TikTok ban?

[Landslide Lyndon]

Hey, at least nobody can accuse the conservative intelligentsia of being inconsistent regarding this matter.
Amirite?

https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1783288134387556586

[Beet]

You guys notice the Chinese government weighing in and saying TikTok will never divest?

Why is the Chinese government weighing in on this, I thought TikTok was a Singapore app, wasn't that the point of Shou Chew constantly reminding us that he's from Singapore, not China?  Hmmm otherwise why would he keep bringing that up if it's irrelevant?

Also I thought TikTok was totally independent of the Chinese government and that in particular its American operations were a completely distinct entity from anything Chinese?  That's what Shou Chew told us when he sat before Congress.  So why would the Chinese Communist Party have any interest whatsoever in what an American app with American data does?

And why is China so determined to keep this particular app operational rather than allowing its CEO to sell it for enormous amounts of money?  LinkedIn, PornHub, DeviantArt, Archive.org, and many other American companies are banned in Russia, did the United States government get involved and dictate corporate strategy for those companies?  Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, WhatsApp, Google, and YouTube are banned in China but I don't remember the Trump administration weighing in on whether or not Google should do Project Dragonfly.

The U.S. government regularly weighs in in favor of U.S. companies in China. Virtually every visit by Yellen or Blinken or whoever tends to have this as an agenda item. This is pretty much normal behavior for governments. Shou Chew said he was from Singapore because he was asked by Tom Cotton whether he was a member of the CCP.  Singaporeans aren't members of the CCP. They just, often, have a Yellow face.

I still really don't like the "foreign influence" angle on this--I want short-form social media in general cracked down on because it's a cognitohazard, not TikTok in particular cracked down on because it's Chinese--but Zephyr Teachout (law professor at Fordham, perennial candidate in New York, high-profile left-wing primary challenger to Cuomo in 2014) has an interesting essay in The Atlantic arguing, convincingly in my opinion, that this is really not much of a departure from traditional American policy on who can and can't own communications infrastructure.

Teachout is coming from the right place, but in Teachout's ideal world, all tech companies would be regulated as platform monopolies. Clearly, this isn't the motivation of Congress to pass this xenophobic bill. News Corp. was allowed to own networks here even while it was incorporated in Australia, as long as founder Rupert Murdoch became a U.S. citizen. Has anyone even considered allowing offering Zhang Yiming the chance to become an American citizen to allow TikTok to remain legal? Of course not. If there was an actual national security concern that could not be addressed without a divest-or-ban, everyone would understand a divest-or-ban, but the bill's supporters never even tried to find a workable solution because they weren't interested in one.

[Arizona Iced Tea]

Yes China bans American websites because they are a communist country, but we are not. I'm tired of our government pretending like it's morally superior to the CCP and then follows similar tactics against freedom.

[Oregon Eagle Politics]

“TikTok should be banned because it spies on you” as if literally every social media platform doesn’t do the exact same.

The US must not stoop to the level of totalitarian dictatorships that restrict internet use to control the flow of information.

[GeneralMacArthur]

TikTok is not being banned because of its content.

The content on TikTok is really not that different from what you see on Twitter or Tumblr or even YouTube, content which is allowed by our government with minimal censorship (said "censorship" only applying to self-harm videos, illegal activity, and what gets shown to children).

Yes it's more addicting and effective as propaganda because it abuses a trust pattern we built up over two decades with the front-facing-camera directly-speaking-normal-person format, and because its algorithm is designed to be maximally addicting, and to shove people into a repetitive click hole of controversial conflict content (as detailed by the WSJ piece).  But none of these are unique features of the app and none of them are reasons to ban it.  Regulate it, sure, but such regulation should be applied to all similar apps.

Nor is TikTok being banned for harvesting data.  Every app "harvests" data.  That is fundamental to how the internet works.  People like the internet because it delivers a personally-curated experience.  I like that YouTube shows me videos about my basketball team (well, not after last night) as opposed to basketball videos in general.  YouTube is able to do that by "harvesting" my data to know that I am (was) a fan of the Cleveland Cavaliers.  The government does not ban this kind of data harvesting nor should it.  It should regulate it, but this behavior is already heavily-regulated -- much more so than the average consumer is probably aware.

TikTok is being banned because it is a tool of the Chinese Communist Party.  Anyone saying otherwise is simply lying.  It's clear that this is true because the only demand made of TikTok to avoid the ban is to divest from Chinese ownership.  They could keep their hyper-addicting algorithm, they could keep harvesting the same data, they could keep doing their utmost to turn our youth into al-Qaeda, and it would all be fine according to the bill.  The only thing they can't do is be an arm of the Chinese government in its propaganda/information cold war against the United States of America.  You may think that's an overblown fear, or think that it would be good for China to win said war, but it's understandable that the U.S. Government disagrees with you.

[ingemann]

I don’t get why this didn’t happen years ago.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I don’t get why this didn’t happen years ago.

It had to wait for there to be a very specific level of anti-China sentiment because, as people on both sides of the substantive issue of "should TikTok be cracked down on?" have conceded throughout this thread, there was little to no political will to do it for the right reasons.

[GeneralMacArthur]

I don’t get why this didn’t happen years ago.

It had to wait for there to be a very specific level of anti-China sentiment because, as people on both sides of the substantive issue of "should TikTok be cracked down on?" have conceded throughout this thread, there was little to no political will to do it for the right reasons.

The actual reason:  Democrats didn't want to waste political capital on a potentially divisive and controversial issue that would distract from the major legislative battles we were trying to win in the 2021-23 Congress, and ever since Republicans took over they've been bound and determined to not pass anything -- unless I'm forgetting something this is the first significant legislation to get passed since the midterms and it's required Speaker Johnson abandoning the far-right of his base to get done.  Really there had to be something else to motivate him to make that political move, since TikTok alone isn't important enough, and I think Russia/Ukraine was what it took.  Johnson feels very differently from the Gaetz/MTG wing of the party on this issue and even if he was willing to let them walk over him on this issue alone, he wasn't willing to sacrifice Israel funding to do that.  So we got him to pass something, and then included TikTok as well.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Yes China bans American websites because they are a communist country, but we are not. I'm tired of our government pretending like it's morally superior to the CCP and then follows similar tactics against freedom.

Theoretically we should severely restrict other Chinese tech companies too if not ban them . Tit for Tat is perfectly fine when it comes to trade policy

[Pres Mike]

As of 4/27/24, I think its more liekly that ByteDance will shut down US operations than sell. Out of pure spite.

Tiktok is a great tool of the CCP. Why would they give that up?

[Pres Mike]

Apprently what makes Tiktok so valuable is its algorthium which recommends videos. Its what makes it so addicting. Without it, Tiktok isn't Tiktok

Bytedance is willing to sell the app, not the algorthium. It uses the algorthium for other apps it owns. Even if it wanted to, Bytedance is not allowed to sell the algorthium because of Chinese copyright laws

To remove the software from the app is apprently too much trouble for Bytedance. Better to shut down US operations. And its unlikely any US company or group of investors will pony up the cash AND figure out a close enough algorthium.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Yes China bans American websites because they are a communist country, but we are not. I'm tired of our government pretending like it's morally superior to the CCP and then follows similar tactics against freedom.

Theoretically we should severely restrict other Chinese tech companies too if not ban them . Tit for Tat is perfectly fine when it comes to trade policy

Tit for Tat is what leads to global annihilation.

[politicallefty]

I don’t get why this didn’t happen years ago.

It had to wait for there to be a very specific level of anti-China sentiment because, as people on both sides of the substantive issue of "should TikTok be cracked down on?" have conceded throughout this thread, there was little to no political will to do it for the right reasons.

They also decided to shove it into a must-pass foreign aid bill. I'm sure the Senate would have voted to ban it as well, but it didn't even get a good debate.

I don't like the TikTok ban, but if I was in Congress, it's not a poison strong enough to stop me from voting to send aid to Ukraine. Even if it's inevitably upheld, the TikTok ban likely won't be enforced for a couple years. There probably won't be a decision from SCOTUS until at least 2026 (with that part of the law obviously being enjoined until at least that time).

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Apprently what makes Tiktok so valuable is its algorthium which recommends videos. Its what makes it so addicting. Without it, Tiktok isn't Tiktok

Bytedance is willing to sell the app, not the algorthium. It uses the algorthium for other apps it owns. Even if it wanted to, Bytedance is not allowed to sell the algorthium because of Chinese copyright laws

To remove the software from the app is apprently too much trouble for Bytedance. Better to shut down US operations. And its unlikely any US company or group of investors will pony up the cash AND figure out a close enough algorthium.

I don't blame ByteDance for this situation. If anything I'd sooner blame the US govt.

[MyLifeIsYours]

I don’t get why this didn’t happen years ago.

Infringement on the freedom of media and speech.

The hysteria over Tik Tok is just another case of out of touch politicians feeling threaten by the youth of the day who seeks for change.  With so many teenagers learning about the world through the platform, does it make it wonder that many law makers seek to determinate the site as it showcases a diversity of views that are not expressed in the mainstream press. This ban is going to hit the congressional members who voted yes to lose levity with the under-30 vote.

[Obama24]

Joe Biden unalived Tiktok, to use Tiktok slang.

[darklordoftech]

Joe Biden unalived Tiktok, to use Tiktok slang.

I hope the term "unalive" gets unalived along with Tiktok.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Joe Biden unalived Tiktok, to use Tiktok slang.

I hope the term "unalive" gets unalived along with Tiktok.

It's more of a YouTube thing, and it's to avoid demonization by YouTube.

[emailking]

TikTok sues U.S. government, saying potential ban violates First Amendment
The company argues that invoking national security concerns isn't a sufficient reason to restrict free speech.

TikTok is suing the U.S. government to stop enforcement of a bill passed last month that seeks to force the app’s Chinese owner to sell the app or have it banned.

The lawsuit, filed Tuesday in the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for Washington, D.C., argues that the bill, the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, violates constitutional protections of free speech.

The suit calls the law an “unprecedented violation” of the First Amendment.

“For the first time in history, Congress has enacted a law that subjects a single, named speech platform to a permanent, nationwide ban,” TikTok wrote in the lawsuit, “and bars every American from participating in a unique online community with more than 1 billion people worldwide.”

The company argues that invoking national security concerns is not a sufficient reason for restricting free speech, and that the burden is on the federal government to prove that this restriction is warranted. It has not met that burden, the lawsuit stated.

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/tiktok-sues-us-government-says-ban-violates-first-amendment-rcna151059

[compucomp]

TikTok sues U.S. government, saying potential ban violates First Amendment
The company argues that invoking national security concerns isn't a sufficient reason to restrict free speech.

TikTok is suing the U.S. government to stop enforcement of a bill passed last month that seeks to force the app’s Chinese owner to sell the app or have it banned.

The lawsuit, filed Tuesday in the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for Washington, D.C., argues that the bill, the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, violates constitutional protections of free speech.

The suit calls the law an “unprecedented violation” of the First Amendment.

“For the first time in history, Congress has enacted a law that subjects a single, named speech platform to a permanent, nationwide ban,” TikTok wrote in the lawsuit, “and bars every American from participating in a unique online community with more than 1 billion people worldwide.”

The company argues that invoking national security concerns is not a sufficient reason for restricting free speech, and that the burden is on the federal government to prove that this restriction is warranted. It has not met that burden, the lawsuit stated.

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/tiktok-sues-us-government-says-ban-violates-first-amendment-rcna151059

If the courts want to uphold the Constitution then this law will never go into effect, but we'll see if the First Amendment is a dead letter in the face of anti-China hysteria.

To the people on this forum who are feverishly cheering for the ban:

-Again, all of the viral content you object to is created by users and made popular because other users engage with it. You're now arguing directly for government censorship of your fellow citizens.
-To the people arguing that TikTok can be regulated and foreign ownership banned because it's like a public utility, well then where's this level of regulation on Meta's many services and Google? Why are they allowed to do whatever they want with basically zero liability?
-I'm well aware that since 2001, "national security" is a magic word to the courts that says they have to let the government do whatever it wants. This case may end up like that. But you think it's a good thing now? You're really in favor of the security state, the FBI, NSA, DHS expanding its authority to take away your freedoms? What's next, will this forum cheer for the Mark Warner bill that would make VPN use punishable by 20 years in prison?
-I get that you hate China with every fiber of your being and wish for China to be wiped off the face of the earth, but you're OK with abandoning your principles in the name of that? Is your only principle now "China bad"?

[emailking]

It's not in the excerpt but they're also suing on the grounds that the law violates their due process rights under the Fifth Amendment.

[DaleCooper]

Joe Biden unalived Tiktok, to use Tiktok slang.

I hope the term "unalive" gets unalived along with Tiktok.

A lot of the fake words influencers use to avoid getting "demonetized" are seeping into everyday language thanks to their mentally ill viewers. The amount of self-censorship these days is beyond anything I've ever witnessed.

[Obama24]

Joe Biden unalived Tiktok, to use Tiktok slang.

I hope the term "unalive" gets unalived along with Tiktok.

A lot of the fake words influencers use to avoid getting "demonetized" are seeping into everyday language thanks to their mentally ill viewers. The amount of self-censorship these days is beyond anything I've ever witnessed.

I don't usually go in for conspiracies but I think it's actually a purposeful attempt by TikTok to

1) Dumb down American literacy / grasp of English. A dumber, and less well read enemy is an easier enemy to conquer (not by military force, but by outpacing in areas such as education and overall intelligence)

2) Subtly pump the ideas of self censorship (and thus, the idea that wider social censorship is a net positive) into the collective unconscious of Gen Z.

China is built around nothing else if censorship, why not import their way of thinking here by placing it in the subconscious of American youth? And it's had an effect that this social self censorship has escaped beyond the terminally online and has begun to enter the American dialog.