#ban foreign ownership of American media

[theozgnomian]

Because the uber-rich, the people that own the media that SHOULD be talking about it, have recognized that any such talk would be against their best interests. Their best interests? Stay rich and getting richer. More power.

Enough said?

[qqueenofhades]

People are apparently saying "well I'm not gonna vote/vote for trump if tik tok is banned!"

I'm pretty sure they were already going to do that, this is just their excuse of the week

But more importantly, if a stupid app matters more to you than the actual lives trump and the republicans will deliberately destroy, well that says more about them don't it?

But wait... I thought they weren't going to vote because of Gaza/because Biden hasn't personally forgiven THEIR student loan/because something something corporate centrism/because something something garble garble??! Does this mean their excuses just change by the week according to whatever's in the headlines and have no actual logical coherence or adherence to a guiding principle? Surely you jest, good internet sir and/or madam. Shocking.

Anyway, also... they realize that this effort is being spearheaded by Republicans and is pretty transparently an attempt to get another huge social media platform (after the Bird App Formerly Known as Twitter) into the ownership of an ex-Trump Cabinet official and an investor group with Russian ties? And that voting for Trump would directly play into those people's hands? And that... wait, never mind. I still expect logic or reason to have any place in this discussion, and it doesn't. Just tell me Why They Aren't Voting For Biden!!! next week and maybe I can get ahead of the curve for once.

This, however, is likewise why I oppose this rushed and Republican-driven move to "ban TikTok!!" in a highly consequential election year and think somebody needs to talk some sense into Biden and/or the Senate that this is a stupid idea and should be shelved (or at the least, heavily revised or modified). Yes, TikTok being owned by a group with Chinese government ties isn't great, but there's no morally pure ultra-megacorp that's going to rush in to fill the void. Forcing the Chinese owners to divest will just create an opening for Trump's ex-Treasury Secretary and his Russian businessmen buddies to step in instead, and I don't know about you, but I don't think that's a net positive in terms of keeping Americans' personal data out of the hands of hostile foreign entities. We already have Musk shilling for the alt-right and the Russian government every chance he gets, using Twitter to prop up their narratives and their operations, and selling TikTok to a Trump/Russian-linked consortium in fucking 2024 would be an incredibly massive own goal and give MAGA and company virtually hegemonic control over American social media content. That is why I think this is a stupid idea and should be opposed, but also, I agree that people who are using this as their Excuse of the Week to not vote were deeply, deeply unlikely to vote in the first place.

This is also a perfect example of why "well now I won't vote >:[!!!!" as a threat/temper tantrum backfires every single time. If there are young people who are concerned about TikTok possibly being banned, and their response is to immediately throw temper tantrums about not voting, all that does is reinforce to elected officials that young people never vote, there is no need to make legislation that champions their interests, and they don't need to fear any electoral backlash because these people have already spent years announcing their intention to Not Vote at every opportunity and clearly aren't about to start now. They remove themselves further from the civic process at every turn, and they reinforce the narrative that young people as a group are not worth having their concerns or ideas prioritized, because even when politicians do other things that young people like and/or support, young people are poised to turn against them and urge No Vote!!! :( at the drop of a fucking hat. So, yeah. "Don't vote!" is always a stupid and self-defeating message, but I can't see how it's possibly supposed to convince politicians that a group of people already predisposed not to vote is going to make any difference from what they already do. So yeah. Like. Not that this surprises me, but it's literally the same threat they've echoed at every single turn, doesn't represent anything new, and will probably be changed 10 times before the election anyway.

[thatstormygeek]

The United States used to be firmly opposed to any attempt to restrict the free flow of information technology because it benefited US companies that were dominating global markets. It’s been changing its tune in recent years not because its convictions have changed, but because the real guiding principles were always misunderstood. The global spread of the internet was framed by US lawmakers and tech capitalists as being synonymous with the spread of freedom and democracy — concepts the United States loves to wrap itself in — when it was really about geopolitics and economic power. Now that those goals are threatened, it’s happy to embrace bans to protect its interests, while pressuring its allies to back them and, by extension, accept the position of US tech firms within their economies.

Maybe you’re an American and you think the TikTok ban makes sense. Sure, US tech companies can track virtually everything you (and people in many countries outside the US) do, will hand that data over to the government, and even sell it to a ton of data brokers — but at least they’re US companies. Chinese ones shouldn’t be allowed to do the same thing, at least to US residents. That line of thinking makes no sense to me, but I can see how people only thinking of their own narrow national interests can believe it. But why should a Canadian, a European, a Brazilian, a South Korean, or people from any number of other countries outside the United States defend that reality or find it in any way acceptable? When previous forms of media like radio, film, or television and communications technologies like the telephone rolled out, countries often placed rules on foreign ownership and content distribution, but with the internet little of that was allowed. Countries were expected to accept US dominance of the new medium, yet now we see what happens when those US firms start to face real competition at home: the US government does exactly what it long said no one else was allowed to do and protects its domestic industry.

[mediaflamingoos]

Understanding the U.S. Ban on TikTok and Its Broader Implications - By Beidi

In the digital age, social media platforms have become more than just spaces for sharing selfies and viral dance videos. For many, apps like TikTok are a hub of creativity, connection, and even income. However, when a social media giant becomes the center of a geopolitical tug-of-war, users and policymakers alike are thrown into a whirlwind of debate and decision-making. Such is the case with the U.S. government's move to ban TikTok, a decision that has sparked conversations about national security, free speech, and the future of international apps on American soil.

TikTok, for those who might not be familiar, is a wildly popular app known for short-form videos. It's a launchpad for trends, a platform for activists, and a new frontier for marketers. But despite its playful exterior, TikTok has found itself embroiled in controversy, with the U.S. raising concerns about data privacy and the potential for foreign influence.

The crux of the argument for banning TikTok revolves around its ownership by ByteDance, a Chinese company. U.S. officials are worried that the Chinese government could pressure ByteDance into handing over data on American users, which could be used for espionage or to manipulate public opinion. While there's no public evidence to confirm these fears, the very possibility has been enough to put TikTok in the hot seat.

Advocates of the ban assert that national security must come first, and if there's even a slight chance of a breach, action should be taken. They point to China's National Intelligence Law, which mandates that Chinese organizations and citizens support state intelligence work, as a cause for concern. In their view, the ban is a necessary step to protect American interests.

Opponents of the ban, however, see a different picture. They argue that TikTok has gone to great lengths to separate its U.S. operations from its Chinese parent company. The app has even proposed aggressive measures to safeguard U.S. user data, including storing it on American soil and walling it off from other parts of the business.

Critics of the ban also worry about the precedent it sets for internet freedom. TikTok has become a digital town square for millions of Americans, particularly among the younger generation. Shutting down a major platform raises questions about free speech and the government's role in regulating the internet.

Furthermore, there's a conversation to be had about the effectiveness of such a ban. In our interconnected world, where apps can be downloaded and VPNs (virtual private networks) can circumvent geographic restrictions, a ban might not stop determined users from accessing TikTok. It may only drive the activity underground, making it harder to regulate and monitor.

For TikTok enthusiasts and creators, the ban threatens the community they've built and the opportunities they've found. For some, TikTok is more than entertainment—it's a livelihood. Content creators who have amassed significant followings are facing the prospect of losing their audience and income overnight.

As the debate rages on, the TikTok ban holds a mirror to broader issues facing our society. It highlights the growing suspicion and tension between major world powers, the challenges of privacy in the digital era, and the struggle to balance security with freedom. It also underscores the need for international dialogue and cooperation on cyber issues, as the actions of one nation can have ripple effects across the globe.

In the end, the future of TikTok in the U.S. will likely be decided through a complex interplay of diplomacy, legal challenges, and public opinion. What is certain is that the outcome will have lasting implications for the tech industry, geopolitics, and the everyday user scrolling through their feed in search of the next great video.

Word Count : 754

[mariacallous]

The drumbeat against TikTok grows louder by the day. More than a dozen U.S. states including Georgia, Texas, Maryland, Virginia, and both Dakotas have already banned the popular social media app—best known for short videos and viral dances—from being used on state government devices. A similar ban for federal government devices is part of the omnibus spending bill that passed Congress on Friday, and bipartisan legislation introduced earlier this month calls for TikTok to be banned in the United States completely. 

Further warnings about the app have come from Brendan Carr, a commissioner on the Federal Communications Commission, and several members of the intelligence community, including the directors of the FBI and CIA. 

The debate centers on TikTok’s ownership by Chinese tech giant ByteDance and the degree to which the government in Beijing has access to and influence over the data it collects on its users. Critics of TikTok argue that the app could be used to spy on Americans, influence public opinion, and expose them to Chinese propaganda. 

TikTok’s algorithm, which serves its users videos better suited to their interests and has driven the app’s popularity, collects data on users’ likes and dislikes based on viewing patterns. It also has data on the devices being used to view its videos, with recent research showing it can potentially access details such as location, contacts, and calendars. While some of the data TikTok collects is no different from other platforms that rely on ad tracking, such as Google and Facebook, TikTok’s ownership heightens the risk that China’s authoritarian government could compel it to share data with Beijing on users from other countries. (TikTok, for its part, has said it does not share data with the Chinese government and would not do so if asked.)

In any event, targets abound: An estimated 100 million Americans, particularly younger Americans, use the app, with a survey earlier this year by Pew Research placing it second in popularity to YouTube among U.S. teenagers, ahead of Instagram, Snapchat, Twitter, and Facebook. 

The concerns aren’t new. Then-President Donald Trump went after TikTok aggressively on similar national security grounds, nearly forcing a ban from U.S. app stores before he lost his reelection bid in 2020 to President Joe Biden. After Biden took office, he dropped the ban in favor of continuing a national security review of TikTok’s technology by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), which is yet to conclude. 

“We have been working with CFIUS, led by the Treasury Department, for over two years to address all reasonable national security concerns about TikTok in the U.S.,” TikTok spokesperson Brooke Oberwetter said in a statement to Foreign Policy, adding that CFIUS is reviewing a “comprehensive solution” that covers data security, corporate governance, and content moderation. “We have made substantial progress on implementing that solution over the past year, and look forward to completing that work to put these concerns to rest,” she said.

In the meantime, TikTok has only grown in influence and popularity. Several companies, celebrities, news outlets, and even politicians (including Biden himself) have used its enormous influence among younger Americans to increase the reach of their messaging. 

“I think the Biden administration’s worried. … There’s just too many users,” said Nazak Nikakhtar, who served as the Department of Commerce’s lead on CFIUS in the Trump administration and was involved in its efforts to ban the app. “The teenagers are going to pretty much revolt” if it’s banned across the board, she said.

But after a prolonged lull, the conversation around TikTok has collided with a growing bipartisan hawkishness on China—particularly around technology—and the pressure to do something is increasingly difficult to withstand. The legislation could not only end up banning one of the world’s biggest tech platforms in one of its most lucrative markets but also deepen a rapidly growing schism between Washington and Beijing on technology. The fact that TikTok’s U.S. user base accounts for roughly one-third of the population would make an outright ban something of a political tightrope. As past U.S. moves against Chinese technology such as 5G and semiconductors have shown, the effect on TikTok’s business, if allies decided to follow suit, could be immense. TikTok has more than a billion users worldwide. 

TikTok hasn’t done much to help its cause. While the company has made efforts to shore up its protection of U.S. user data, including a commitment to route all the data through servers run by U.S. tech firm Oracle, it has also admitted that the data can be accessed by employees in China. A bigger breach came to light this week, when ByteDance revealed it had fired four employees—two each in the United States and China—for using TikTok data to surveil journalists who were covering the company. 

“The misconduct of certain individuals, who are no longer employed at ByteDance, was an egregious misuse of their authority to obtain access to user data,” Oberwetter said. “This misbehavior is unacceptable, and not in line with our efforts across TikTok to earn the trust of our users.”

TikTok’s sympathizers in Washington, however, are dwindling in number.

“This has been brought on by TikTok, not by the U.S. government,” said Junaid Islam, a cybersecurity and secure communications expert and partner at security advisory firm OODA. While TikTok insists that it is not beholden to the Chinese government, the fact that the company has still not made more of an effort to completely wall off its data from China raises the question of its “ulterior motives,” Islam said.

There are other experts, however, who say the campaign against TikTok is motivated more by political considerations than security ones, arguing that the social media app is no different than U.S. counterparts such as Facebook or Snapchat in simply trying to make money through advertising. 

“I think what people don’t seem to understand is that TikTok is not an organ of the Communist Party, and it is a fallacy to continually repeat the fact that any Chinese company is, in fact, indistinguishable from the state and has no purpose other than to advance the political and military objectives of the Chinese government when it’s obviously a commercial company,” said Milton Mueller, a professor at the Georgia Institute of Technology’s School of Public Policy. “It’s interested in selling advertising and needs to be looked at in that way.” 

Mueller advocates a more measured approach, such as using existing U.S. privacy laws and ensuring TikTok is in compliance with them. “It is a personal privacy issue, not a national security issue,” he said. TikTok has employed a similar approach in its criticism of the calls for a ban.

“We’re disappointed that Congress has moved to ban TikTok on government devices—a political gesture that will do nothing to advance national security interests—rather than encouraging the administration to conclude its national security review,” Oberwetter said, also criticizing the state governments that have individually banned TikTok as “jumping on the political bandwagon … based on unfounded falsehoods.”

With more China hawks circling by the day, however, it remains to be seen how long the Biden administration can slow-walk its response—and whether the platform’s days in the United States are genuinely numbered. 

“I don’t know why it hasn’t happened yet,” Islam said, referring to the security agreement between TikTok and the U.S. government. “But too much time has passed.”

[longwindedbore]

This proposed law allegedly directed at the foreign ownership of TikTok would be used by a President to unilaterally close down any social media platform including Tumblr.

It has bipartisan support in the Senate. Many of the proponents own stock in and have received campaign donations from US competitors of TikTok.

What wasn’t presented at the hearing re TokTok on March 23, 2023 was any National Security concerns regarding actual past current or potential future feasible cyber-threats.

What we did see:

Aging Legislators who acknowledged that they didn’t know that their phones connected to the WiFi.

Aging legislators who complained about prurient or pornographic images on their FYP while totally oblivious to the fact that EVERYONE ELSE ALL KNOW how the algorithm program directed those images to the legislators’ page in the first place

Questions fired at the CEO of TikTok without allowing him even 30 seconds to answer

Aging legislators angrily demanding ‘Yes or No Only’ answers to complex technical questions someone else obviously wrote out for them but the jargon for which they could barely pronounce.

Virtually no follow up questions. Which is normal unless the interlocutors have only superficial knowledge of the topic.

These legislators televised these revelations to a dumbfounded world watching on social media.

If you weren’t on social media and still ‘follow a news outlet’, the news entities praised the ‘righteous grilling’ of the ‘sinister’ Asian.

The six corporate news entities which own 90% of all outlets share the same hedge funds as major stock holders with each other as well as with Meta/FacebookGoogle, Twitter, etc. Meta alone spent a reported $20 million lobbying for a ban on TikTok.

Anything to reclaim the 150 million US users of TikTok lost to Major networks and other social media.

Corporate American doesn’t understand is that their 24 hour news cycle is built on getting constant viewership developing addiction to HATE and ANGER that has driven Americans away.

TikTok’s and Tumblr’s algorithms let you curate your own interests. As well as find like minded people who share your political or social issues. Or avoid them.

[timesofinnovation]

TikTok, the social media platform beloved by millions, is now at the center of a high-stakes legal battle that could determine its future in the United States. With approximately 170 million American users, the ramifications of a potential ban could extend far beyond the app itself, challenging fundamental beliefs about free speech, technology, and regulation in the digital age. The conflict arises from a recent law passed by the U.S. Congress, aimed at addressing national security concerns related to the app's Chinese ownership. Lawmakers fear that the Chinese government could access sensitive American user data through TikTok, posing a threat to national security. The legislation requires ByteDance, TikTok's parent company, to divest its U.S. operations by January 19, 2025, or face a comprehensive ban. TikTok's legal team is mounting a vigorous defense, arguing that the law infringes on free speech rights and represents an unprecedented governmental overreach. They contend this move contradicts America's historical stance on maintaining an open internet where innovation can flourish. Such arguments reflect concerns that the legal precedent set in this case may have far-reaching implications for tech companies operating within the framework of U.S. law. The Justice Department is defending the legality of the law by highlighting the perceived threat posed by TikTok's ownership structure. They argue that the threat of data breaches and disinformation campaigns justifies stringent action against the platform. The government's stance resonates with many who share concerns about foreign influence within American digital spaces. In recent years, scrutiny over social media platforms, particularly those owned by foreign entities, has intensified. This issue has drawn widespread media attention, especially during a politically charged environment where both presidential candidates, Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, are utilizing TikTok to engage younger voters. The intersection of politics and social media raises questions about the motivations behind the legislation and whether it could inadvertently stifle voices in a platform that has been a vital outlet for youth expression and activism. During the recent hearing, a federal appeals court in Washington examined the complexities of the case. The presiding judges expressed concerns about the challenge of monitoring TikTok’s extensive codebase and verifying potential risks accurately. This detail underscores the technical difficulties involved in enforcing compliance with such regulations, illustrating that practical implementation could be fraught with challenges. Meanwhile, ByteDance has publicly stated that divesting TikTok is neither realistic nor feasible, raising concerns about its viability as a leading social media platform. The implications of a ban extend beyond ByteDance, as potential impacts could ripple through the advertising industry and cause disruptions in how brands communicate with a significant demographic of consumers. As this legal battle unfolds, many stakeholders are watching closely to gauge its outcomes. A ruling is anticipated by December 6, and should the situation escalate, the case could eventually find its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, potentially reshaping the legal landscape surrounding technology and privacy across the nation. With opinions sharply divided on the best path forward, it becomes clear that this is not just a matter of one app’s fate but a testing ground for how the United States approaches issues of national security in an increasingly interconnected world. The outcome could set critical precedents impacting the broader tech ecosystem. As the clock ticks on TikTok's future, a question lingers: will the pursuit of security undermine the very principles of free expression that the U.S. stands for? The stakes have never been higher, and the unfolding narrative will resonate far beyond the confines of a single social media platform.

[ciolookleaders]

TikTok Challenges U.S. Government over Forced Sale, Citing Free Speech and Technological Hurdles

TikTok, the widely popular social media app owned by ByteDance, has taken a decisive legal stance against the U.S. government. On Tuesday, the company filed a lawsuit against the federal government over a newly enacted law compelling ByteDance to sell TikTok’s U.S. operations or face a nationwide ban. This legal maneuvering has ignited a contentious clash revolving around issues of national security and the protection of free speech, with implications poised to resonate through the highest echelons of the judiciary.

Constitutional Challenges and Election-Year Complexities

At the heart of his’s lawsuit lies the assertion that the law infringes upon the First Amendment rights of its users. TikTok contends that the legislation, by effectively erasing a platform utilized by millions of Americans for expression and communication, constitutes a violation of constitutionally protected freedoms. Furthermore, TikTok underscores the impracticality of executing a divestiture within the law’s stringent timeline, citing complexities such as Beijing’s reluctance to part with crucial technological components.

The legal clash unfolds against the backdrop of an election year, adding layers of complexity to an already contentious issue. With President Biden’s signature having sealed the legislation, policymakers are acutely aware of potential ramifications and public sentiment, given the app’s vast user base, which spans 170 million monthly users in the United States. The app’s role in facilitating everything from viral trends to political discourse renders it a focal point of contemporary cultural exchange, intensifying the stakes of the legal standoff.

TikTok Sues US Government Over Law Forcing Sale or Ban

Technological Impediments and National Security Concerns

Central to TikTok’s legal challenge are technological barriers that impede the mandated divestiture. The company argues that transferring ownership of its U.S. operations is neither commercially nor technologically feasible, emphasizing the intricate global infrastructure that underpins its functionality. Moreover, TikTok underscores the indispensability of its recommendation algorithm, a proprietary feature integral to its user experience, which Beijing has explicitly refused to sell.

In tandem with these technological hurdles, the government’s rationale for the forced sale rests on national security imperatives. Lawmakers and experts contend that TikTok’s ties to China pose inherent risks, potentially exposing sensitive user data to foreign influence or exploitation. Yet, the proposed remedy of divestiture prompts thorny questions regarding free speech rights, as alterations to TikTok’s content policies could curtail users’ expressive liberties.

Legal battle signifies a pivotal moment in the intersection of technology, national security, and constitutional rights. As the dispute unfolds in the courts, the outcome stands to shape the contours of online expression and regulatory oversight in an increasingly interconnected digital landscape.

Also Read: ByteDance Firm on TikTok Ownership Amid US Ban Threats

[comptonplations]

TikTok: A Possible Solution

One of the latest social media brouhahas is about foreign ownership of TikTok. The two “solutions” most often heard are either sell it to an American, or ban its use in the US. Frankly I’m appalled that our government thinks is can force a foreign company to sell itself to an American company. They’re acting like bullies. Now, I don’t have a TikTok account. It’s not my jam. But I know plenty of…

[martyrbat]

[ID: Photo one and two shows Matt Mullenweg's likes on Twitter. The first post is from Anthony Goldbloom (@/antgoldbloom) that reads: “Anti-Israel content is dominating on TikTok among 18-24 year-olds: 447MM views vs 16.5MM views in the last 30 days. The top anti-Israel hashtag on TikTok is #freepalestine, and the top pro-Israel hashtag is #standwithisrael. Raw data comes from TikTok and is available here for anyone who wants to validate: [link one] and [link two]. Seems very plausible that this is a major driver of the Harvard Caps Harris poll result that showed 51% of 18-24 year olds believe Hamas's massacre of 1200+ Israeli civilians could be justified by the grievances of the Palestinians.”

Attached to the tweet is a graph that shows the TikTok views in the United States for the two hashtags over the course of the past 30 days. ‘Free Palestine’ has 446,600,000 views while ‘I Stand With Isreal’ has 16,450,000.

Photo three shows Mullenweg retweeted a post by Daniel Gross (@/danielgross) that reads: “I'm not a conspiracy theorist, so it has been crazy to discover the degree of mind control that is being attempted by non-profits and foreign states on Americans. Online, at college, at work, everywhere.. The fight for the sovereignty of the American mind is very real.”

Photo four is a retweet of an essay from ‘The Information Forum’. The sinophobic text that's visible reads: ‘Tiktok Needs To Go, Now. We made a big mistake to not ban Tiktok when Trump opened the issue in 2020. He was right, it was/is a major national security threat, and making an exception to our ban on foreign ownership of "media" just because the content was UGC was/is nonsense.... Media is media. Far too many smart people focused on their hatred of the messenger and missed that the message was right. ... and now, a few years later - we are paying for this major major misstep. The fact that we didn't ban (or force US ownership and control) of Tiktok in the US is coming home to roost and allowing terrorist propaganda to spread inside the US and driving real physical danger and violence to US citizens-not just words. If you don't think Tiktok is a source - just open the app... or look at the numbers. Reality is undeniable. IS TIKTOK DOING THIS ON PURPOSE? I don't think so, but i am not sure. The fact that they plausibly are and there is no way to check is the issue. Hamas is obviously aligned with Russia, and Russia is aligned with China... it is at least plausible that if the Chinese were making the decision of if or if not they should allow Hamas propaganda in the US they would choose "sure"... but even if they don't / aren't on purpose, this is the moment that shows what they could do if they chose to in the future - and it is wild... The solution to this one issue is (thankfully) pretty...simple. We have laws / a framework for this already.... we have for 75+ years since we were worried about this exact issue vs Stalin... and the realization of the chaos the media can cause with 'war of the worlds'. If a billionaire from a non-ally wanted to buy CNN we would simply say no... the fact that digital/social products grow fast and technically the content is crowed sourced vs professionally produced is a difference without a meaning (and an increasingly small difference with every passing month anyway)... and of course the Chinese have been clear on this for a decade+/there is a reason our platforms aren't on the mainland. So unlike most of the problems we face securing the information / news landscape (and they are intense) for this next era of conflict, this one is easy. IN THE FUTURE WE CAN SPILL INK ON ALL THE REASONS WE MESSED THIS UP BEFORE AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF ACTING NOW...’

END ID]

tumblr's ceo is pro isreal. like openly so on his twitter. thats why a lot of the palestine tags and posts are being censored

Checked @mattmullenwegceo's likes on twitter:

and whatever the fuck this retweet is supposed to mean:

He also retweeted this weird essay, I'll only give an excerpt:

so.....? is it plausible to make the case that tumblr is willingly censoring Palestine advocates? by somehow also saying Palestinians around the globe who have been organizing for the past 75+ are actually super secret terrorists who want to blow up the whole world and have no reason to be advocating for their Land Back? Nefarious underground league of people who secretly are controlling your content to ruin your precious democracy that you've built to benefit yourselves? How offensive can you possible get?

I almost think it's useless to post this because I'll probably get nuked, but I still want to call it out when I see it because I refuse to allow the delusion that this platform is anything more than for the ultrarich techbros to make money. Corporations do not have your best interests in mind, and that goes for the people running those corporations too.

You all cry for free speech but when the speech is running freely you say it's against your better interests and shoot it in the back midstride.

If I get nuked it'll probably be because of this post. Mutuals feel free to ask for my discord or something.

[systemtek]

USA government could ban TikTok nationwide

The US House of Representatives has passed a groundbreaking bill aimed at potentially banning TikTok from operating in the country. Under the proposed legislation, ByteDance, the Chinese parent company of TikTok, would be given a six-month window to sell its controlling stake in the app. Failure to do so would result in the app being blocked in the US. Despite enjoying widespread bipartisan support in the House, the bill still needs to clear the Senate and receive the president's signature to become law. Lawmakers have long voiced concerns about China's influence over TikTok, which is owned by ByteDance, a company founded in 2012. Mike Gallagher, a Wisconsin Republican who co-authored the bill, said the US could not "take the risk of having a dominant news platform in America controlled or owned by a company that is beholden to the Chinese Communist Party". TikTok has sought to reassure regulators by asserting that it has implemented measures to safeguard the data of its 150 million US users from ByteDance employees in China. TikTok's CEO, Shou Zi Chew, emphasized the company's dedication to maintaining data security and ensuring the platform remains "immune from external manipulation." He cautioned that the passage of the bill would result in a ban on the app in the US, granting "increased authority to a few other social media companies" and jeopardizing thousands of American jobs. Nonetheless, a Wall Street Journal investigation in January uncovered that the system remained "vulnerable," with data being informally exchanged between TikTok in the US and ByteDance in China. Notable instances, such as one where ByteDance employees in China accessed a journalist's data to trace their sources, have fueled apprehensions. Following the vote, TikTok seemed to revive its efforts to encourage users to engage with Congress, issuing another notification prompting them to reach out to their representatives. The spokesperson for the Chinese foreign ministry remarked, "Despite the absence of evidence from the United States indicating that TikTok poses a threat to US national security, the relentless suppression of TikTok continues. Such bullying tactics, which fail to succeed in fair competition, disrupt the normal business operations of companies, undermine international investors' confidence in the investment climate, and disrupt the standard international economic and trade framework." However, White House Spokesperson Karine Jean Pierre maintained that the bill aimed solely to guarantee that ownership of significant technology platforms operating within the US "would not fall into the hands of those who could manipulate them". Read the full article

[morningmantra]

US House of Representatives Passes Bill to Ban TikTok

The US House of Representatives passed a bill to ban TikTok, aiming to protect American data from Chinese control. The app's ownership by ByteDance, a Chinese company, prompts concerns. The bill received widespread support.

Washington: The US House of Representatives on Wednesday passed a bill to ban the Chinese social media app TikTok. 352 people voted in favor of the bill. Only 65 people opposed it. Later it will reach the Senate. Brought in the name of ‘Protecting Americans from Foreign Controlled Apps’, it was created by Indian-origin Democratic member Raja Krishnamurthy and Republican Representative Mike…

[pierre-mikhiel]

Tick Tock, TikTok

Earlier this week, Representatives Mike Gallagher and Raja Krishnamoorthi introduced a bill aimed at addressing national security concerns arising from foreign ownership of social media apps. The bill aims to compel ByteDance, the owner of TikTok, to sell the platform to American entities. This move is intended to prevent the potential transfer of U.S. user data to China, where the Chinese Communist Party (C.C.P.) could theoretically access it for political purposes.

The House is set to vote on a potential ban of TikTok to safeguard U.S. national security from threats posed by foreign-controlled applications, including TikTok and any future offerings from ByteDance Ltd. or its subsidiaries.

While data access of this nature may not be a primary concern for most TikTok users, there exists a hypothetical risk that Chinese government operatives could exploit TikTok user data to identify government employees and their families, potentially using it as leverage to influence those users.

This concern has led to TikTok being banned on government devices in nearly every Western nation. For instance, there's a scenario where a high-ranking diplomat's child posts controversial content, which could be accessed by the C.C.P.

However, there is currently no evidence to suggest direct access by the Chinese government to TikTok data. TikTok maintains that it operates independently and would not be required to share such information at any stage.

The bill takes a two-pronged approach. Firstly, it mandates that ByteDance Ltd., headquartered in Beijing, divests from TikTok and other controlled applications within 180 days of the bill's enactment, or face prohibition in the United States. Secondly, it establishes a specific process enabling the executive branch to block access to apps owned by foreign adversaries if they pose a national security threat.

Former President Donald Trump previously attempted to ban TikTok through executive order, but the courts blocked the action after TikTok sued, arguing that such actions would violate free speech and due process rights.

Despite security concerns, President Biden's reelection campaign has embraced TikTok as a means to engage with young voters. However, his administration continues to raise concerns about whether the popular social media app might be sharing user data with the Chinese government.

Word Count: 359

[prelawland]

The Law Of The TikTok Ban And The Chinese Communist Party

By Fatah Abdi, Ohio State University class of 2023

April 9, 2023

The essay talks about the controversy and ban surrounding the social media app TikTok in the United States. This social media app allows users to create, watch, and share videos and has taken a liking to more than 100 million Americans. However, fear and concerns have been in the air regarding this app and how it has Chinese ownership. Congress and the Biden administration believe there is a national security risk because the owners can collect sensitive data on American citizens and share it with the Chinese Communist Party. The Trump administration was the first to bring the topic of banning this app to life, and the Biden administration is working on getting that done. Republicans and lawmakers in Congress have been working on this ban and are creating a new act that can fight security threats. That new law that was introduced by the bipartisan group is called the Restriction Act. Which allows the federal government to ban foreign-produced technology. The White House endorsed and addressed the threats Americans could be facing. Congress also called TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew to testify. An incident occurred when a spy balloon believed to be from the Chinese government was found in the United States of America's sky. Even though they shot it down, the fear of being watched is still in the air. This essay also talked about how passing the RESTRICT Act and the Data Act could provide a legal basis for banning tik-tok. This app has been banned in many other countries that don't trust or allow foreign-based technology.

For full article please visit

The Ban Of TikTok

at

Ohio PreLaw Land

[sameer95]

TikTok, ByteDance spent millions on lobbying Congress

TikTok and its parent company combined to spend more than $13 million on lobbying federal government officials since 2019 — an effort that appears to have fallen flat as lawmakers push proposals targeting the app's ownership by a Chinese company or even seek to ban TikTok in the U.S. outright.Weeks after Republican Rep. Ken Buck of Colorado and Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri introduced legislation that would bar TikTok downloads nationwide, Buck's staff received a call in February from Michael Beckerman, the head of the social media company's U.S. public policy shop, according to a person close to Buck.Beckerman pushed back on concerns from Buck's staff that TikTok is harvesting customer data, and advocated for the company's new initiative known as Project Texas, this person explained. Project Texas is TikTok's effort to place its U.S. customer data into a secure hub managed by the tech giant Oracle, which is meant to ease U.S. government concerns that the information could be accessed by Chinese parent company ByteDance or members of the ruling party in China.The lobbying comes amid a sustained effort by TikTok to play down fears raised by lawmakers who want to ban the app, which has 150 million monthly active users in the U.S. The company has tried to show it can address concerns about user information without an outright ban, but most lawmakers at a contentious hearing about TikTok this month seemed unconvinced Project Texas would adequately do so.TikTok Chief Executive Shou Zi Chew looks on as he testifies before a House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing entitled "TikTok: How Congress can Safeguard American Data Privacy and Protect Children from Online Harms," as lawmakers scrutinize the Chinese-owned video-sharing app, on Capitol Hill in Washington, March 23, 2023.Evelyn Hockstein | ReutersTikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew told U.S. lawmakers at the hearing that China-based employees at ByteDance may have access to some U.S. data from the app. But he assured them employees would no longer have that data once Project Texas is complete.The sustained lobbying pressure and Chew's testimony so far have not stifled the effort on Capitol Hill to sever TikTok's ties to its Chinese owner or limit access to the app.Brooke Oberwetter, a spokeswoman for TikTok, did not deny any element of this story. She defended the work of TikTok's team in Washington and said the company is trying to address lawmakers' privacy and safety concerns."Our team in Washington is — and always has been — focused on educating lawmakers and stakeholders about our company and our service," Oberwetter said. "We will continue our work to educate lawmakers and the American public about our progress in implementing Project Texas to address national security concerns, and we will continue to work with lawmakers, stakeholders, and our peer companies on solutions that address the industrywide issues of privacy and safety."

One of the leading proposals targeting TikTok is the RESTRICT Act, introduced by a bipartisan group of senators led by Sens. Mark Warner, D-Va., and John Thune, R-S.D.. The bill, which does not yet have companion legislation in the House, would give the Commerce secretary the authority to evaluate national security risks related to certain technology transactions with firms or individuals in a select group of foreign adversary countries, including China. The Commerce secretary could recommend the president take action up to a ban.Another proposal is the DATA Act, introduced by Rep. Mike McCaul, R-Texas. It would revoke protections that have typically shielded creative content from U.S. sanctions. It would also mandate the president impose sanctions on China-based companies that transfer Americans' sensitive personal data to individuals or businesses in China. The proposal passed through the GOP-led House Foreign Relations Committee along party lines, with Democrats fearing it was rushed.At the furthest end of the extreme is the legislation from Hawley and Buck that simply seeks to ban TikTok outright by directing the president to block transactions with ByteDance.Since the call with Beckerman, Buck has not held back in calling the app a threat to national security. Buck's staff members responded to Beckerman that they were still concerned about the company's privacy, cybersecurity and national security policies, the person close to Buck said.Another ally of the Colorado lawmaker said the lobbying money is wasted on trying to change Buck's mind. "It's like they're lighting their money on fire," a Republican strategist allied with Buck told CNBC.Another GOP strategist familiar with TikTok's lobbying efforts told CNBC that the company's "last-minute blitz" to lobby Capitol Hill weeks before Chew's testimony was "amateur hour." The person said congressional offices at times declined meetings with company representatives, and that TikTok officials did not reach out to key lawmakers such as Hawley who have targeted the app.Hawley has not eased his campaign to ban TikTok. He tried on Wednesday to win unanimous Senate support to fast-track his bill. Sen. Rand Paul, a Kentucky Republican who is now among the small group of lawmakers from both parties who have opposed the effort to bar access to the app, blocked Hawley's legislation. While there are plenty of lawmakers who haven't yet concluded a ban is necessary, only a handful have openly ruled it out.Those who declined to be named in this story did so to speak freely about private conversations and meetings. A Hawley spokeswoman did not return a request for comment.The interaction with Buck's team represents just one of many instances when lobbyists for TikTok, or its China-based parent company ByteDance, have seen their campaigns fall on deaf ears on Capitol Hill, according to advisors and aides to congressional lawmakers. The fact that some lawmakers have showed little interest in hearing out TikTok executives is the latest sign the company may need more allies in Congress to prevent new restrictions on the app or a potential ban.

Warner met earlier this year with TikTok lobbyists, according to a person at the gathering at the senator's office. The Virginia lawmaker and Thune later introduced their bill that would empower the Commerce secretary to take action against TikTok. The White House has since endorsed the bill and called for Congress to pass it so President Joe Biden can sign it.Warner's office did not return a request for comment.TikTok appears to have ramped up its lobbying just ahead of Chew's testimony in front of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. The company flew TikTok influencers to Washington before the event.The company also had allies in a handful of Democratic lawmakers such as Rep. Jamaal Bowman, D-N.Y. A day before the hearing, he and popular content creators on the app held a news conference to oppose a potential ban.But in private meetings, some of those same influencers told Bowman that there need to be regulations passed to protect their data across all social media platforms, including TikTok, while keeping the app intact, according to an aide familiar with the discussions.Regardless of their impact on lawmakers, creators' pleas to maintain access to TikTok in the U.S. have seemed to resonate with many American users who see the app as a source of entertainment, information and even income. During and after the hearing, TikTok users shared clips of lawmakers asking basic questions of the CEO, deriding Congress for what they saw as a lack of understanding of the technology.But based on the five hours of tense questioning by members of both parties at the hearing, the creators' appeals didn't seem to offset the deep concerns lawmakers shared about the app's connections to China, along with the addictive and potentially harmful qualities of its design."I don't think they won over any lawmakers," Alex Moore, communications director for Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., said of TikTok's pre-hearing lobbying. Bringing in TikTok creators to amplify the company's message "hasn't swayed my boss," Moore added.Still, Moore said his office has been hearing a lot from constituents since the hearing. Before the testimony, calls about TikTok would "trickle in," he said. But after, "our phones were ringing off the hook," with the majority of callers voicing opposition to a TikTok ban."We heard overwhelmingly that's not what our constituents are interested in," he said.While often a call like that "starts out hot," Moore said constituents would tend to calm down once staff explained that Schakowsky wants comprehensive privacy legislation so as not to "let other companies off the hook" for similar data practices.Schakowsky told CNBC immediately after the hearing that there will still likely be "further discussion" about how to address the concerns directly related to TikTok's Chinese ownership. But Schakowsky, who co-sponsored the bipartisan privacy legislation that passed out of the committee last Congress, said she hopes the hearing brings renewed momentum to privacy protections that would apply to other large tech companies as well.

Connected lobbying efforts

TiKTok's and ByteDance's lobbying efforts are directly linked.ByteDance's quarterly lobbying reports show all of their in-house lobbyists work for TikTok. They include Beckerman, who once worked as a policy director for former GOP Rep. Fred Upton of Michigan, along with Freddy Barnes, who had a stint in Republican House Speaker Kevin McCarthy's office.TikTok itself has hired its own legion of outside lobbyists. Its latest recruits include former Rep. Jeff Denham, R-Calif., and Ankit​ Desai, a former aide to Biden when he was a member of the U.S. Senate.ByteDance and TikTok have combined to spend over $13 million on federal lobbying since 2019, according to lobbying disclosure reports and data reviewed by OpenSecrets.The majority of the spending on lobbying related to the social app has come from ByteDance. The TikTok parent company spent $5.3 million on federal lobbying in 2022, a new record for the company, according to the nonpartisan OpenSecrets.TikTok itself has spent just over $900,000 since 2020 on outside lobbying consultants.ByteDance also donated over $400,000 last year to nonprofit groups allied with members of Congress for "honorary expenses," according to a filing.The document shows that ByteDance donated a combined $300,000 to the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute and Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, groups linked to predominantly Democratic caucuses in the House. Each of those organizations list Jesse Price, a public policy director at TikTok, as a member of either its board of directors or advisory council.Beckerman, the leading TikTok lobbyist, signed the report showing the contributions ByteDance made.TikTok and ByteDance have also targeted Biden's executive office in the White House with lobbying since 2020, according to disclosure reports.The White House did not respond when asked about further details on the lobbying effort. #TikTok #ByteDance #spent #millions #lobbying #Congress Read the full article

[xtruss]

'Political Theater': Why Does ‘Hegemonic & Hypocrite US’ Seek Full Ban of TikTok?

© AFP 2023/Olivier Douliery

TikTok Chief Executive Shou Zi Chew confirmed on Tuesday that the app now has around 150 million monthly active users in the US, who are coming to the platform "To Connect, To Share, To Learn, or Just To Have Some Fun."

The Biden administration recently demanded that TikTok's Chinese owners must sell their stakes in the company or else face a nationwide ban. So why does Washington want to ban the short video-sharing app, and is it on the right side of the law? Sputnik explores.

What is TikTok and Who Owns It?

TikTok is a popular social media app that allows users to create, watch, and share mainly 15-Second Videos on mobile devices or webcams. The app’s CEO Shou Chew recently confirmed there are about 150 Million monthly active TikTok users in the US, who use the platform “to have some fun”.

The app was launched in 2016 by the Beijing-headquartered technology company ByteDance, which currently owns the platform. ByteDance itself is 60%-owned by international investors, according to TikTok officials.

What's Behind the US Drive to Ban TikTok?

The US government’s concerns focus on TikTok’s Chinese ownership. White House officials claim that China’s law would require ByteDance to help Chinese authorities in intelligence and national security matters if asked.

In this regard, the officials expressed two main concerns. The first pertains to TikTok’s alleged ability to give Beijing the data of the app’s users in the US, something that officials allege rides roughshod over US national security.

The second is that the app allegedly could tweak its video-recommendation system in order to show Americans videos that would benefit China’s foreign policy goals. Some US politicians admit that they are concerned TikTok could promote the Chinese government’s preferred US presidential candidate, for example.

Others insist that the only way to protect US national security is to either ban TikTok, or try to force ByteDance to sell TikTok to an American company.

In January, Marco Rubio, vice chairman of Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, claimed that there’s an “extraordinary” threat that the Chinese government can influence TikTok’s recommendation algorithms, shaping the content that American users see.

Committee Chairman Mark Warner echoed those concerns, arguing that TikTok’s level of influence is "exponentially greater" than Russia's alleged interference with the 2016 election, which was, coincidentally, never proven by former Special Counsel Mueller's probe.

What About the Legality of WH's Possible TikTok Ban?

In early March, the House Foreign Affairs Committee passed a bill allowing President Joe Biden to ban TikTok nationwide. The panel voted 24-16 along partisan lines in favor of H.R. 1153, which is intended "to provide a clarification of non-applicability for regulation and prohibition relating to sensitive personal data under International Emergency Economic Powers Act, and for other purposes."

The measure will now advance to the full House, where its fate remains uncertain. A ban would require passage by the full House and the Senate before POTUS can sign the measure into law.

China Blasts TikTok Ban, Says Push Shows US Insecurities Over 'Young People's Favorite App'! “How unsure of itself can the world’s top superpower be to fear a young people’s favorite app like that? The US has been over-stretching the concept of national security and abusing state power to suppress foreign companies,” Mao said at a news conference on Monday. “We firmly oppose those wrong actions. The US government should respect the principles of market economy and fair competition, stop suppressing the companies and provide an open, fair and non-discriminatory environment for foreign companies in the US.” (March 20, 2023)

���It would be unfortunate if the House Foreign Affairs Committee were to censor millions of Americans, and do so based not on actual intelligence, but on a basic misunderstanding of our corporate structure,” TikTok spokesperson Brooke Oberwetter said in response to the bill. “TikTok Inc. is a US company bound by US law, and we are two years and $1.5 billion dollars deep into a project to go above and beyond existing law to secure the US version of the TikTok platform.” (March 20, 2023)

“Congress must not censor entire platforms and strip Americans of their constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression,” ACLU senior policy counsel Jenna Leventoff said in the letter. “Whether we’re discussing the news of the day, live streaming protests, or ​​even watching cat videos, we have a right to use TikTok and other platforms to exchange our thoughts, ideas, and opinions with people around the country and around the world.” (March 20, 2023)

Republican committee chair Michael McCaul claimed in this connection that "many Americans do not realize one of the greatest surveillance efforts from [China] has been silently gathering personal data in their pockets. TikTok is a national security threat... it is time to act."

The top Democrat on the committee, Gregory Meeks, strongly opposed the legislation, warning that it would "damage our allegiances across the globe, bring more companies into China's sphere, destroy jobs here in the United States and undercut core American values of free speech and free enterprise."

This was echoed by Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, who told a US newspaper that "The Supreme Court has said before —as far back as 50 years ago — that Americans have the right to receive information from abroad, including communist propaganda."

"Restricting access to media is the hallmark of authoritarian regimes. I think we should be very wary of giving that kind of power to our own government," Jaffer argued.

In a letter to federal lawmakers, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) voiced opposition to a full-blown ban of TikTok.

"Congress must not censor entire platforms and strip Americans of their constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression," said Jenna Leventoff, senior policy counsel at the ACLU.

Is POTUS Sure of Full Ban of TikTok?

While President Biden said that he's not sure if TikTok will be banned nationwide, the White House gave government agencies 30 days to ensure that the video-making app is not on any federal devices and systems in late February.

"We'll continue to look at other actions that we can take. That includes how to work with Congress on this issue further,” Olivia Dalton, the White House principal deputy press secretary, said.

More than half of US states have, meanwhile, already taken steps toward a partial or full ban of TikTok on government devices.

It's worth noting that the Trump administration unsuccessfully attempted to ban TikTok as well as the Chinese media platform WeChat in 2020, allegedly in order to protect Americans’ privacy. The Biden team did not continue to fight for the implementation of their predecessors' initiative and only recently resumed criticism of TikTok.

What is TikTok's Stance?

TikTok's chief executive will testify before Congress on Thursday that the Chinese-owned video app “has never shared, or received a request to share, US user data with the Chinese government”, according to the official’s written testimony that has been posted by the US House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee.

Shou Zi Chew is also expected to add that ByteDance is not owned or controlled by any government or state entity.

"Let me state this unequivocally: ByteDance is not an agent of China or any other country," the TikTik CEO will say to the Energy and Commerce Committee.

In response to the US ban of the app on government-issue devices, the company told American media that the move came in December “without any deliberation, and unfortunately, that approach has served as a blueprint for other world governments. These bans are little more than political theater."

"We hope that when it comes to addressing national security concerns about TikTok beyond government devices, Congress will explore solutions that won't have the effect of censoring the voices of millions of Americans," the company added.

— Oleg Burunov | March 23, 2023