If there's one thing I've taken away from Trump's successes, it's that there's no such thing as "political suicide".
A massive tax hike on imported goods, making loads of things more expensive? Political suicide! Constant flip-flopping and backtracking on deals? Political suicide! Doing mocking impersonations of disabled people? Political suicide! Accepting donations from neo-nazi groups? Political suicide! Cheating on your pregnant wife with a porn star? Political suicide! Repeatedly visiting a billionaire pedophile's private island? Political suicide!
Except it turns out actually none of that is political suicide.
All of those things affect the everyperson far less than losing TikTok.
Losing TikTok would be like if the government shut down the NFL. This isn’t hyperbole.
I never claimed all those other irrelevant things you brought up were political suicide. In that sense they are unrelated topics. Dare I say you’re making a strawman argument.
My theory is the Trump Mafia doesn't care if people think they are idiots.
This admin is so transparently corrupt, and they're making out like bandits.
Trump and his family have made billions of dollars on the crypto rug pull. Everyone knew it was a shitcoin from the start.
Trump has pardoned violent criminals and felony fraudsters for business deals and "donations".
His family's net worth has estimated to have risen billions this year alone.
Elon Musk essentially bought his way into the control of the government and tried to buy off votes.
Kristi Noem funneled at least one sole source contract worth $220 million dollars to a firm closely tied to her and her previous political campaigns.
Ron DeSantis spent $250 million dollars of no-bid contracts for essentially a tent interment camp, many of questionable value and to politically tied companies
They don't care if you don't like them and I don't think they care if they accomplish what they ran on. They have done a bang up job enriching themselves and their donor class, however.
It is true and documented that the reason TikTok was challenged and censored was because it was exposing too many people to Israeli crimes in the genocide in Gaza. This was stated by high level officials. Of course, it also provides grist for accusing China of interfering in American politics, but of course, doing so would be a voice of morality, and you can't have that.
Edit: As a Jew, I also want to note that there is at least one dead comment mixing this with actual antisemitism, which has been apparently increasingly promoted by the right-wing media. My presumption is this is an attempt to create an actual anti-semitism crisis Israel can point to in order to shut down criticism from the left.
No, it’s not true. The bill which banned TikTok (H.R. 7521 Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act)[1] was introduced by Mike Gallagher and Raja Krishnamoorthi in 2024, but a near identical bill, the ANTI-SOCIAL CCP Act (H.R.1081)[2] was introduced by those same lawmakers in February of 2023, long before the Gaza War began, though it did not make it out of committee at that time. It’s conceivable that the bill’s passage was prioritized by house leadership due to concerns about content on TikTok, but the text of the bill contains no reference to the Israel-Palestine conflict and its very obvious from public statements by both co-sponsors that the primary motivation for this bill was concern with Chinese influence.
The bill had no traction, "until Oct. 7. The attack that day in Israel by Hamas and the ensuing conflict in Gaza became a turning point in the push against TikTok, Helberg said. People who historically hadn’t taken a position on TikTok became concerned with how Israel was portrayed in the videos and what they saw as an increase in antisemitic content posted to the app."
Around the time the second bill was passed, banning TikTok was polling at 50%. Why make this complicated? Banning TikTok is popular. People don’t like it because it’s brain rot. Many vice bans poll highly.
Completely disagree. Look around, mass protests start and governments fall when banning social media. There are 80 million daily active users of TikTok in the US, Trump would never, ever be so stupid as to piss off 80 million people by suddenly blocking their favourite app. That's the whole reason of this standoff.
Remember how the USSR used Jim Crow to criticize America and degrade the US's international standing? That Soviet messaging was clearly self-serving, but it doesn't make America's behavior that creating the opening any less reprehensible.
And it's not like there aren't dozens of equally brain-rot apps made my US and EU based companies that people would love to see banned. The only one, out of SHEER COINCIDENCE I'M SUUUURE, actually on the chopping block is the one that promotes a lot of pro-Gaza content.
Like I'm sorry, there is just no debate to be had here. Israel is committing a genocide, confirmed by the UN, recognized by anyone who looks at what's going on there with an even remotely objective eye, and the only social platform on which that message is getting out is facing legal scrutiny in the entire West is TikTok. This doesn't even require a conspiracy board, it's literally three red strings between TikTok, Israel, and the US. Despite worldwide propaganda efforts on the part of every corporate media in existence all screaming that the genocide isn't a genocide, a full 25% of people according to a poll I saw are fully convinced the genocide Israel is committing is in fact a genocide.
This would be fucking pathetic if not for the fact that every organized world entity involved in this utter sham was so incredibly powerful and their influence wasn't borderline inescapable.
The initial TikTok ban bill was introduced in January 25, 2023, before the Oct 7 attacks.
I don't think we can trust TikTok to be a defender of global human rights. China doesn't have a great record on this, with Muslim minorities in particular. The furor over Uyghurs in China has died down due to China's strong international influence but that doesn't mean China is respecting Uyghurs human rights.
Should American owned or controlled companies be banned in other countries? Should Israel be banned from interfering in American politics? If yes, then I am more open to this concept.
For what it's worth, I am not aware of any evidence that TikTok did anything intentional to promote anti-US narratives. To be honest, I think they accomplished that goal by simply promoting what people wanted to see, which is in large part, simply the truth. The so-called enemies of America do not have to work very hard or lie, they just need to expose our propaganda in a very straightforward fashion.
Since the COVID crisis at least, US owned social media companies have become very censorious and we know they tamper with the algorithms. It may be that simply having a less biased algorithm is too clarifying for American elites.
>Should American owned or controlled companies be banned in other countries?
I don't understand why that's your response to a question about them both being true. It seems like a perfectly legitimate observation: China can and probably is leveraging social media to shape global discussion of political topics that they deem sensitive. And it's also the case that at least for some voting block of conservative Republicans in the US Senate, it's an opportunity to potentially shut down communication on Israel's actions in Gaza. It's a classic both can be true situation.
I actually think you're right that Tiktok isn't necessarily intentionally promoting Gaza but that it has organically emerged simply because it legitimately is an issue that is an issue that has provoked moral outrage of the western world. To the extent that China is shaping anything, I think it's more about suppressing disapproved narratives than amplifying approved ones, as well as surveillance of Western opinion that can be channeled into soft power infrastructure outside the bounds of the internet.
I don’t disagree that there is a soft power component, but it is strange in my opinion to narrowly focus on China when there are demonstrable harms from american allies and none so far as I can tell from China.
In my view, people getting exposed to China and seeing them as human will help prevent the war our capitalists are cooking up.
It is true that China controls the conversation around e.g. Tienanmen square (an event that is not accurately portrayed in U.S. media), nor the Xianjiang "genocide" that Biden concocted for which there was zero proof (we know what a genocide looks like in Gaza, the most tightly controlled, censored, and surveilled territory in the world, it is also laughable that the U.S. would pretend to be the champion of muslims while enacting a genocide of a population that is predominantly muslim and putting a self-proclaimed crusader in charge of the department of war).
However, the "harms" of exposing the U.S. population to Chinese influence would be to tamp down the population's aggression towards China. I cannot see a single problem with that.
China is a democracy, but it is not a liberal democracy. It represses the right wing and allows democracy within a window defined by the communist party. I think we would be hard pressed to call America a democracy at this point. We repress left wing viewpoints that gain traction and allow "democracy" within a right wing capitalist framework. Funnily enough, this is not a symmetric mirror. Right wing viewpoints are oppressive and minoritarian. Left wing viewpoints at least purport to represent the majority of workers and China does in fact increase the material well-being of its population by leaps and bounds year-over-year.
If you are more ready to call China a democracy than the United States, there's too much ground to cover in this conversation. There's a lot to unpack there.
In America, democracy is defined as liberal democracy to preclude other forms as legitimate. Liberal democracy means theoretically that anyone can contest for political power regardless of political viewpoint. This means that anyone from a monarchist, to a fascist, to religious fundamentalist, to a liberal, to a communist and anything in-between may run in elections. In practice, various devices are used to ensure there is a window of acceptability, and that fire is primarily directed at the left. I used to think at least fascists and monarchists would also be precluded, but I have been shown to be wrong. In this sense, outside of tight parameters, liberal democracy has inherent contradictions that can easily destroy itself and transition to a different point of (usually temporary) stability, such as has been seen in France when the 1st republic became the French Empire under Napoleon, became a republic again, then switched back to monarchy, and so on and so forth.
I'm not sure what the phrase used for what China is doing is (well, there is "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics"), but as an outsider, my understanding is the idea is that a very broad portion of the population should be involved in the communist party and that democracy should be encouraged within a framework of marxism. Nonetheless, several opposition parties are allowed to run in elections though parties too far to the right are excluded. Still, these opposition parties can be fairly critical and given that China is using a significant capitalist mode of production, some elements of capitalist ideology are allowed. It is a little confusing to be sure.
To be fair, in some Russian regions you cannot access even most Russian sites from mobile (we have whitelist mode). Also, not everyone, but some people started using VPN after Instagram ban, and even more after Youtube ban. Like drug addicts who cannot drop their habits.
Americans still have free speech. There are many other platforms to use. Foreign governments never have had free speech rights and I doubt most people support them having those rights.
> Should American owned or controlled companies be banned in other countries? Should Israel be banned from interfering in American politics? If yes, then I am more open to this concept.
I think there are important differences between China any democracy. In China, each company needs a internal party cell or party commitee to police and control that companies actions. If you don't find differences between China and open democracies compelling, we won't find much common ground.
Nonetheless, we are seeing US tech companies facing scrutiny in Europe.
Something else I'll say is I think some of the big tech companies should be broken up, which I see achieving similar goals by similar means. Reduce centralized control by a change in ownership. If China were a corporation instead of a country, old likewise advocating divesting control of TikTok
> Should American owned or controlled companies be banned in other countries?
This is hardly the "gotcha" you're framing it as. Building sovereign capability has shot to the top of a lot nations priority lists.
In a lot of industries this is also just standard even amongst allies: national security related contracts have extensive clauses about ownership, structure and access.
It was bad until General Bone Spur found a way to profit from it. Now it's ok. As usual the deal was just some verbal agreement that was not binding in anyway. How many times will people keep falling for this?
Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, outright said that it was important for this deal to go through and that is part of the "eighth front" in their war.
Larry Ellison is a vocal Zionist, leaked emails show that he vetted Marco Rubio for "fealty to Israel". In one email he outright said "Great meeting with Marco Rubio. I set him up to meet with Tony Blair. Marco will be a great friend for Israel".
It's been clear to me since the very beginning of this TikTok drama, even before the war in Gaza, that it was never about TikTok being naughty; it is about TikTok not being owned by the wealthiest people in America. These people have no problem with Facebook, Instagram, et al. being naughty because they profit from it.
That's why the every proposed TikTok ban is so specific to TikTok, and never does anything to actually regulate the naughty things TikTok does, because that would mean hurting American social media companies.
> These people have no problem with Facebook, Instagram, et al. being naughty because they profit from it.
Facebook, Instagram are not naughty. They're well embedded in the political economic ruling elite of the country. They amplify or mute whatever messages that elite wants amplified or muted. The US can't make rules for TikTok to do the same because that would be illegal, besides being too obviously partisan.
The idea that TikTok is somehow less corruptible than Facebook or Instagram is laughable as American investors were largest investors of ByteDance to begin with. If it was only about Israel, they can be pressured into censorship the same way Meta supposedly is*. The difference is that TikTok can also be pressured by China, where its parent company resides.
*What is more likely is that TikTok isn't actually more pro-Palestinian than Meta, but the demographics that use it actually are which affects the algorithm and user reports.
This is brainrot conspiracy garbage. Preventing a geopolitical rival which we have no democratic control over from exerting algorithmic influence over our country is a no-brainer. Efforts to remove TikTok from PRC control predate the Oct 7, 2024 attacks.
Additionally, information about what was going on in Gaza was widely available and widely discussed on all social media platforms and in the mainstream media.
Additionally, if you're defending TikTok because it allowed them to amplify support for the Palestinian cause, it's interesting that TikTok themselves claim that you are wrong, as they said to the US Supreme court that "allegations that TikTok has amplified support for either side of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are unfounded". Are they lying here? If so, why should we trust them with control over mass social media? If they're not lying, you are wrong.
I agree some Republicans (a dumb and bad group of people) support it for this reason, but divestiture (ideally to someone other than Larry Ellison) is still highly desirable.
Ellison, Zuckerberg, and Shou Zi Chew (who to be clear is only the CEO of TikTok, not ByteDance) may be willing to brainrot Americans, but it's for the sake of profit, so they can be pressured to change. Facebook and Twitter cooperated with American intelligence to uncover to Russia's disinformation campaign and they have no incentivize to fake compliance.
From those investigations, it was revealed that Russia and likely other foreign adversaries do simply want to brainrot Americans for the sake of destabilizing the country. If TikTok gets investigated for Chinese intererfence, China can pressure Bytedance into sabotaging these investigations.
TikTok allowed the algorithm to amplify what people wanted to see while palestine content was suppressed on other platforms. What they said was true and they also allowed this content to be amplified, which was a good thing.
All the worries are about what TikTok could do. Not about anything they've done so far. If you like progressive stuff, you get progressive stuff. If you like right-wing stuff, you get right-wing stuff.
Is Facebook's, or Twitter's? This is about the US federal government wanting to exert control over a popular information portal, nothing more, nothing less.
I don't think the CCP should be in control of it either. Of course, I don't think the UK should be able to backdoor services and devices, and I don't think the EU has any business hurling Chat Control around year after year. I also know that age verification is a similar tactic being employed globally to ensure the same degradation of rights.
That doesn't mean that amplification can't sometimes be a good thing, or that it wasn't a good thing that TikTok allowed so much anti-Israel content even though Instagram and other platforms routinely manipulated discoverability of anti-Israel content. Even if it was part of a plan by China to destabilize the US-Israeli imperial regime; If the US wasn't busy funding and encouraging genocide, we wouldn't have all this rope laying around with which to hang ourselves.
The truth is, the current state of international foreign affairs is so complicated, so messy, that we are not going to be able to have a nuanced yet condensed discussion which fully accounts for everything currently in motion.
So it can be true that TikTok is a tool of China meant to best America in a culture war and destabilize it from within, and that the US Corpgov is still totally in the wrong here and leveraging the usual excuses in a bid to continue the mass consolidation of media distribution under oligarchical control. Everyone is in the wrong here, and you and I are paying for it.
Here's Mitt Romney explaining that "the number of mentions of Palestinians" was the reason why "there was such overwhelming support for us to shut down (potentially) TikTok": https://x.com/wideofthepost/status/1787104142982283587
> Additionally, if you're defending TikTok because it allowed them to amplify support for the Palestinian cause, it's interesting that TikTok themselves claim that you are wrong, as they said to the US Supreme court that "allegations that TikTok has amplified support for either side of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are unfounded". Are they lying here? If so, why should we trust them with control over mass social media? If they're not lying, you are wrong.
The sentence that you quoted from that Wikipedia page came at the end of this paragraph:
Several officials subsequently cited alleged pro-Palestinian bias on the app. While advocating for a ban, Representative Mike Gallagher alleged "rampant pro-Hamas propaganda on the app". Senators Mitt Romney, Josh Hawley, Representative Mike Lawler, and other Republicans have also alleged that TikTok had a pro-Palestine bias, with Lawler even alleging that TikTok was being manipulated during pro-Palestinian protests at colleges. In a filing to the Supreme Court, TikTok's attorneys said, "Allegations that TikTok has amplified support for either side of the Israeli- Palestinian conflict are unfounded."
There's no contradiction if TikTok was telling the truth about its neutrality: not amplifying support for Israel was reason enough to get banned by the United States government, and immediately after Trump's first reprieve a year ago TikTok began flagging and removing "Free Palestine" posts as hate speech (https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/tiktok-labels-free-pal...).
The conspiracy here is the idea that the only reason someone might want TikTok in the US to be under US control is to suppress information about Gaza. The best reason is to have the media that people in the US consume not be controlled by geopolitical rivals through opaque algorithms!
I have less cynical view on essentially the same thing - US lawmakers saw how effective TikTok was at spreading a pro- Palestine/anti-Israel story, and became afraid that China would weaponise it (more?) against the US population on a separate topic.
I haven’t really followed things in great detail, but something that has stood out to be is the apparent linchpin that was pulled in this whole affair. Like it or not, TikTok is an American company with American employees and even running on American infrastructure and oversight that was established years ago now; not somehow the cabal in our government has simply eschewed rule of law and their own ideals, to basically strong-arm this deal because there was too much free speech, a fundamental right of Americans, which the government is legally prohibited from violating and doing so is as much of a capitol offense as it can get, violating not only the law of the Constitution, but also the rights enshrined in the Declaration of Independence.
I don’t see how a competent legal team could not shred this whole effort at disowning TikTok and at the very least make it extremely expensive politically and even to the core foundation of legitimacy of the current government in what is for some reason still called the USA in spite of gross patterns of consistent material violations of all the terms.
While technically true, these articles give context about the level of decision-making control and data access from ByteDance, as of the time of their publication.
You wrote "All tiktok code is written by ByteDance engineers in china." While historically that might have been true in the old codebase, it isn't anymore. There is a significant TikTok office presence in South Bay, with many job listings open.
What's changed in 2025 is that the Trump administration has illegally postponed the ban passed by Congress four times, despite the fact that the law does not allow the President to extend the ban. And, naturally, the fact that this is to facilitate purchase by a coalition of political allies.
This has less to do with anti china hawks and more to do with anti Israel content on TikTok. And information control in the US. They are openly buying out all US mainstream media and from the looks of it will probably take Warner brothers from Netflix as well.
I'm the first to say they should have been shut down the day the original deadline ran out, and if new leadership comes to the WH they should aggressively prosecute all the platforms that broke the law under promises of the corrupt DOJ (Google, Apple et al). But that's between your joke of a constitution and political leadership, it hardly sways the case one way or another.
> TikTok is an American company with American employees
Those American employees are required to basically uphold the interests of the CCP. This is done as part of an agreement around their stock grants apparently. From https://dailycallernewsfoundation.org/2025/01/14/exclusive-d... there are details on what executives of TikTok have to agree to in writing:
> “You shall comply with applicable laws and guidelines and abide by public order and good customs, the socialist system, national interests, legal rights of other citizens, and information authenticity requirements,” the purported Douyin agreement reviewed by the DCNF states.
> The document also lists a number of prohibited activities for employees, including “overthrowing the socialist system,” “inciting secession,” “undermining national religious policies, or promoting cults and superstitions,” as well as injunctions against “meaningless information or deliberate use of character combinations to avoid technical censorship.”
And in fact, they’re required to report to a ByteDance management team in China, and acknowledge that they’re employees of ByteDance (and therefore NOT the American company):
> TikTok executives also sign agreements with ByteDance consenting to digital surveillance and report to China-based leadership, according to other documents and audio recordings supporting Puris’ lawsuit.
> Other documents also seem to indicate TikTok ultimately considered Puris to be a ByteDance employee.
> While onboarding in 2019, Puris was allegedly required to sign one hiring document reviewed by the DCNF affirming: “I am a director, executive officer or general partner of ByteDance LTD.”
People seem to forget that China is a fully authoritarian state. The fact is that China is an adversary and blocks virtually every western social network, including YouTube, Instagram, and Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_websites_blocked_in_ma...
The CCP has absolute authority over internal companies to bend them to their will, and regularly disappears political dissidents including tech leaders like Jack Ma.
TikTok has over 150 million users in the United States, skewing young. We have seen the massive misinformation campaigns from other adversaries like Russia, with the goal of sowing dissent and malcontent.
All it takes is leaning on the algorithmic levers. Today the controversy may be over the issue you are passionate about, tomorrow it will a different issue, the only thing that matters is that TikTok is an open door to unduly influence public opinion in America.
The immense scale of data collection, from personal information to location tracking data, is also a clear concern.
Anyone that thinks it is reasonable for a geopolitical rival to control this company, especially a country known to reach its hand deep into company policy, is incredibly naive and self-sabotaging.
TikTok must be banned or fully controlled by a US based company.
> the only thing that matters is that TikTok is an open door to unduly influence public opinion in America.
The immense scale of data collection, from personal information to location tracking data, is also a clear concern.
I understand where you’re coming from - “they ban us so we’ll ban you” is a valid sentiment. But this grandstanding is like slapping a bandaid on a leaky tub and calling it “Job done”. I’m almost being transported to the 1940s with this McCarthy-lite take.
Everything that TikTok is doing is being done by Meta, Snap, Instagram, etc. If it’s not done through TikTok it’ll be done somewhere else. But sure, instead of passing real privacy laws let’s just also be authoritarian - I’m sure that’ll solve the problem.
> Everything that TikTok is doing is being done by Meta, Snap, Instagram, etc. If it’s not done through TikTok it’ll be done somewhere else.
Meta, Snap, Instagram (i.e. Meta), are US-based media companies and subject to US regulation and jurisprudence.
TikTok operates under the jurisdiction of authoritarian adversary. This undue foreign influence is the sticking point, not merely the massive media sway.
TikTok operates in the US, so they are operating under US jurisdiction and subject to the same regulations as US companies.
The main difference is political pressure, not legal. US companies will bend the knee to Trump, Chinese companies will do so to Xi. Both of these leaders are authoritarian, but Trump's government is also fascist. However Xi's government is more experienced and successful.
I don't know which is worse, honestly. I mean, at this exact second, China is obviously a more authoritarian state, but the US is riding a bullet train into fascism. So who knows what things will look like in a few years?
Everything that is being done on TikTok is not being done on the other socials. Some of the actions are more or less the same. The difference is in consequences.
Yes, they are all manipulating feeds. Yes, they are are using psychological sabotage and attention hacks to steal as much attention as they possibly can from every pair of eyeballs they encounter.
If Meta, Youtube, Snap, et al do something that is illegal, or violates social norms, or commits any of a thousand different offenses, legal or cultural or otherwise, they can be held to account. They have. Facebook and Instagram and Youtube and all US platforms have been sued, settle out of court, have been subpoenaed and forced to account for themselves in front of congress, etc.
China can use TikTok for many purposes, whether it's purely disruptive, or in pursuit of nation-state agendas, or any sort of nefarious deliberate action they might take. You can hold Zuck accountable. You cannot, with China, and because all Chinese companies are under state control, they are by definition not operating in good faith. They do not follow trade agreements, norms, or deal in good faith. They will steal IP, ignore sanctions, and do whatever benefits them most regardless of any agreements to the contrary, and will actively seek to undermine opposition to their greatest advantage. And they're more or less immune to accountability for anything they do outside of China, except and unless they make the state look bad, or costs them money or reputation in the market.
China chose to deliberately manipulate and abuse their platform by using it to cause all sorts of users to flood their representatives with calls - that one move, by itself, the choice of a paltform to deliberately intervene at scale and advocate for political action, should be sufficient to have seized the platform outright, and then tell China to go pound sand. Imagine how they'd respond to us broadcasting American Freedom TV across their whole country from Starlink satellites, with free satellite 5G compatible with their carriers, bypassing all their great firewall and censorship? As much as I loathe the authoritarianism, we ostensibly have to respect state sovereignty - China deliberately and specifically violated US sovereignty by manipulating a bunch of useful idiots to their own purposes, flexing on the US, threatening them with manipulating the electorate unless they played ball on TikTok control.
We should just seize it and tell them to pound sand, then auction the assets. You can't trust the code, so sell off the name, domain, the network to other platforms if they want to rebuild it, then scour the content and software and hardware, burn it, and salt the earth over it.
> China can use TikTok for many purposes, whether it's purely disruptive, or in pursuit of nation-state agendas, or any sort of nefarious deliberate action they might take. You can hold Zuck accountable.
Yeah they can in theory but so can Facebook. Remember Cambridge Analytica? They held Zuck accountable in the sense that there was a slap on the wrist and he went on his merry way. You can similarly hold the ByteDance US CEO accountable and they operate as a US business.
It’s all political theatrics and has nothing do with keeping our personal data safe or protect the American people. These companies might run in the US but corporations are beholden to no nation.
It’s funny because as a European when you wrote “Anyone that thinks it is reasonable for a geopolitical rival to control this company, especially a country known to reach its hand deep into company policy, is incredibly naive and self-sabotaging.” I thought “yeah, when you put it like that it would be AWFUL for the Trump administration to own it.
And then I read the next line and realised you meant China.
Given that Trump and Hegseth seem to now be friendly with China and talking about a “G2” (as opposed to G7), I feel the TikTok ban that should have happened months ago is just going to not happen, as long as (my speculation) someone in the Trump family is able to profit off business dealings with China. It makes no sense not to enact the ban that Congress passed.
- November 2023: audio leaked of Apartheid Defense League CEO Jonathon Greenblatt saying they had a Tiktok problem [1] because Tiktok didn't sufficiently censor live broadcast of the genocide, unlike, say, Meta [2]
- 5 March 2024: the bill to ban Tiktok was introduced to the Senate [3];
- 7 March 2024: the bill passes the Senate;
- 13 March 2024: the bill passes the House;
- 24 April 2024: Biden signs the bill into law.
So yes the Tiktok "ban" was about a foreign government, just not the one usually stated.
Larry Ellison is the world's second richest man. His son, David Ellison, now heads Paramount Skydance and are key players in the Tiktok acquisition. David Ellison acquired CBS News and put Bari Weiss in charge of it. Why was CBS News for sale? Because 60 Minutes said one slightly negative thing about Israel's involvement in Gaza so Shari Redstone sold it to Paramount [4].
What I find both funny and depressing is that the US government is doing exactly what they accuse China of doing. It's not even a partisan issue. On foreign policy, America is uniparty, just like China.
For anyone who follows legislative affairs, this rocketed through.
I’m confused. Why are you alleging a link between the first few bullet points? I'm not saying there's no link, but it certainly doesn't seem obvious without some substantiation.
The US government has considered TikTok a national security issue for a long time, and considered banning it even back in 2020 - a full 3 years before October 7th. So it has nothing to do with Israel, or Jews, or Gaza, and everything to do with not following American laws, defending against asymmetric warfare from the Chinese government, and national security.
They are reporting that the US investors set to make the purchase are still waiting on China to finalize a deal.
The thing about Trump saying it was a done deal*, like most other things he says, was true in the sense that the deal to find the US investors to buy the app is done. And having the "blessing" or any other uttering of China's President Xi Jinping is not the same as having the official action of China finalizing the sale. It did allow him to sign an executive order allowing tiktok to continue operating while the deal is being finalized -- and additional executive order 90 day extensions in the mean time.
With the sale going to the usual suspects, Larry Ellison, Abu Dhabi MGX, it makes this look more like Trump is being played at his own game. Or, like the other comment says about ByteDance and China mocking the US in this silly posturing. Maybe they get it done on Monday, or give it another 90 days.
*See paltering.[0][1]. It's the reason you get people saying he lied and others saying he's unfairly being called a liar. A more accurate way to describe what he says is: manipulation. Even news outlets are capable of being manipulated (and some may encourage it), which in turn causes all of them to be called "partisan hacks" and the populace loses trust -- but in the wrong things/people.
President Xi and Putin aren’t just seasoned politicians, they are experienced and know the rules of the game very well. Trump is not just naive, but he’s utterly stupid as well. Not sure why voters can’t see through his BS.
The law is quite clear the 90 day extension is a one-time thing and the Trump admin had already violated said law prior to actually invoking that clause.
The thing about Trump saying it’s a done deal is that, like on many other topics, he’s simply lying.
There was a legitimate debate to be had about the dangers of TikTok and the importance of free speech. Do we ban TikTok and squash free speech, or is free speech of supreme importance, even if it means allowing a dangerous foreign app--these were the questions of a few years ago.
So what happened? Let's recap:
Congress passed a law banning TikTok. Free speech was trampled.
The Supreme Court upheld the ban. Free speech was trampled again.
Then, the law just doesn't get enforced. The dangers of TikTok remain.
Everyone loses and the entire political process around this has been a joke.
We've learned that Congress can just ban apps by name, effectively, and yet the great danger that made us cross this line in the first place remains in use under the control of China.
Free speech by foreign governments (or controlled by foreign governments) has never been protected by the US constitution, right?
I do agree that Trump, in both his administrations, has made it starkly clear that its checks and balances are quite impotent against a person or party that doesn’t care to follow the rules, so long as they have enough supporters that also don’t care, or are misled
Whoa, it should be bigger news. I too was under the impression that it was a done deal, with Larry Ellison coming in to mop the floor.
It would be so funny if ByteDance and China continued to successfully mock the US in this silly posturing.
Russia and China have been pretty successful at making these fools look like what they are - gullible suckers.
I think the truth is TikTok/ByteDance have all the leverage. A ban of the app is political suicide for whatever administration implements it.
If there's one thing I've taken away from Trump's successes, it's that there's no such thing as "political suicide".
A massive tax hike on imported goods, making loads of things more expensive? Political suicide! Constant flip-flopping and backtracking on deals? Political suicide! Doing mocking impersonations of disabled people? Political suicide! Accepting donations from neo-nazi groups? Political suicide! Cheating on your pregnant wife with a porn star? Political suicide! Repeatedly visiting a billionaire pedophile's private island? Political suicide!
Except it turns out actually none of that is political suicide.
this is exactly right. he could ban all social media and 1/2 the country would be “yes, visionary looking out for us and our children” :)
All of those things affect the everyperson far less than losing TikTok.
Losing TikTok would be like if the government shut down the NFL. This isn’t hyperbole.
I never claimed all those other irrelevant things you brought up were political suicide. In that sense they are unrelated topics. Dare I say you’re making a strawman argument.
My theory is the Trump Mafia doesn't care if people think they are idiots.
This admin is so transparently corrupt, and they're making out like bandits.
Trump and his family have made billions of dollars on the crypto rug pull. Everyone knew it was a shitcoin from the start.
Trump has pardoned violent criminals and felony fraudsters for business deals and "donations".
His family's net worth has estimated to have risen billions this year alone.
Elon Musk essentially bought his way into the control of the government and tried to buy off votes.
Kristi Noem funneled at least one sole source contract worth $220 million dollars to a firm closely tied to her and her previous political campaigns.
Ron DeSantis spent $250 million dollars of no-bid contracts for essentially a tent interment camp, many of questionable value and to politically tied companies
They don't care if you don't like them and I don't think they care if they accomplish what they ran on. They have done a bang up job enriching themselves and their donor class, however.
Hey, it did become bigger news. Good. It's the first time I see this on HN. An old 2 days thread being "bumped" by changing the timestamp?
It is true and documented that the reason TikTok was challenged and censored was because it was exposing too many people to Israeli crimes in the genocide in Gaza. This was stated by high level officials. Of course, it also provides grist for accusing China of interfering in American politics, but of course, doing so would be a voice of morality, and you can't have that.
https://forward.com/culture/688840/tiktok-ban-gaza-palestine...
Edit: As a Jew, I also want to note that there is at least one dead comment mixing this with actual antisemitism, which has been apparently increasingly promoted by the right-wing media. My presumption is this is an attempt to create an actual anti-semitism crisis Israel can point to in order to shut down criticism from the left.
No, it’s not true. The bill which banned TikTok (H.R. 7521 Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act)[1] was introduced by Mike Gallagher and Raja Krishnamoorthi in 2024, but a near identical bill, the ANTI-SOCIAL CCP Act (H.R.1081)[2] was introduced by those same lawmakers in February of 2023, long before the Gaza War began, though it did not make it out of committee at that time. It’s conceivable that the bill’s passage was prioritized by house leadership due to concerns about content on TikTok, but the text of the bill contains no reference to the Israel-Palestine conflict and its very obvious from public statements by both co-sponsors that the primary motivation for this bill was concern with Chinese influence.
[1] https://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20240311/HR%207521%20Up...
[2] https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/hr1081/BILLS-118hr1081ih....
The bill had no traction, "until Oct. 7. The attack that day in Israel by Hamas and the ensuing conflict in Gaza became a turning point in the push against TikTok, Helberg said. People who historically hadn’t taken a position on TikTok became concerned with how Israel was portrayed in the videos and what they saw as an increase in antisemitic content posted to the app."
"How TikTok Was Blindsided by U.S. Bill That Could Ban It" (https://www.wsj.com/tech/how-tiktok-was-blindsided-by-a-u-s-...)
> its very obvious from public statements by both co-sponsors that the primary motivation for this bill was concern with Chinese influence.
Here's an op-ed authored by bill sponsor Mike Gallagher entitled, "Why Do Young Americans Support Hamas? Look at TikTok.": https://www.thefp.com/p/tik-tok-young-americans-hamas-mike-g...
Around the time the second bill was passed, banning TikTok was polling at 50%. Why make this complicated? Banning TikTok is popular. People don’t like it because it’s brain rot. Many vice bans poll highly.
Completely disagree. Look around, mass protests start and governments fall when banning social media. There are 80 million daily active users of TikTok in the US, Trump would never, ever be so stupid as to piss off 80 million people by suddenly blocking their favourite app. That's the whole reason of this standoff.
Both can be true, no? TikTok can be a tool that China uses to aid its geopolitical goals. TikTok has lots of criticism of Israel. Both can be true.
TikTok is a social media the US don't control. TikTok has content the US don't want the American public to see. It's the same problem.
Would we be having this conversation if TikTok was EU based?
Probably not, because the EU is politically subservient both to the US and to Israel.
Remember how the USSR used Jim Crow to criticize America and degrade the US's international standing? That Soviet messaging was clearly self-serving, but it doesn't make America's behavior that creating the opening any less reprehensible.
Same deal here.
And it's not like there aren't dozens of equally brain-rot apps made my US and EU based companies that people would love to see banned. The only one, out of SHEER COINCIDENCE I'M SUUUURE, actually on the chopping block is the one that promotes a lot of pro-Gaza content.
Like I'm sorry, there is just no debate to be had here. Israel is committing a genocide, confirmed by the UN, recognized by anyone who looks at what's going on there with an even remotely objective eye, and the only social platform on which that message is getting out is facing legal scrutiny in the entire West is TikTok. This doesn't even require a conspiracy board, it's literally three red strings between TikTok, Israel, and the US. Despite worldwide propaganda efforts on the part of every corporate media in existence all screaming that the genocide isn't a genocide, a full 25% of people according to a poll I saw are fully convinced the genocide Israel is committing is in fact a genocide.
This would be fucking pathetic if not for the fact that every organized world entity involved in this utter sham was so incredibly powerful and their influence wasn't borderline inescapable.
You can stop believing in conspiracy theories and that the Jews are behind it all anytime. It will vastly improve your mood.
The initial TikTok ban bill was introduced in January 25, 2023, before the Oct 7 attacks.
I don't think we can trust TikTok to be a defender of global human rights. China doesn't have a great record on this, with Muslim minorities in particular. The furor over Uyghurs in China has died down due to China's strong international influence but that doesn't mean China is respecting Uyghurs human rights.
Should American owned or controlled companies be banned in other countries? Should Israel be banned from interfering in American politics? If yes, then I am more open to this concept.
For what it's worth, I am not aware of any evidence that TikTok did anything intentional to promote anti-US narratives. To be honest, I think they accomplished that goal by simply promoting what people wanted to see, which is in large part, simply the truth. The so-called enemies of America do not have to work very hard or lie, they just need to expose our propaganda in a very straightforward fashion.
Since the COVID crisis at least, US owned social media companies have become very censorious and we know they tamper with the algorithms. It may be that simply having a less biased algorithm is too clarifying for American elites.
>Should American owned or controlled companies be banned in other countries?
I don't understand why that's your response to a question about them both being true. It seems like a perfectly legitimate observation: China can and probably is leveraging social media to shape global discussion of political topics that they deem sensitive. And it's also the case that at least for some voting block of conservative Republicans in the US Senate, it's an opportunity to potentially shut down communication on Israel's actions in Gaza. It's a classic both can be true situation.
I actually think you're right that Tiktok isn't necessarily intentionally promoting Gaza but that it has organically emerged simply because it legitimately is an issue that is an issue that has provoked moral outrage of the western world. To the extent that China is shaping anything, I think it's more about suppressing disapproved narratives than amplifying approved ones, as well as surveillance of Western opinion that can be channeled into soft power infrastructure outside the bounds of the internet.
I don’t disagree that there is a soft power component, but it is strange in my opinion to narrowly focus on China when there are demonstrable harms from american allies and none so far as I can tell from China.
In my view, people getting exposed to China and seeing them as human will help prevent the war our capitalists are cooking up.
How are you scoping harms this context? Are we setting aside Chinas actions inside of China or Hong Kong?
It is true that China controls the conversation around e.g. Tienanmen square (an event that is not accurately portrayed in U.S. media), nor the Xianjiang "genocide" that Biden concocted for which there was zero proof (we know what a genocide looks like in Gaza, the most tightly controlled, censored, and surveilled territory in the world, it is also laughable that the U.S. would pretend to be the champion of muslims while enacting a genocide of a population that is predominantly muslim and putting a self-proclaimed crusader in charge of the department of war).
However, the "harms" of exposing the U.S. population to Chinese influence would be to tamp down the population's aggression towards China. I cannot see a single problem with that.
China is a democracy, but it is not a liberal democracy. It represses the right wing and allows democracy within a window defined by the communist party. I think we would be hard pressed to call America a democracy at this point. We repress left wing viewpoints that gain traction and allow "democracy" within a right wing capitalist framework. Funnily enough, this is not a symmetric mirror. Right wing viewpoints are oppressive and minoritarian. Left wing viewpoints at least purport to represent the majority of workers and China does in fact increase the material well-being of its population by leaps and bounds year-over-year.
If you are more ready to call China a democracy than the United States, there's too much ground to cover in this conversation. There's a lot to unpack there.
>China is a democracy, but it is not a liberal democracy.
This is a specular redefining of fundamental terms that prevents meaningful discussion in this context.
In America, democracy is defined as liberal democracy to preclude other forms as legitimate. Liberal democracy means theoretically that anyone can contest for political power regardless of political viewpoint. This means that anyone from a monarchist, to a fascist, to religious fundamentalist, to a liberal, to a communist and anything in-between may run in elections. In practice, various devices are used to ensure there is a window of acceptability, and that fire is primarily directed at the left. I used to think at least fascists and monarchists would also be precluded, but I have been shown to be wrong. In this sense, outside of tight parameters, liberal democracy has inherent contradictions that can easily destroy itself and transition to a different point of (usually temporary) stability, such as has been seen in France when the 1st republic became the French Empire under Napoleon, became a republic again, then switched back to monarchy, and so on and so forth.
I'm not sure what the phrase used for what China is doing is (well, there is "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics"), but as an outsider, my understanding is the idea is that a very broad portion of the population should be involved in the communist party and that democracy should be encouraged within a framework of marxism. Nonetheless, several opposition parties are allowed to run in elections though parties too far to the right are excluded. Still, these opposition parties can be fairly critical and given that China is using a significant capitalist mode of production, some elements of capitalist ideology are allowed. It is a little confusing to be sure.
If people actually went to the Chinese language social media as it is instead of algorithimically curated media they would have alot worse opinion.
Try using American social media and offerings in China, and lately, Russia.
To be fair, in some Russian regions you cannot access even most Russian sites from mobile (we have whitelist mode). Also, not everyone, but some people started using VPN after Instagram ban, and even more after Youtube ban. Like drug addicts who cannot drop their habits.
But it's not about reciprocity if you're truly committed to free speech right?
The first amendment isn't a suicide pact, and foreign corporations were never covered by it.
It's not a 'suicide pact', it's a clear commitment that the government will not ban speech it finds inconvenient.
It's not done a great job of living up to that promise.
Americans still have free speech. There are many other platforms to use. Foreign governments never have had free speech rights and I doubt most people support them having those rights.
China already bans American media companies from operating in China.
> Should American owned or controlled companies be banned in other countries? Should Israel be banned from interfering in American politics? If yes, then I am more open to this concept.
I think there are important differences between China any democracy. In China, each company needs a internal party cell or party commitee to police and control that companies actions. If you don't find differences between China and open democracies compelling, we won't find much common ground.
Nonetheless, we are seeing US tech companies facing scrutiny in Europe.
Something else I'll say is I think some of the big tech companies should be broken up, which I see achieving similar goals by similar means. Reduce centralized control by a change in ownership. If China were a corporation instead of a country, old likewise advocating divesting control of TikTok
I mean, having local government and employees represented on the board seems to be an increasingly good idea.
> Should American owned or controlled companies be banned in other countries?
This is hardly the "gotcha" you're framing it as. Building sovereign capability has shot to the top of a lot nations priority lists.
In a lot of industries this is also just standard even amongst allies: national security related contracts have extensive clauses about ownership, structure and access.
It was bad until General Bone Spur found a way to profit from it. Now it's ok. As usual the deal was just some verbal agreement that was not binding in anyway. How many times will people keep falling for this?
Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, outright said that it was important for this deal to go through and that is part of the "eighth front" in their war.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/gPKw3cM3DUI
Larry Ellison is a vocal Zionist, leaked emails show that he vetted Marco Rubio for "fealty to Israel". In one email he outright said "Great meeting with Marco Rubio. I set him up to meet with Tony Blair. Marco will be a great friend for Israel".
https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/larry-ellison-vetted-marco-ru...
This is the man who would be given control of Tik Tok and its algorithm.
As a Jew, when’s the last time you kept Shabbat?
It's been clear to me since the very beginning of this TikTok drama, even before the war in Gaza, that it was never about TikTok being naughty; it is about TikTok not being owned by the wealthiest people in America. These people have no problem with Facebook, Instagram, et al. being naughty because they profit from it.
That's why the every proposed TikTok ban is so specific to TikTok, and never does anything to actually regulate the naughty things TikTok does, because that would mean hurting American social media companies.
> These people have no problem with Facebook, Instagram, et al. being naughty because they profit from it.
Facebook, Instagram are not naughty. They're well embedded in the political economic ruling elite of the country. They amplify or mute whatever messages that elite wants amplified or muted. The US can't make rules for TikTok to do the same because that would be illegal, besides being too obviously partisan.
The idea that TikTok is somehow less corruptible than Facebook or Instagram is laughable as American investors were largest investors of ByteDance to begin with. If it was only about Israel, they can be pressured into censorship the same way Meta supposedly is*. The difference is that TikTok can also be pressured by China, where its parent company resides.
*What is more likely is that TikTok isn't actually more pro-Palestinian than Meta, but the demographics that use it actually are which affects the algorithm and user reports.
You're being downvoted but Greenblatt has stated it plainly.
Also the reason behind the 60 minutes fiasco and the CBS acquisition which had Bari Weiss installed there.
You're being downvoted but Greenblatt has stated it plainly.
Maybe he's being downvoted for taking the discussion off-topic.
How is the reason for the TikTok sale off topic for a post about the TikTok sale?
This is brainrot conspiracy garbage. Preventing a geopolitical rival which we have no democratic control over from exerting algorithmic influence over our country is a no-brainer. Efforts to remove TikTok from PRC control predate the Oct 7, 2024 attacks.
Additionally, information about what was going on in Gaza was widely available and widely discussed on all social media platforms and in the mainstream media.
Additionally, if you're defending TikTok because it allowed them to amplify support for the Palestinian cause, it's interesting that TikTok themselves claim that you are wrong, as they said to the US Supreme court that "allegations that TikTok has amplified support for either side of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are unfounded". Are they lying here? If so, why should we trust them with control over mass social media? If they're not lying, you are wrong.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restrictions_on_TikTok_in_the_...
Sitting congresspeople said that this was one of the motivations.
I agree some Republicans (a dumb and bad group of people) support it for this reason, but divestiture (ideally to someone other than Larry Ellison) is still highly desirable.
Maybe "brainrot conspiracy garbage" isn't the way to describe it, then?
Why should it matter to the average citizen if the algorithmic control is coming from Ellison, Zuckerberg, or Shou Zi Chew?
Ellison, Zuckerberg, and Shou Zi Chew (who to be clear is only the CEO of TikTok, not ByteDance) may be willing to brainrot Americans, but it's for the sake of profit, so they can be pressured to change. Facebook and Twitter cooperated with American intelligence to uncover to Russia's disinformation campaign and they have no incentivize to fake compliance.
From those investigations, it was revealed that Russia and likely other foreign adversaries do simply want to brainrot Americans for the sake of destabilizing the country. If TikTok gets investigated for Chinese intererfence, China can pressure Bytedance into sabotaging these investigations.
TikTok allowed the algorithm to amplify what people wanted to see while palestine content was suppressed on other platforms. What they said was true and they also allowed this content to be amplified, which was a good thing.
So, in your opinion the TikTok algorithm is politically neutral?
having it made the overall landscape more politically neutral.
with it changed to peddle the american propaganda line, the overall media is more biased than it was
Is there any evidence it's not?
All the worries are about what TikTok could do. Not about anything they've done so far. If you like progressive stuff, you get progressive stuff. If you like right-wing stuff, you get right-wing stuff.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_by_TikTok
Is Facebook's, or Twitter's? This is about the US federal government wanting to exert control over a popular information portal, nothing more, nothing less.
I don't think the CCP should be in control of it either. Of course, I don't think the UK should be able to backdoor services and devices, and I don't think the EU has any business hurling Chat Control around year after year. I also know that age verification is a similar tactic being employed globally to ensure the same degradation of rights.
That doesn't mean that amplification can't sometimes be a good thing, or that it wasn't a good thing that TikTok allowed so much anti-Israel content even though Instagram and other platforms routinely manipulated discoverability of anti-Israel content. Even if it was part of a plan by China to destabilize the US-Israeli imperial regime; If the US wasn't busy funding and encouraging genocide, we wouldn't have all this rope laying around with which to hang ourselves.
The truth is, the current state of international foreign affairs is so complicated, so messy, that we are not going to be able to have a nuanced yet condensed discussion which fully accounts for everything currently in motion.
So it can be true that TikTok is a tool of China meant to best America in a culture war and destabilize it from within, and that the US Corpgov is still totally in the wrong here and leveraging the usual excuses in a bid to continue the mass consolidation of media distribution under oligarchical control. Everyone is in the wrong here, and you and I are paying for it.
> This is brainrot conspiracy garbage.
Here's Mitt Romney explaining that "the number of mentions of Palestinians" was the reason why "there was such overwhelming support for us to shut down (potentially) TikTok": https://x.com/wideofthepost/status/1787104142982283587
> Additionally, if you're defending TikTok because it allowed them to amplify support for the Palestinian cause, it's interesting that TikTok themselves claim that you are wrong, as they said to the US Supreme court that "allegations that TikTok has amplified support for either side of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are unfounded". Are they lying here? If so, why should we trust them with control over mass social media? If they're not lying, you are wrong.
The sentence that you quoted from that Wikipedia page came at the end of this paragraph:
There's no contradiction if TikTok was telling the truth about its neutrality: not amplifying support for Israel was reason enough to get banned by the United States government, and immediately after Trump's first reprieve a year ago TikTok began flagging and removing "Free Palestine" posts as hate speech (https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/tiktok-labels-free-pal...).The conspiracy here is the idea that the only reason someone might want TikTok in the US to be under US control is to suppress information about Gaza. The best reason is to have the media that people in the US consume not be controlled by geopolitical rivals through opaque algorithms!
I have less cynical view on essentially the same thing - US lawmakers saw how effective TikTok was at spreading a pro- Palestine/anti-Israel story, and became afraid that China would weaponise it (more?) against the US population on a separate topic.
This is essentially the same thing though I guess
You think we are going to get to a whole year of Byte Dance operating illegally in the United States?
I don't see why not, I'd expect four years of illegal operation.
I haven’t really followed things in great detail, but something that has stood out to be is the apparent linchpin that was pulled in this whole affair. Like it or not, TikTok is an American company with American employees and even running on American infrastructure and oversight that was established years ago now; not somehow the cabal in our government has simply eschewed rule of law and their own ideals, to basically strong-arm this deal because there was too much free speech, a fundamental right of Americans, which the government is legally prohibited from violating and doing so is as much of a capitol offense as it can get, violating not only the law of the Constitution, but also the rights enshrined in the Declaration of Independence.
I don’t see how a competent legal team could not shred this whole effort at disowning TikTok and at the very least make it extremely expensive politically and even to the core foundation of legitimacy of the current government in what is for some reason still called the USA in spite of gross patterns of consistent material violations of all the terms.
> an American company with American employees
While technically true, these articles give context about the level of decision-making control and data access from ByteDance, as of the time of their publication.
https://restofworld.org/2024/tiktok-chinese-us-ban/ (2024)
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/emilybakerwhite/tiktok-... (2022)
> TikTok is an American company with American employees
All tiktok code is written by ByteDance engineers in china.
Context for the non-beleivers. I work on the TikTok USDS team.
This isn't true. You should ask friends who work at TikTok before you write comments like this.
ZXCZXCZXCZXCZXC
You wrote "All tiktok code is written by ByteDance engineers in china." While historically that might have been true in the old codebase, it isn't anymore. There is a significant TikTok office presence in South Bay, with many job listings open.
https://lifeattiktok.com/search
I don't get it, did you miss that this went all the way to the Supreme Court already? It's not "anti free speech", it's "anti Chinese platform".
What's changed in 2025 is that the Trump administration has illegally postponed the ban passed by Congress four times, despite the fact that the law does not allow the President to extend the ban. And, naturally, the fact that this is to facilitate purchase by a coalition of political allies.
This has less to do with anti china hawks and more to do with anti Israel content on TikTok. And information control in the US. They are openly buying out all US mainstream media and from the looks of it will probably take Warner brothers from Netflix as well.
I'm the first to say they should have been shut down the day the original deadline ran out, and if new leadership comes to the WH they should aggressively prosecute all the platforms that broke the law under promises of the corrupt DOJ (Google, Apple et al). But that's between your joke of a constitution and political leadership, it hardly sways the case one way or another.
> TikTok is an American company with American employees
Those American employees are required to basically uphold the interests of the CCP. This is done as part of an agreement around their stock grants apparently. From https://dailycallernewsfoundation.org/2025/01/14/exclusive-d... there are details on what executives of TikTok have to agree to in writing:
> “You shall comply with applicable laws and guidelines and abide by public order and good customs, the socialist system, national interests, legal rights of other citizens, and information authenticity requirements,” the purported Douyin agreement reviewed by the DCNF states.
> The document also lists a number of prohibited activities for employees, including “overthrowing the socialist system,” “inciting secession,” “undermining national religious policies, or promoting cults and superstitions,” as well as injunctions against “meaningless information or deliberate use of character combinations to avoid technical censorship.”
And in fact, they’re required to report to a ByteDance management team in China, and acknowledge that they’re employees of ByteDance (and therefore NOT the American company):
> TikTok executives also sign agreements with ByteDance consenting to digital surveillance and report to China-based leadership, according to other documents and audio recordings supporting Puris’ lawsuit.
> Other documents also seem to indicate TikTok ultimately considered Puris to be a ByteDance employee.
> While onboarding in 2019, Puris was allegedly required to sign one hiring document reviewed by the DCNF affirming: “I am a director, executive officer or general partner of ByteDance LTD.”
People seem to forget that China is a fully authoritarian state. The fact is that China is an adversary and blocks virtually every western social network, including YouTube, Instagram, and Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_websites_blocked_in_ma...
The CCP has absolute authority over internal companies to bend them to their will, and regularly disappears political dissidents including tech leaders like Jack Ma.
TikTok has over 150 million users in the United States, skewing young. We have seen the massive misinformation campaigns from other adversaries like Russia, with the goal of sowing dissent and malcontent.
All it takes is leaning on the algorithmic levers. Today the controversy may be over the issue you are passionate about, tomorrow it will a different issue, the only thing that matters is that TikTok is an open door to unduly influence public opinion in America.
The immense scale of data collection, from personal information to location tracking data, is also a clear concern.
Anyone that thinks it is reasonable for a geopolitical rival to control this company, especially a country known to reach its hand deep into company policy, is incredibly naive and self-sabotaging.
TikTok must be banned or fully controlled by a US based company.
> the only thing that matters is that TikTok is an open door to unduly influence public opinion in America. The immense scale of data collection, from personal information to location tracking data, is also a clear concern.
I understand where you’re coming from - “they ban us so we’ll ban you” is a valid sentiment. But this grandstanding is like slapping a bandaid on a leaky tub and calling it “Job done”. I’m almost being transported to the 1940s with this McCarthy-lite take.
Everything that TikTok is doing is being done by Meta, Snap, Instagram, etc. If it’s not done through TikTok it’ll be done somewhere else. But sure, instead of passing real privacy laws let’s just also be authoritarian - I’m sure that’ll solve the problem.
> Everything that TikTok is doing is being done by Meta, Snap, Instagram, etc. If it’s not done through TikTok it’ll be done somewhere else.
Meta, Snap, Instagram (i.e. Meta), are US-based media companies and subject to US regulation and jurisprudence.
TikTok operates under the jurisdiction of authoritarian adversary. This undue foreign influence is the sticking point, not merely the massive media sway.
> Meta, Snap, Instagram (i.e. Meta), are US-based media companies and subject to US regulation and jurisprudence
Increasingly, this is an argument for the EU banning them. Especially Twitter.
TikTok operates in the US, so they are operating under US jurisdiction and subject to the same regulations as US companies.
The main difference is political pressure, not legal. US companies will bend the knee to Trump, Chinese companies will do so to Xi. Both of these leaders are authoritarian, but Trump's government is also fascist. However Xi's government is more experienced and successful.
I don't know which is worse, honestly. I mean, at this exact second, China is obviously a more authoritarian state, but the US is riding a bullet train into fascism. So who knows what things will look like in a few years?
Everything that is being done on TikTok is not being done on the other socials. Some of the actions are more or less the same. The difference is in consequences.
Yes, they are all manipulating feeds. Yes, they are are using psychological sabotage and attention hacks to steal as much attention as they possibly can from every pair of eyeballs they encounter.
If Meta, Youtube, Snap, et al do something that is illegal, or violates social norms, or commits any of a thousand different offenses, legal or cultural or otherwise, they can be held to account. They have. Facebook and Instagram and Youtube and all US platforms have been sued, settle out of court, have been subpoenaed and forced to account for themselves in front of congress, etc.
China can use TikTok for many purposes, whether it's purely disruptive, or in pursuit of nation-state agendas, or any sort of nefarious deliberate action they might take. You can hold Zuck accountable. You cannot, with China, and because all Chinese companies are under state control, they are by definition not operating in good faith. They do not follow trade agreements, norms, or deal in good faith. They will steal IP, ignore sanctions, and do whatever benefits them most regardless of any agreements to the contrary, and will actively seek to undermine opposition to their greatest advantage. And they're more or less immune to accountability for anything they do outside of China, except and unless they make the state look bad, or costs them money or reputation in the market.
China chose to deliberately manipulate and abuse their platform by using it to cause all sorts of users to flood their representatives with calls - that one move, by itself, the choice of a paltform to deliberately intervene at scale and advocate for political action, should be sufficient to have seized the platform outright, and then tell China to go pound sand. Imagine how they'd respond to us broadcasting American Freedom TV across their whole country from Starlink satellites, with free satellite 5G compatible with their carriers, bypassing all their great firewall and censorship? As much as I loathe the authoritarianism, we ostensibly have to respect state sovereignty - China deliberately and specifically violated US sovereignty by manipulating a bunch of useful idiots to their own purposes, flexing on the US, threatening them with manipulating the electorate unless they played ball on TikTok control.
We should just seize it and tell them to pound sand, then auction the assets. You can't trust the code, so sell off the name, domain, the network to other platforms if they want to rebuild it, then scour the content and software and hardware, burn it, and salt the earth over it.
> China can use TikTok for many purposes, whether it's purely disruptive, or in pursuit of nation-state agendas, or any sort of nefarious deliberate action they might take. You can hold Zuck accountable.
Yeah they can in theory but so can Facebook. Remember Cambridge Analytica? They held Zuck accountable in the sense that there was a slap on the wrist and he went on his merry way. You can similarly hold the ByteDance US CEO accountable and they operate as a US business.
It’s all political theatrics and has nothing do with keeping our personal data safe or protect the American people. These companies might run in the US but corporations are beholden to no nation.
This isn't china, we don't need to engage in this race to the bottom. Banning foreign websites violates the 1st amendment.
My power company (I'm located in New England) is owned by some Spanish company, but not many people see any problems with that, either.
It’s funny because as a European when you wrote “Anyone that thinks it is reasonable for a geopolitical rival to control this company, especially a country known to reach its hand deep into company policy, is incredibly naive and self-sabotaging.” I thought “yeah, when you put it like that it would be AWFUL for the Trump administration to own it.
And then I read the next line and realised you meant China.
Its a valid concern. I wish a viable European bidder had stepped forward. It would be nice if at least on major social network was EU based.
well come on people, tik tok
Given that Trump and Hegseth seem to now be friendly with China and talking about a “G2” (as opposed to G7), I feel the TikTok ban that should have happened months ago is just going to not happen, as long as (my speculation) someone in the Trump family is able to profit off business dealings with China. It makes no sense not to enact the ban that Congress passed.
As a reminder of the timeline:
- November 2023: audio leaked of Apartheid Defense League CEO Jonathon Greenblatt saying they had a Tiktok problem [1] because Tiktok didn't sufficiently censor live broadcast of the genocide, unlike, say, Meta [2]
- 5 March 2024: the bill to ban Tiktok was introduced to the Senate [3];
- 7 March 2024: the bill passes the Senate;
- 13 March 2024: the bill passes the House;
- 24 April 2024: Biden signs the bill into law.
So yes the Tiktok "ban" was about a foreign government, just not the one usually stated.
Larry Ellison is the world's second richest man. His son, David Ellison, now heads Paramount Skydance and are key players in the Tiktok acquisition. David Ellison acquired CBS News and put Bari Weiss in charge of it. Why was CBS News for sale? Because 60 Minutes said one slightly negative thing about Israel's involvement in Gaza so Shari Redstone sold it to Paramount [4].
What I find both funny and depressing is that the US government is doing exactly what they accuse China of doing. It's not even a partisan issue. On foreign policy, America is uniparty, just like China.
For anyone who follows legislative affairs, this rocketed through.
[1]: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/inside-adl-anti-defa...
[2]: https://www.hrw.org/report/2023/12/21/metas-broken-promises/...
[3]: https://nolabels.org/the-latest/tiktok-ban-timeline-how-trum...
[4]: https://www.cjr.org/feature/cbs-news-redstone-ellison-60-min...
I’m confused. Why are you alleging a link between the first few bullet points? I'm not saying there's no link, but it certainly doesn't seem obvious without some substantiation.
> On foreign policy, America is uniparty, just like China.
Oh, do tell of the countries that aren’t uniparties when talking about national security.
Oh, none of them? So just making a bullshit false equivalence?
Post hoc non es propter hoc
This is just trying to fit different data points to confirm a conspiratorial narrative around Israel. The reality is that China has a tool to manipulate and influence American politics in TikTok, where there is no transparency around what their algorithm does or what censorship/amplification they perform manually. On top of that, TikTok lied about data collection on kids (https://www.npr.org/2024/08/02/nx-s1-5061604/doj-sues-tiktok...), lied about where data is sent (https://www.techspot.com/news/104032-us-claims-tiktok-collec...), and their CEO literally lied under oath (https://walberg.house.gov/media/press-releases/walberg-urges...). The executives of TikTok should be in jail.
The US government has considered TikTok a national security issue for a long time, and considered banning it even back in 2020 - a full 3 years before October 7th. So it has nothing to do with Israel, or Jews, or Gaza, and everything to do with not following American laws, defending against asymmetric warfare from the Chinese government, and national security.
Honestly. The last people I'm going to feel sorry for is TikTok investors.
why is that? do you stand any other moral ground for investing? apple? google? amazon?
True. They're all absolute leeches.
Fuck em all.
Are they claiming that the US president lied? Say it ain't so!
They are reporting that the US investors set to make the purchase are still waiting on China to finalize a deal.
The thing about Trump saying it was a done deal*, like most other things he says, was true in the sense that the deal to find the US investors to buy the app is done. And having the "blessing" or any other uttering of China's President Xi Jinping is not the same as having the official action of China finalizing the sale. It did allow him to sign an executive order allowing tiktok to continue operating while the deal is being finalized -- and additional executive order 90 day extensions in the mean time.
With the sale going to the usual suspects, Larry Ellison, Abu Dhabi MGX, it makes this look more like Trump is being played at his own game. Or, like the other comment says about ByteDance and China mocking the US in this silly posturing. Maybe they get it done on Monday, or give it another 90 days.
*See paltering.[0][1]. It's the reason you get people saying he lied and others saying he's unfairly being called a liar. A more accurate way to describe what he says is: manipulation. Even news outlets are capable of being manipulated (and some may encourage it), which in turn causes all of them to be called "partisan hacks" and the populace loses trust -- but in the wrong things/people.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paltering
[1] https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20171114-the-disturbing-a...
President Xi and Putin aren’t just seasoned politicians, they are experienced and know the rules of the game very well. Trump is not just naive, but he’s utterly stupid as well. Not sure why voters can’t see through his BS.
> President Xi and Putin aren’t just seasoned politicians,
True for Xi but Putin hasn't a clue about what he's doing, calling him a politician is a stretch.
Social conservatism is disgust. They don't want to see through simple explanations that let them feel less disgust for themselves.
The law is quite clear the 90 day extension is a one-time thing and the Trump admin had already violated said law prior to actually invoking that clause.
The thing about Trump saying it’s a done deal is that, like on many other topics, he’s simply lying.
The thing about breaking the law is that when you don't suffer any consequences, the strictly optimal thing to do is to keep breaking the law.
Eh, sounds clever but not really.
People can and do think they're "getting away with" a lot more than they come to realize once they're indicted.
Your point remains, of course, that no law is actually self-executing.
Tiko Toko TACO lolo
This whole situations is such a sad clown show.
There was a legitimate debate to be had about the dangers of TikTok and the importance of free speech. Do we ban TikTok and squash free speech, or is free speech of supreme importance, even if it means allowing a dangerous foreign app--these were the questions of a few years ago.
So what happened? Let's recap:
Congress passed a law banning TikTok. Free speech was trampled.
The Supreme Court upheld the ban. Free speech was trampled again.
Then, the law just doesn't get enforced. The dangers of TikTok remain.
Everyone loses and the entire political process around this has been a joke.
We've learned that Congress can just ban apps by name, effectively, and yet the great danger that made us cross this line in the first place remains in use under the control of China.
Free speech by foreign governments (or controlled by foreign governments) has never been protected by the US constitution, right?
I do agree that Trump, in both his administrations, has made it starkly clear that its checks and balances are quite impotent against a person or party that doesn’t care to follow the rules, so long as they have enough supporters that also don’t care, or are misled
I mean free speech the ideal, not free speech the law.
Obviously the law can be contrary to free speech the ideal, in this case.