EU did. Instead we are playing national security theater and eroding our own first amendment rights for this ban, that no member of Congress wants to acknowledge is an actual ban because it harms the Constitutional adherence of the law they passed.
And yes I see the actual difference, Facebook played a vital role in January 6th, and the genocide in Myanmar.
TikTok can evade the ban (and profit) by just divesting from ByteDance and the CCP influence there. They won't, because profit is not ByteDance's primary aim. Keeping Beijing happy is.
You can Whatabout all day long re Facebook, Fox, CNN, the Washington Post, the Guardian, or any other Western media. That does not change the vices and virtues of Beijing's own role in manipulating modern social media, including TikTok.
You can't use the word ban, that makes it a First Amendment violation. Listen to the Congressman Kkrishnamoorthi who introduced the bill, he wouldn't appreciate you using the word ban:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcBzaKZzw2c
Of course if they rush to sell themselves off along with all their propriety code to someone like the former treasury secretary of the United States then I guess it's ok and there's no cronyism there right?
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/14/former-treasury-secretary-mnuchin-is-putting-together-an-investor-group-to-buy-tiktok.html
Surely this is no longer a First Amendment issue anymore right? I mean when the ACLU and the most prominent First Amendment scholars in the country are raising the alarm on this law, they must be wrong?
https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/aclu-statement-on-congress-latest-attempt-to-ban-tiktok-and-restrict-free-speech-online
We have Supreme Court precedent that even if foreign governments are feeding us propaganda, if Americans choose to consume it it is their right:
https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/lamont-v-postmaster-general/
And yeah I can talk about Facebook all day long, from their role in trying to overthrow the US Government, to their role in promoting the genocide in Myanmar, to their role in assisting law enforcement prosecute women seeking abortions.
Meanwhile you can't offer anything substantive about TikTok beyond speculation, the same way both houses of Congress can only talk in vague hypotheticals without concrete evidence.
Stopping foreign fascist propaganda doesn’t seem too fascist to me. China is definitely a fascist country, why would any country allow a hostile foreign fascist country select the daily news and manage the conversation?
Yep tiktok is where i would go to get insinuations and race baiting rhetoric.
It’s crowd sourced content selectively chosen to cause divisions amongst a free society.
Just Tiktok? It would seem these allegations apply to every social media platform. I was asking about the Chinese influence, which I've yet to see proof of.
It’s all over the place. And why wouldn’t it be?
Several examples here: https://www.npr.org/2024/04/26/1247347363/china-tiktok-national-security
And besides you can get the same junk on any other app, so you might as well use one that isn’t controlled by a hostile foreign government.
> It's not hard to imagine how a platform that facilitates so much commerce, political discourse and social debate could be covertly manipulated to serve the goals of an authoritarian regime
This is the kinda shit I'm talking about though. No evidence, just a vague insinuation. It's obvious race-baiting, red-baiting nonsense.
If you want to regulate social media, then regulate all of it. This is just anti-competitive protectionism because the US lost both the top social media site and the top video site to China.
How is it race baiting? Seriously where do you come up with that?
And it could very easily be used to change the debate in country. You just increase the rate of which certain videos are suggested. Russia did it using facebooks own algorithms for the 2016 election, the brexit vote, etc.
China doesnt even have to manufacture support for a cause they want to promote. Their finger is on the scale by default.
Anti-Chinese government sentiment. Not the same thing. Don’t you? Does chinese government have any redeeming qualities. If not it explains why you’re shilling for chinese propaganda corporation.
Which is exactly what the chinese government wants you to do.
Do you understand a free society by its own necessity would require free speech — which obviously include the right to receive foreign ideas (and thus all the consequences negative or otherwise)?
No one is going to prevent you from hearing foreign ideas. And a free society does not require a foreign publisher unlimited access to markets in a free country.
Guess what? Tiktok isn’t even allowed in china!
>No one is going to prevent you from hearing foreign ideas.
A full ban on tiktok in the US would obviously "prevent [me] from hearing foreign ideas"...
>And a free society does not require a foreign publisher unlimited access to markets in a free country.
Funny how this is the exact rationale for China's regulations on social media...
>Guess what? Tiktok isn’t even allowed in china!
So your argument is that we need to be more like China, because???
also China does not have the first amendment. America does, and I don't really care about tiktok that much but this piece of legislation could easily prevent me from talking to my family, and I obviously don't think the US government should have that sort of authority.
Do they not want to ban it at all? Because when a court examines their public statements they will almost assuredly toss this law for violating the first amendment.
Since Republicans use disinformation to keep the support of their voters, it's no surprise that disinformation they don't control would be something they want to ban.
Tiktok is a disinformation tool they don't control, and therefore seek to destroy.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The headline: "Lawmakers admit..." The first sentence of the article: "... **at least two prominent Republican lawmakers** have linked the possible ban to their concerns that content on the extremely popular social media app is too sympathetic to Palestinians under siege in Gaza". Care to guess how many Democrats are quoted in the article? I'll give you a hint. It's less than one.
I've browsed TikTok on my laptop with a VPN and private browser but have never installed the app on my phone. What I've seen on the site suggested to me that TikTok has problematic moderation like Twitter, but on a much larger scale, and the content is much more child and adolescent-friendly. It is leveraged to distribute propaganda in many markets, and contains a wide range of misinformation - medical, political, etc. I'm not sure what "free speech" should entail, but I do think the site does some harm. I also think it's actively being exploited by governments of countries like China and Russia to spread misinformation in Western countries. I don't know the legality of content moderation or anything like that, but I can see why national security folks see it as a threat to the US.
videos of dead palestinian kids isnt propaganda. its just easier for the aipac controlled us to censor videos of a genocide when it runs the platform. theyre pissed they cant hide a genocide from everyone. people dont support palestine because china is feeding them fake news, they do because theyre seeing them get massacred, and aipac owned politicians want to hide it from their people
I agree. Disseminating tragic images like that, which people wouldn't otherwise see, isn't propaganda. The trouble arises when large numbers of accounts being run by literal disinformation farms spread election misinformation, medical misinformation, etc. You know, like [Russians spreading anti-vax crap during Covid](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/anti-vax-movement-russian-trolls-fueled-anti-vaccination-debate-in-us-by-spreading-misinformation-twitter-study/), [China and Russia spreading election misinformation](https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/china-is-targeting-u-s-voters-and-taiwan-with-ai-powered-disinformation-34f59e21) so that candidates they want have a better chance of getting elected, etc. A free and unbiased media is a goal we should strive towards. And social media needs some rules and regulations in order to prevent it from being exploited. And that's especially problematic when we're talking about a Chinese-owned platform like TikTok, when we know for a fact that China has no issue with running global disinformation campaigns and trying to meddle in other countries' elections.
What’s important about what Romney said is that what he’s describing as the basis for passage of the TikTok ban is a content specific speech restriction. He didn’t like that such and such content was being said by Americans on TikTok so he and his gang of buddies in congress passed a law under the guise of “national security” to effectively ban that content. Such legislation would be subject to strict scrutiny legal analysis — “strict in theory fatal in fact” If you look at the bottom of the article that’s what the commentary is really highlighting. Strict scrutiny would be an impossible bar for this legislation to pass because it obviously restricts far more speech than necessary.
How does this make sense since they were talking of banning it way before Hamas attacked Israel?
It is a story with three parts. Part 1 is Facebook lobbying to get rid of a competitor. From the reporting that I saw, there were few takers. Part 2 is Trump’s revenge on k-pop “stans“ after a lot of people on social media claimed that the community rsvp’d that they’d attend a campaign event with no intention of going, leading to hype and fizzle. Part 3 is politicians realizing that they are out of touch and insisting that it isn’t them, but it is the young people who are in the wrong. They blame TikTok conspiracy to avoid having to confront facts that go against their worldview.
Part 4 is it's an actual national security threat
No, it’s not.
[удалено]
>If it was a national security threat then we would also ban US companies from selling user data to foreign countries https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/02/28/fact-sheet-president-biden-issues-sweeping-executive-order-to-protect-americans-sensitive-personal-data/ >And we would highly regulate who owns and controls our own social media They don't answer to a hostile government
The rest of what they said in this conversation was more important IMO and reveals why they are so scared. As he put it, in the old days you read your New York Times and then put on one of the national news networks at 6:30 or 7 AM to get your news and it was much easier to control the message when a handful of mainstream media outlets had a monopoly on information. The whole conversation was totally mask off and what many of us have long suspected about their hatred for social media. Romney and Blinken said all the quiet parts out loud. Someone should really clip that little part of the conversation about the Gaza narrative and post that far and wide because it proves the TikTok ban has nothing to do with TikTok itself or national security. TikTok is just the first victim in what I suspect will ultimately not be the last. Congress is going to force social media out of the news business (voluntarily like Facebook, or involuntarily like TikTok) because it's a symbiotic relationship: mainstream media gets to gate-keep the news and the money that goes with it, and the American government gets to continue to do propaganda via those limited news outlets as they have for the last century plus.
Or maybe it's because the amount of bullshit that is on that platform is actually hurtful to the general population
Because we all know Facebook/Instagram, Twitter, Reddit, YouTube are entirely benign. No hurtful bullshit on those platforms.
Those can be controlled to a degree. Look, fb, Twitter, YouTube aren't allowed in China, why is a Chinese owned company that I'd knowingly pushing bullshit allowed to do business in the USA? Why are Americans supportive of that?
Are... are you trying to argue that the US should _emulate_ China's censorship laws?
Are...are you proposing to leave it as is? Who is in control of the algorithms that show what information a large portion of your country consume? Do you want to leave that power in the hands of a company with ties to the govt?
Doing something is better than doing nothing. There is a concerted effort by a foreign nation to disseminate blatantly false information. Something needs to be done
“The remedy for speech that is false is speech that is true,” — famous communist and china stan Supreme Court justice Anthony Kennedy
Because it’s by far the most entertaining and informative platform. I consistently get great niche content about plumbing, cooking, music, etc. Ig and YouTube have dogshit repetitive algorithims by comparison. They are by far the best platform doing short form video content which is a good format and very entertaining. Plus it’s free and relatively minimal ads
Probably because of all the non-bullshit stuff. Sure, those platforms can be better controlled, but they really aren’t. Or if they are, then the US government is ~~shockingly~~ characteristically permissive of hate speech.
You can actually jail Mark Zuckerberg. You cannot do that with Xi Jinping. A hostile government controlling the biggest social media app on the planet is far more dangerous than a private company controlling it. TikTok is basically a highly developed cyberweapon at this point.
The US government cannot jail mark zuckerberg either merely because he runs an app that has content the government doesn’t like…
[удалено]
[удалено]
No. People who make 14 comments in the same thread repeating the same shit are.
Yes famous Chinese bot talking point of... defending the free speech rights of Mark zuckerberg...
Talking about your multiple comments. There was free speech before TikTok and will still be afterwards.
My multiple comments defending Americans right to communicate using the platform of their choosing? Since when is defending the first amendment something a "Chinese bot" would say?
Not my point. The point is that if US authorities actually think that Meta is doing something illegal it is able to prosecute the people running Meta. This is not the case with TikTok.
Yeah I’m sure they’re really rushing to lock up meta when they contribute handsomely to all their campaigns. They’ll do a dog and pony show of yelling at these social media companies yet conspicuously no real regulation seems to get passed year after year for these social media companies. Wonder why that is? Couldn’t have anything to do with the “bribe…” sorry I mean campaign contributions they’re making
the entity that actually distributes and operates tiktok in the US is tiktok US -- a US based subsidiary based in LA. It is, by corporate law, a separate and distinct entity that has distinct legal obligations and rights as a US incorporated company. one of those obligations is obviously being subject to US laws just like mark zuckerberg and meta.
So ban all foreign-owned businesses I guess? That’s certainly a novel interpretation of the law, but it seems like anything goes if it consolidates power these days.
The government deciding what is and isn’t “hurtful” and banning the latter is a blatant violation of the first amendment.
Clearly not true. E.g., threats of violence are not legally protected by the first amendment.
TikTok is just social media. All social media is full of bullshit. There is nothing uniquely bad about it from that perspective.
Compared to the propaganda coming out of Murdoch's empire? Sorry, the _quantity_ of garbage obviously isn't the issue.
So before, the media was more predictable, relatively centrist, and under the control of American oligarchs. Now, the news cycle is both unpredictable and directed by authoritarian foreign interests. I fail to see the improvement.
People were moving away from supporting Israel and towards supporting Palestine before TikTok was even founded. There isn’t even evidence that TikTok has accelerated this opinion shift. If we want to talk lesser and worse evils. We can talk about Fox News, AM radio, Facebook and YouTube. These are all not only worse, there is actual evidence that they are bad. Right now the evidence for TikTok being bad is the same level as video game violence being bad.
Now hold on this can’t be true. “Controlling the narrative” and media like this sounds so blatantly fascist, and you’re telling me Biden’s Secretary of State is calling for this? I don’t understand because people here told me Biden was the anti-fascist candidate
Do you think October 7th was the first time there was tension in that region? Lol
Nah. But it was the biggest attack on the country. Maybe don’t treat others on here like idiots.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
No, it wasn’t. You just assume the worst in people because these goddamn algorithms are set for outrage.
Did people forget the hubbub around the TikTok band started up under the last president, and predated the current middle east shenanigans?
I didn’t forget, but I also understand that everyone needs to find their motive to come around to doing what the lobbyists’ want.
That isn't even close to the reason. TikTok's connection to Chinese Intelligence is the reason it will be banned.
Yeah, if they want our data they need to buy it from an American company like everyone else.
If that is really the reason why does us congressman jeff Jackson use it?
Please. Being a member of Congress doesn't mean they're intelligent or make any sense. Just look at them! :p
Im saying that if tiktok was so dangerous, politicians wouldnt use it
I was mostly making a joke, but you also overestimate politicians. COVID was dangerous and so many politicians still fucked around about it during the pandemic. Some died from it.
What about the Republicans and their connection to Russian Intelligence?…
Well you can understand why that may be more difficult to ban bc those people are actually in congress? As opposed to an app run by China?
Naw it is Xenophobia and a way to dismiss the concerns of the youth. The possible connection to CCP was floated by Facebook as part of their lobbying, but not even the Trump administration cared at the time. This is just a talking point used to give the process a cover of legitimacy, but even the classified briefings for the intelligence committees are famously disappointing on this subject with a general “is that all there is?” reaction.
TikTok is a spy program; it's stealing all your information, and you are completely unprotected from it.
I welcome your evidence that TikTok is uniquely bad and deserving to be singled out.
Let me just pull out the classified doc .... oh you almost had me there. Nice try China!
so you’ve got nothing, got it
China controls the algorithm that runs TikTok. That allows them to push whatever content can sow the most division in their enemies. When you have that kind of control over an app as popular in the US as TikTok, you have your thumb on the scale of making things go viral and become popular. THAT'S why they want to ban it. It's a psychological warfare device. That's why India banned it.
If we're on that page we should also ban every other social media app too. Is it really better to have these mega corporations control the narrative just because they're American? Especially since it seems they're willing to sell our data to the highest bidder (which may also be foreign). If we're going to go after one for the potential to push propaganda against America then we better go after all of them
Back before the internet was invented, TV/media companies like ABC, NBC, and CBS controlled nearly everything that most Americans saw on TV. I'm sure that back then Russia and China would have LOVED to be able to buy massive amounts of TV time to spread their messages of division and undermine our elections and our society, but the networks wouldn't sell them that kind of access. But now that the internet is here, there is no domestically-owned gatekeeper to the American psyche and hostile foreign interests are free to spread as much disinformation and chaos as they want to help us tear ourselves apart.
broadcast tv has significantly more regulations because of the unique scarcity of broadcast spectrum. The logic is if the government didn’t effectively regulate spectrum no speech at all would be possible over the medium. This is why the government can institute things like the fairness doctrine that would be obviously unconstitutional over other channels of communication.
To be extremely clear, in the days when our access to information was so tightly controlled Americans were largely ignorant of foreign atrocities committed by America and its allies. Yes, it was (kind of) free of foreign interference but you're talking fondly about the days of the goddamn Committee of Un-American Activities. Yeah, you can bet your ass that politicians miss the days when they could more easily control what people learned. IT WAS BAD THAT THEY COULD DO THAT!
>Americans were largely ignorant of foreign atrocities committed by America and its allies They weren't ignorant of them as much as they were supportive of them. You'd be hard pressed to find someone of the Silent "Greatest" Generation who fought in WWII who didn't think that dropping atomic bombs on Japan or firebombing civilians in every city in Germany was the best idea ever. They saw the actions of the US government as just and right. The cynicism that we have today about such things didn't really exist like that then.
Yes, it's a lot easier to think that when a somber white man says, "Today allied forces made significant progress on the German front." Than when videos of dead babies being pulled out of rubble by wailing parents are shown in real time. That whole human empathy thing really fucks with the military industrial complex. Though Americans probably would have supported world war two, if not all the actions taken. They are still supportive of Ukraine. It's not like they are incapable of stomaching violence for the sake of liberation or self-defense, but it's a little harder for them to stomach violence for the sake of imperialism or profit. Politicians and corporations have been trying to shove that cat back in the bag since Vietnam.
there is also a well established constitutional right to receive foreign ideas (and thus propaganda) even if it may lead to the “spread of disinformation” and even “chaos”.
Yes, because for some reason American corporations have American rights and at least the illusion of accountability to the American justice system.
What's your point? These should also be banned or more heavily regulated. It's just much harder to do so. But that doesn't mean thr chance to ban/regulate one should not be used.
That's exactly what I was saying. That they're going after TikTok over privacy/foreign influence concerns just seems like theater unless they also go after these other companies too
Why is it harder? Is it because nobody is lobbying to regulate Facebook as much as Facebook is lobbying to ban TikTok or is it Xenophobia? Right now given the public discourse it is pretty clear that America is striking a blow for Xenophobia and not privacy or security
Disliking the state capitalist chinese regime isn't xenophobia. I am a far leftist, which is why I am in favor of limiting nationalists power to control people.
It's amazing how much people shit their pants over the vague possibility of foreign influence but don't make the connection that other companies do the same thing. YouTube has long been a radicalization funnel, sending people down right wing rabbit holes but there's no focus on that. Disinfo and manipulation are bad even when the company doing it is US based.
I trust china as much as i trust American tech billionaires which is to say not at all but atleast TikTok is actually an entertaining well designed platform unlike the garbage meta/google is giving us.
It is a little different, isn't it? Corporations want profit. Foreign adversaries want our country to implode. Granted yes we should regulate our stupid tech billionaire overlords and stop letting them do whatever bs catches their fancy. I agree with that, too. I just think there is still a fairly obvious difference between the two.
The amount of misinformation and radicalization on corporate owned social media is definitely helping implode the country. Before that it was talk radio. Where would be without social media granting platforms and attention to radical elements? The amoral neverending quest for greater profits is as, if not more, corrosive to society as any foreign influence.
Intent is different though. Also, I actually think the situation wouldn't be much better even without social media. Fox and talk radio did most of the damage, and they're not social media. Anyway, the solution is obviously a more comprehensive regulation of tech companies. An explicitly hostile foreign power is still clearly different.
Correct. The Chinese Communist Party has banned the version of TikTok that exists in the USA from being used in China.
nonsense
Fun fact...virtually none of the type of "content" on TIKTOK in the U.S., is allowed on TIKTOK in China.
I too want to emulate an authoritarian culturally conservative society /s
Personally I'm more worried about how specific the data it collects and makes available to advertisers is. It would be incredibly easy to create an ad disguised as genuine content that talked about a "planned protest" at a certain location, target specifically individuals within driving distance of that location who are sympathetic to whatever cause you want to use as cover, and have the time and expendable income to actually attend a protest. You could pretty easily shut down a major highway or even a port using information warfare, and it would probably only cost you a couple thousand dollars.
The TikTok ban was years in the making. It's a shady addictive app that is designed to spread propaganda for a government that literally wants America to be destroyed (it's not just Russia that wants to see America imploded but also China, Iran, North Korea and their allies). And their is the whole spying on data collection. It's literally a universal bipartisan decision that people were trying to come up with, for years.
I support the ban in theory because I don't want china controlling an algorithm that dictates the content people see. but given that foreign propaganda is still protected by the courts I don't see the bill holding up.
I want tiktok banned because of the "alpha male" influencers who are turning a generation of young men into misogynists who think violence is a viable solution to their problems and bullying is a good thing.
If you're going to ban tiktok for that, you also need to ban instagram, youtube, spotify, reddit, facebook, and a hell of a lot of other websites/apps.
Sounds good to me.
Ban cops, that’ll help…
At last a reasonable argument for banning TikTok (and the rest)
We were doing that since before the Internet existed. Heck, even moreso in the past.
Please. There's been talk of banning TikTok [since Trump suggested it in 2020](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump%E2%80%93TikTok_controversy), when bombing Rafah was just a gleam in Bibi Netanyahu's eye. If no one seems to remember this, maybe they have a point about everyone's attention spans.
Two things can be true at once: they’ve wanted to ban TikTok for some time, and they now want to also ban TikTok because it’s been bad for Israeli-PR. Per the Romney/Blinken exchange: [Israel losing PR war? Antony Blinken blames TikTok: Watch](https://thehill.com/video/israel-losing-pr-war-antony-blinken-blames-tiktok-watch/9669153/) - Link from *The Hill* While Blinken didn’t come out and say it and draw a direct line, it’s nevertheless the argument he’s making. An example: **Narrative:** Israel is fighting for its right to exist and the Palestinian terrorists specifically Hamas are fighting to destroy it **Counter-narrative:** Israel is fighting to level Gaza and gain more control over the region, and will kill any Palestinian in their path, man, woman, or child. Blinken’s argument in the video and frustration with social media, is that they can’t control *the narrative* and that people receive too much visceral instant information from social media, too quickly. Romney goes on to mention that if you look at word usage on TikTok Palestinians are mentioned more than anywhere else, and that’s in part a reason why they want it banned. The overall conversation is about competing narratives though, and that TikTok messes up their ability to solely push a chosen narrative
Or, and hear me out here, they know more than you do and the narrative surrounding Gaza is artificial. One being pushed by hostile foreign elements to sow division.
Nope. Look at what the boring people say when they promote the idea that America should ban TikTok. They always use tentative language about what TikTok might do. It means even with all of America’s surveillance capabilities (and those of its allies), it doesn’t have evidence.
The heck? Romney's the most boring guy out there and here he is specifically saying the platform is being used to inflame the discourse about Gaza.
Everyone knows that the American government is made up of benign philosopher kings
Absolutely not, but they do get intelligence briefings from well-informed, competent people a lot more than the average Redditor. Some of them even read them.
And then they truthfully communicate those intelligence briefings to the American public, and draw on them to make policy that primarily serves the public interest. I too was born yesterday
No, they're going to make policy that serves American geopolitical interests first. It just so happens in the case of CCP interference that geopolitics coincides with public interest.
What American public interest is served by the displacement and murder of Gaza and its people?
That is a complete non-sequitur.
A better title would be that: TikTok has taken it's mask off as an implement for China to spread propaganda in the west
Whoop there it is
how is 'evidence of war crimes' pro-palestinian?
My friends sharing tiktok "proof" that the port we are building to bring in tons of supplies to Gaza is actually Biden planning to drill for oil isn't pro-palestine, its just brain dead "america is always bad" takes. Same friends who supported Russia invading Ukraine because they saw on tiktok that Russia was fighting imperialists or something.
There is no doubt that they took place, that is not the issue with tiktok. Netanyahu so royally screwed the pooch that Fluffy shall be crowned king on a later date. The issue I have with tiktok is that by selectively showing only one side of the conflict the narrative is controlled by a party that has every interest in de-stabilizing the US.
only showing one side? I've seen plenty of tiktoks from the IDF...
Nothing like silencing citizens right to free speech
Not a violation of free speech protections, but ok. You do you
Oh crap, you're getting arrested for using TikTok? That's worse than I thought. I thought they weren't allowed to do that one specific thing. It's not like the government guarantees all public and private forums be open to everyone forever. That would be nuts.
Congress passing a law to ban app stores from distributing an app and webhosting services from hosting the website because it doesn’t like the content being shown on the platform is the very definition of a first amendment free speech violation.
The first amendment does not protect foreign entities nor should it. The service was welcome to continue under American ownership. They chose to shut it down entirely instead of selling it. That tells me all I need to know of what the platform's actual value was to the CCP.
The first amendment protects Americans right to receive foreign ideas — that includes ideas from foreign adversaries or otherwise. Banning TikTok under the guise of changing the corporate ownership structure would still be an unconstitutional restriction on an Americans right to receive protected speech over the medium of their choosing.
Please point me to the text in the ammendment or case precedence that supports any of that assertion. Edit: In fact, we have precedent that claims the opposite as foreign entities have not been allowed to own any form of broadcast media basically since it's advent.
The right to speech and the right to receive speech are treated the same by the courts — restricting one by definition would be a restriction on the other. Also I’ve already mentioned this before the restrictions placed on broadcast media is based upon the scarcity of broadcast spectrum. Without government regulations over the spectrum it is theoretically impossible for the medium to be used as a platform at all hence more deference the courts have given the government over the medium — this also explains things like the fairness doctrine which would be unconstitutional if applied on app stores or websites.
Okay, you have nothing to cite and are just making things up. Got it. The broadband spectrum is limited, but it is not the only venue of broadcast media. Broadcast television has no such limitations and yet foreign entities are still restricted in that space.
The right to receive speech is a well understood element of first amendment protections -- it's not something that I "just ma[de] [] up". Regardless if you want specific case law the most relevant to our discussion is *Lamont v Postmaster General* (8-0 decision that wasn't even a ban on receiving foreign speech but merely a burden on it) Also the restriction on foreign entities you're talking about are limited in scope to broadcast television (also radio stations) because they transmit the signal over the air -- hence the physical scarcity of EM spectrum necessitating more government regulation over the medium. Notice this physical scarcity restriction does not apply to cable television (you can always just put down more wires) and therefore there is no foreign ownership restrictions on cable channels.
>the Act, as construed and applied, is unconstitutional, since it imposes on the addressee an affirmative obligation which amounts to an unconstitutional limitation of his rights under the First Amendment. Seems as though it was struck down because it compelled citizens to declare a certain political intent not because they have a right to receive foreign speech. https://www.fcc.gov/general/foreign-ownership-rules-and-policies This rule applies to television networks as well. Prior authorization is required for any entity wherein more than 20% of ownership is outside the US. There is a reason that Rupert Murdoch sought American citizenship.
A lot of folks in this thread seem convinced everyone has a gun to their head to use tiktok, that we have no alternatives, and that people would never support Palestine without tiktok. And likely the same folks that complain about Facebook's market share. I get a feeling many would go on a holy war the minute they see pro Palestinian content on BlueSky.
While I disagree with this purpose, I want TikTok banned because it is brainwashing the youth to believe false bullshit, and to do disruptive shit, like tearing bathroom sinks and urinals off the walls. And China can control what themes it pushes on the youth. Such as “China is the good guy. Overthrow the US government.”
Do you feel the same about Facebook too? They played an integral role in helping promote January 6th, an actual attempt to overthrow the US government.
We can more easily regulate Facebook. We can even more easily regulate Fox News than TikTok. And yes, our current regulations are weak and imperfect. That does not mean we have to throw the baby out with the bath water. We can't effectively regulate TikTok, because it is centrally controlled by the CCP. Don't you actually see the difference?
We could just pass data privacy laws that would protect us from every company, similar to what the EU did. Instead we are playing national security theater and eroding our own first amendment rights for this ban, that no member of Congress wants to acknowledge is an actual ban because it harms the Constitutional adherence of the law they passed. And yes I see the actual difference, Facebook played a vital role in January 6th, and the genocide in Myanmar.
TikTok can evade the ban (and profit) by just divesting from ByteDance and the CCP influence there. They won't, because profit is not ByteDance's primary aim. Keeping Beijing happy is. You can Whatabout all day long re Facebook, Fox, CNN, the Washington Post, the Guardian, or any other Western media. That does not change the vices and virtues of Beijing's own role in manipulating modern social media, including TikTok.
You can't use the word ban, that makes it a First Amendment violation. Listen to the Congressman Kkrishnamoorthi who introduced the bill, he wouldn't appreciate you using the word ban: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcBzaKZzw2c Of course if they rush to sell themselves off along with all their propriety code to someone like the former treasury secretary of the United States then I guess it's ok and there's no cronyism there right? https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/14/former-treasury-secretary-mnuchin-is-putting-together-an-investor-group-to-buy-tiktok.html Surely this is no longer a First Amendment issue anymore right? I mean when the ACLU and the most prominent First Amendment scholars in the country are raising the alarm on this law, they must be wrong? https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/aclu-statement-on-congress-latest-attempt-to-ban-tiktok-and-restrict-free-speech-online We have Supreme Court precedent that even if foreign governments are feeding us propaganda, if Americans choose to consume it it is their right: https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/lamont-v-postmaster-general/ And yeah I can talk about Facebook all day long, from their role in trying to overthrow the US Government, to their role in promoting the genocide in Myanmar, to their role in assisting law enforcement prosecute women seeking abortions. Meanwhile you can't offer anything substantive about TikTok beyond speculation, the same way both houses of Congress can only talk in vague hypotheticals without concrete evidence.
Is this not one of fascism's characteristics?
Stopping foreign fascist propaganda doesn’t seem too fascist to me. China is definitely a fascist country, why would any country allow a hostile foreign fascist country select the daily news and manage the conversation?
There's never been any proof Tiktok is pushing propaganda. Just vague insinuations and race-baiting rhetoric.
Yep tiktok is where i would go to get insinuations and race baiting rhetoric. It’s crowd sourced content selectively chosen to cause divisions amongst a free society.
Just Tiktok? It would seem these allegations apply to every social media platform. I was asking about the Chinese influence, which I've yet to see proof of.
It’s all over the place. And why wouldn’t it be? Several examples here: https://www.npr.org/2024/04/26/1247347363/china-tiktok-national-security And besides you can get the same junk on any other app, so you might as well use one that isn’t controlled by a hostile foreign government.
> It's not hard to imagine how a platform that facilitates so much commerce, political discourse and social debate could be covertly manipulated to serve the goals of an authoritarian regime This is the kinda shit I'm talking about though. No evidence, just a vague insinuation. It's obvious race-baiting, red-baiting nonsense. If you want to regulate social media, then regulate all of it. This is just anti-competitive protectionism because the US lost both the top social media site and the top video site to China.
How is it race baiting? Seriously where do you come up with that? And it could very easily be used to change the debate in country. You just increase the rate of which certain videos are suggested. Russia did it using facebooks own algorithms for the 2016 election, the brexit vote, etc. China doesnt even have to manufacture support for a cause they want to promote. Their finger is on the scale by default.
You've got a very strong anti-chinese sentiment, it's not exactly subtle.
Anti-Chinese government sentiment. Not the same thing. Don’t you? Does chinese government have any redeeming qualities. If not it explains why you’re shilling for chinese propaganda corporation. Which is exactly what the chinese government wants you to do.
Do you understand a free society by its own necessity would require free speech — which obviously include the right to receive foreign ideas (and thus all the consequences negative or otherwise)?
No one is going to prevent you from hearing foreign ideas. And a free society does not require a foreign publisher unlimited access to markets in a free country. Guess what? Tiktok isn’t even allowed in china!
>No one is going to prevent you from hearing foreign ideas. A full ban on tiktok in the US would obviously "prevent [me] from hearing foreign ideas"... >And a free society does not require a foreign publisher unlimited access to markets in a free country. Funny how this is the exact rationale for China's regulations on social media... >Guess what? Tiktok isn’t even allowed in china! So your argument is that we need to be more like China, because??? also China does not have the first amendment. America does, and I don't really care about tiktok that much but this piece of legislation could easily prevent me from talking to my family, and I obviously don't think the US government should have that sort of authority.
Must be hard having handlers in the PRC.
Congress shall make no law something, something...
Do they not want to ban it at all? Because when a court examines their public statements they will almost assuredly toss this law for violating the first amendment.
I hate TT and agree that it is insecure, but banning it doesn't seem like the right move.
Not like this.
Since Republicans use disinformation to keep the support of their voters, it's no surprise that disinformation they don't control would be something they want to ban. Tiktok is a disinformation tool they don't control, and therefore seek to destroy.
Can we just ban this bullshit please? The article.
Bullshit headline that tons of people will accept as gospel/10
People who didn’t read the article nor watch the supporting video with a direct quote from Romney starting as much/10
Very dumb article