• De_Narm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        24 days ago

        There are multiple instances pushing propaganda and most data can just be scraped by bots. It may be harder, but capitalism finds a way.

    • FlexibleToast@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      24 days ago

      Yes, and that’s why US companies aren’t banned by the US. The foreign power having so much propaganda power was the danger.

      • AppleTea@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        24 days ago

        If I wanna get my propaganda from more than one world power, that’s my right under the first amendment. Or it was.

  • heavy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    23 days ago

    Since this is the place for the most serious discussion:

    If US lawmakers focused on protecting American’s privacy with some sensible privacy laws coughGDPR equivalent cough, we could avoid pulling out the ban hammer to play whack-a-mole on these companies.

    Companies would simply be punished by the law for being malicious or irresponsible with your data, forcing industries to take privacy seriously and make investments in protecting and not leaking it.

  • respectmahauthoritybrah@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    22 days ago

    I might be killed, but seeing the comments i feel like lemmy is getting too into the zone of umm like judging the action based on the person instead of judging the action/statement itself, yeah the US gov is a piece of shit, and also they probably don’t have the peoples best interest in mind, but the act of banning tiktok, according to me, is a right move, i can see nd myself have felt the humongous mental impact it has on teens (like me) basically killing their attention span, and making them feel like they need to pick up their phone, heck kids cant read 10pages from their physics book, infact reading a page only thoroughly is a tough task for most of them, and i m not talking abt a few select cases, i can see this in 95% of kids (this is anecdotal tho), ever since i stopped using reels/tiktoks/shorts, i can feel my mind improving

    Also the whole slew of misinformation and propaganda tiktok is, is another issue

    Again I agree with ppl that the US doesn’t hv the ppls best interest, but i do feel this might help atleast some ppl break their addiction, so many I know are aware they r addicted but can’t stop, banning the app altogether might help

    • WhoLooksHere@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      22 days ago

      Sure, I don’t think any disagrees that there’s side effects that aren’t good for anyone, never mind teens.

      But there’s nothing that you’ve written that’s specific to Tik Tok. It’s not substantially worse than American alternatives. Facebook has known for years the negative effect, study after study has come out. What legislation was passed to protect that?

      So why target Tik Tok specifically?

    • 0ops@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      22 days ago

      I don’t use tiktok because I don’t want to get addicted personally, and I know a few people who borderline are.

      That’s not the point though, not the real one anyway. Even if this ban was going through with good intentions, it doesn’t actually solve anything. Everyone will just find a new PRISM-compatable app to get addicted to. The government’s “action/statement itself” is precisely the problem. If they passed a law that forbid certain addicting behaviors, and TikTok ran afoul of that law, then I’d likely be in support, because it bans those behaviors in general. But that’s not what’s happening here, instead the government is targeting the individual company, so it’s pretty clear to me that the cited privacy and addiction concerns are only an excuse. Don’t take this combatively, I just think this is important, but I think that ironically you’re the one who needs to separate the action from the actors. I think you’re underestimating how dangerous a precedence this sets.

      • respectmahauthoritybrah@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        22 days ago

        Hmm i get ur argument, but still i do believe that banning that app will still have some net positive impact, i understand that this doesn’t really fix the problem by its root, maybe i m biased, but i just want the people around me to get a chance to get off that app, thats why banning it, while i agree with not with so good intentions, still might give some sort of positive impact on people who cant concentrate on anything for more than a minute, i just don’t jive well with the mentality here that the ban in nd of itself is wrong, i understand tho that the US has its own interests and doesn’t give many fcks abt ppl

  • FrankFrankson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    23 days ago

    There is sooooo much weird conspiracy shit in these comments. The government is banning TikTok becuase they collect too much data and the Chinese government could eaisly get access to all of it. The correct thing to do would be to regulate data collection but that would be problematic for Google, Meta, Microsoft, Apple…etc etc… so instead they just ban TikTok. All this TikTok refusing to spread deep state US govt propaganda horse shit is a bit past nuts.

  • Sorgan71@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    23 days ago

    I think tiktok should be banned for its addictive algorithm. It is far worse than any other social media for that reason.

      • Sorgan71@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        20 days ago

        Companies should not be free. Only people should be free. Companies exist to do what we want them too.

        • Lulzagna@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          20 days ago

          Citizens should be free to choose which social media platforms there wish to use.

          Companies are not free, which is why they must operate within the regulations and laws that protect consumers and the nation as a whole.

          Banning TikTok only violates the freedom of citizens and does nothing to protect consumers or the nation. Your argument makes zero sense in this context.

          • Sorgan71@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            20 days ago

            And yet if a company is poisoning peoples minds they should be stopped from using it.

            • Lulzagna@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              20 days ago

              Okay, so shut down twitter, Facebook, Fox News, rebel News, etc. Oh, what’s that? You only want to shut down platforms that you disagree with? So “poisoning minds” was just a false projection.

                • Lulzagna@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  20 days ago

                  You act like citizens are being handed crack cocaine.

                  It’s just videos. If you don’t believe in people having free will to watch videos on the Internet, you don’t believe in freedom.

  • RangerJosie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    23 days ago

    Fuck you. I’m going to RedNote. Purely out of spite. Because I’d rather dropship my DNA to the Communist Party of China HQ than give my data to Zucc or Elon.

      • RangerJosie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        23 days ago

        Which is a reddit alternative. I refuse to use any American based TT alternative.

        Musk and Zucc can go stick hotsauce doused cacti up each other’s asses. Fuck them. And anyone like them.

        And most of all fuck GovCo.

        • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          21 days ago

          There’s no reasonable way for a single person to point out every single flaw in a conspiratorial website. The whole article is a gish-gallop; so much misinformation that even if I disproved 90% of the primary points, people would still latch on to the 10% that I hadn’t had time to disprove, and say, see?, they were right! (That’s assuming that they even accept counterclaims as being sufficient in the first place.)

          Paying attention to your sources and not using bad ones is one of the first, most basic principles of media literacy. Failing to adhere to this basic principle is precisely how you get Q-anon.

          • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            21 days ago

            How about disprove just one thing? Can you handle that?

            Wild that you’re attempting to speak with authority, when you’re the one being most vague and refusing to provide an ounce of material to support your argument.

            • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              20 days ago

              I don’t have to. It’s a shitty source that’s making extraordinary claims, so it’s on them to provide the extraordinary proof.

              I could make any number of bullshit claims, like, say, Nazis built a moon base shortly before the end of WWII, and the inability of the allies to find Hitler’s body proves that he didn’t commit suicide in a bunker in Berlin, and you would quite rightly insist that I give you a lot of solid evidence. The article does none of that.

              • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                20 days ago

                Did you actually read it? There’s links throughout.

                How is them pointing out the work history of the government staff installed on this an “extraordinary claim”?

                • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  19 days ago

                  ::sigh::

                  The fact that someone has worked for the gov’t in the past does not prove in any way, shape, or form, that a particular company is controlled by the gov’t. My ex-spouse used to work for the US State Dept, and now is an accountant at Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Ltd; does that mean that Deloitte is a US gov’t asset? I have an uncle that was in the diplomatic corps, and now owns his own business; is his business directly controlled by the US gov’t too?

                  Roughly 3M people are directly employed by the US fed. gov’t at any given time, in a national of roughly 345M people. So no, it’s not that unexpected that someone with high level management experience would also end up working as a high-level manager at corporation after they left gov’t service. (And why would someone leave the gov’t? Because when you compare pay rates for comparable levels of responsibility, the gov’t always comes out far behind.)

                  This is basic media literacy stuff.

  • khaleer@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    23 days ago

    Yeah, so prepare for battle between people who want to tell you that their empire is better.

    • ToucheGoodSir@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      23 days ago

      Obviously the US. China imports and exports everything through the oceans. Have fun with Russian potatoes dumb dumb CCP members xD

  • Shortstack@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    24 days ago

    Those are valid criticisms, but can equally be applied to all of the rest of our main social media platforms.

    I’m not seeing a big difference here between TikTok and YouTube except that one is not able to be influenced or backdoored by the US government and the other is.

    In essence the optics here look an awful lot like the US simply doesn’t like other nations mining their citizens data that they want for themselves, and having foreign control of the type of news being fed by their algorithm.

    Just remember that before Snowden dropped a dime on the NSA, similar suspicions sounded pretty wacky too

    • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      23 days ago

      In essence the optics here look an awful lot like the US simply doesn’t like other nations mining their citizens data that they want for themselves, and having foreign control of the type of news being fed by their algorithm.

      Well duh? Why do you think China blocks a lot of the US social media?

    • kworpy@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      24 days ago

      if Vine was still here (let alone brought back) it would become just as bad as TikTok. Social medias can have their golden age but they will inevitably turn into shit, vine was simply shut down before its golden age came to an end

  • PugJesus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    24 days ago

    “It’s okay that the CCP pushes propaganda because billionaires do it too” - Tiktok defenders

        • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          24 days ago

          The researchers found that while TikTok might not deliver more pro-CCP content, it did deliver less anti-CCP content than the rival platforms.

          Umm, that’s not really propaganda, homie. That’s simple censorship. There’s a difference.

          • PugJesus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            24 days ago

            The very next thing said in the article:

            The team next looked at engagement to see if this explained why anti-CCP content was performing less well. But it found that TikTok users “liked or commented on anti-CCP content nearly four times as much as they liked or commented on pro-CCP content, yet the search algorithm produced nearly three times as much pro-CCP content”. This didn’t happen on Instagram or YouTube.

  • rektdeckard@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    23 days ago

    I have news for everyone ITT: TikTok is not leaving the US. A friend works in their North America business division, and they are fully planning to split off a satellite company that is (at least nominally) US-based and compliant with local law. They have been working on the transition for many months.

    • Tja@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      23 days ago

      While this may be true, this comment has strong “I have a girlfriend in a another school” vibes.

  • just_an_average_joe@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    24 days ago

    Tiktok got banned not for peddling “chinese propaganda” but instead not peddling the US one.

    All the major tech companies in the US take measures to ensure content deemed unworthy by the government never become mainstream or viral.

    This is done under the pretense of stopping “hate speech” or “terroristic propaganda” but often include things like pro-palestinian content or class struggle content (like luigi mangione stuff).

    Tiktok was bold enough to not do that by default, cuz they wanted someone to ask them to do this and then it would become a huge scandal about how the US suppresses free speech. And US gov don’t want to do that for this exact reason as well. So they decided to ban it.

    Remember talks for this “law” were initiated when all of a sudden tiktok became a host for pro-palestinian voices. We should ask ourselves, how is it that 60% of americans want the government to stop arms sales to israel but this 60% never shows up on the big social media platforms. But on other platforms like here in lemmy and tiktok, pro-palestinians is the majority.

    For further reading, listen to employees fired from big US tech companies for voicing their concerns over the palestine issue, or read Meta’s new terms and conditions specially the section on “dangerous organizations and individuals”.

    • Katana314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      23 days ago

      Ah yes, TikTok, the land free of censorship. Where you can’t say “gay” and must insert a stupid little asterisk.