#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?

[mariacallous]

US appeals court upholds TikTok law forcing its sale

WASHINGTON, Dec 6 (Reuters) - A U.S. federal appeals court on Friday upheld a law requiring Chinese-based ByteDance to divest its popular short video app TikTok in the United States by early next year or face a ban.

The decision is a win for the Justice Department and opponents of the Chinese-owned app and a devastating blow to ByteDance. The ruling now increases the possibility of an unprecedented ban in just six weeks on a social media app used by 170 million Americans.

The ruling is expected to be appealed to the Supreme Court.

Free speech advocates immediately criticized the decision. The American Civil Liberties Union said it sets a "flawed and dangerous precedent."

"Banning TikTok blatantly violates the First Amendment rights of millions of Americans who use this app to express themselves and communicate with people around the world,” said Patrick Toomey, deputy director of the ACLU's National Security Project.

But the appeals court said the law “was the culmination of extensive, bipartisan action by the Congress and by successive presidents. It was carefully crafted to deal only with control by a foreign adversary, and it was part of a broader effort to counter a well-substantiated national security threat posed by the PRC (People's Republic of China)."

U.S. appeals court Judges Sri Srinivasan, Neomi Rao and Douglas Ginsburg considered the legal challenges brought by TikTok and users against the law that gives ByteDance until Jan. 19 to sell or divest TikTok's U.S. assets or face a ban.

The decision -- unless the Supreme Court reverses it -- puts TikTok's fate in the hands of first President JoeBiden on whether to grant a 90-day extension of the Jan. 19 deadline to force a sale and then President-elect Donald Trump, who takes office on Jan. 20. But it's not clear whether ByteDance could meet the heavy burden to show it had made significant progress toward a divestiture needed to trigger the extension.

Trump, who unsuccessfully tried to ban TikTok during his first term in 2020, said before the November presidential election he would not allow the TikTok ban.

TikTok said it expected the Supreme Court would reverse the appeals court decision on First Amendment grounds.

"The Supreme Court has an established historical record of protecting Americans' right to free speech, and we expect they will do just that on this important constitutional issue," TikTok said in a statement, adding the law will result "in outright censorship of the American people."

The Justice Department did not have an immediate comment on the decision.

The decision upholds the law giving the U.S. government sweeping powers to ban other foreign-owned apps that could raise concerns about collection of Americans' data. In 2020, Trump also tried to ban Tencent-owned WeChat, but was blocked by the courts.

Shares of Meta Platforms (META.O), opens new tab, which competes against TikTok in online ads, hit an intraday record high following the ruling, last up over 3%. Google parent Alphabet (GOOGL.O), opens new tab, whose YouTube video platform also competes with TikTok, was up over 1% following the ruling.

TIKTOK BAN LOOMS

The court acknowledged its decision would lead to TikTok's ban on Jan. 19 without an extension from Biden.

"Consequently, TikTok's millions of users will need to find alternative media of communication," the court said, which was because of China's "hybrid commercial threat to U.S. national security, not to the U.S. Government, which engaged with TikTok through a multi-year process in an effort to find an alternative solution."

The opinion was written by Ginsburg, an appointee of President Ronald Reagan, and joined by Rao, who was named to the bench by Trump, and Srinivasan, an appointee of President Barack Obama.

The Justice Department says under Chinese ownership, TikTok poses a serious national security threat because of its access to vast personal data of Americans, asserting China can covertly manipulate information that Americans consume via TikTok.

U.S. officials have also warned TikTok's management is beholden to the Chinese government, which could compel the company to share the data of its American users.

TikTok has denied it has or ever would share U.S. user data, accusing American lawmakers in the lawsuit of advancing "speculative" concerns.

TikTok and ByteDance argue the law is unconstitutional and violates Americans' free speech rights. They call it "a radical departure from this country's tradition of championing an open Internet."

ByteDance, backed by Sequoia Capital, Susquehanna International Group, KKR & Co (KKR.N), opens new tab, and General Atlantic, among others, was valued at $268 billion in December 2023 when it offered to buy back around $5 billion worth of shares from investors, Reuters reported then.

The law prohibits app stores like Apple (AAPL.O), opens new tab and Alphabet's (GOOGL.O), opens new tab Google from offering TikTok and bars internet hosting services from supporting TikTok unless ByteDance divests TikTok by the deadline.

Apple and Google did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

In a concurring opinion, Srinivasan acknowledged the decision will have major impacts, noting "170 million Americans use TikTok to create and view all sorts of free expression and engage with one another and the world. And yet, in part precisely because of the platform’s expansive reach, Congress and multiple Presidents determined that divesting it from (China's) control is essential to protect our national security."

He added that "Because the record reflects that Congress's decision was considered, consistent with longstanding regulatory practice, and devoid of an institutional aim to suppress particular messages or ideas, we are not in a position to set it aside."

[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.

[beardedmrbean]

What's New

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear arguments in TikTok's challenge to a law set to go into effect on the last day of Joe Biden's presidency, which would ban the popular app if its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, does not sell it.

ByteDance has indicated it will not sell TikTok.

The justices granted certiorari Wednesday to take up the petition filed by ByteDance, which owns TikTok. The court will hear arguments on January 10 about whether the federal law that seeks to ban the app on national security grounds violates free speech laws.

Why It Matters

TikTok filed the challenge on Monday, arguing that the law, enacted with bipartisan support in April, impermissibly restricts speech in violation of the First Amendment. Congress passed the Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act earlier this year over concerns that the app's Chinese ownership presented a national security risk.

The popular social media platform has more than 170 million users in the United States.

What To Know

A federal appeals court unanimously upheld the ban in a ruling earlier this month, finding that the government does have a national security interest in regulating TikTok in the U.S.

If the Supreme Court does not issue a decision before the deadline, the ban will go into effect a day before President-elect Donald Trump takes office—timing that TikTok's attorneys have pointed out in their filings.

Lawyers for the app said the ban "will shutter one of America's most popular speech platforms the day before a presidential inauguration" and "in turn, will silence the speech of Applicants and the many Americans who use the platform to communicate about politics, commerce, arts, and other matters of public concern."

TikTok CEO Shou Chew met with Trump at the president-elect's Mar-a-Lago home on Monday afternoon, just hours after the company asked the Supreme Court to wade into the matter.

Trump has suggested he could take a different approach to the app but has not indicated what that might look like. Still, TikTok picked up on that tone and urged the Supreme Court to block the ban to give "the incoming administration time to determine its position."

What People Are Saying

Trump, at a Monday press conference: "I have a warm spot in my heart for TikTok because I won youth by 34 points, and there are those that say that TikTok has something to do with it."

TikTok, in a December 6 statement: "The Supreme Court has an established historical record of protecting Americans' right to free speech, and we expect they will do just that on this important constitutional issue. Unfortunately, the TikTok ban was conceived and pushed through based upon inaccurate, flawed and hypothetical information, resulting in outright censorship of the American people. The TikTok ban, unless stopped, will silence the voices of over 170 million Americans here in the US and around the world on January 19th, 2025."

Florida Senator Marco Rubio, who led the charge against TikTok and is Trump's pick for secretary of state, said in an April 24 statement: "TikTok extended the Chinese Communist Party's power and influence into our own nation, right under our noses. I have been raising concerns about TikTok since 2019, so this new law forcing ByteDance to divest from TikTok is a huge step toward confronting Beijing's malign influence. It's official: Communist China is on the clock."

What's Next

It's unclear how quickly the high court might issue a decision. There are only nine days between oral arguments and the ban's effective date.

[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

[vague-humanoid]

On Jan. 15, the Republican governor told his 1 million followers he was ready to sign into law a proposed bill that would ban “citizens, governments & entities” of China, Iran, North Korea and Russia from purchasing land in the state, in effect blocking some immigrants from becoming homeowners.

The bill restricting land ownership was followed by kindred proposals to ban international college students from those same countries and to cut off Texans’ access to TikTok and another social media platform that’s become crucial for the Chinese diaspora living in the state to communicate with family in China.

[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.

[bllsbailey]

Federal Court Strikes Down TikTok’s Appeal, Forcing Chinese Parent Company To Sell Or Face Imminent Ban

In this photo illustration, the social media application logo, TikTok is displayed on the screen of an iPhone on an American flag

A federal appeals court reaffirmed TikTok’s federal ban, which is set to take effect in January if its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, does not sell its ownership.

The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit stated that the Justice Department’s ruling was “constitutional,” subsequently denying ByteDance’s petition for relief.

“We conclude the portions of the Act the petitioners have standing to challenge, that is the provisions concerning TikTok and its related entities, survive constitutional scrutiny,” wrote Senior Judge Douglas Ginsburg in the ruling. “We therefore deny the petitions.”

“The First Amendment exists to protect free speech in the United States. Here the Government acted solely to protect that freedom from a foreign adversary nation and to limit that adversary’s ability to gather data on people in the United States,” Ginsburg continued.

The law in question, signed by President Joe Biden in April, grants the government the authority to federally ban the app, citing national security concerns over Beijing’s potential to spy on and manipulate the more than 170 million Americans who use it.

“Today’s decision is an important step in blocking the Chinese government from weaponizing TikTok to collect sensitive information about millions of Americans, to covertly manipulate the content delivered to American audiences, and to undermine our national security,” stated Attorney General Merrick Garland following the results.

“As the D.C. Circuit recognized, this act protects the national security of the United States in a manner that is consistent with the Constitution. The Justice Department is committed to defending Americans’ sensitive data from authoritarian regimes that seek to exploit companies under their control,” he continued.

TikTok and ByteDance are now expected to take the case to the supreme court, claiming the ban was an unconstitutional “censorship of the American people.”

“Unfortunately, the TikTok ban was conceived and pushed through based upon inaccurate, flawed and hypothetical information, resulting in outright censorship of the American people,” stated TikTok spokesperson Michael Hughes, adding that the ban would “silence the voices of over 170 million Americans here in the US and around the world on January 19th, 2025.”

“The Supreme Court has an established historical record of protecting Americans’ right to free speech, and we expect they will do just that on this important constitutional issue,” he continued.

The Chinese government threatened to block the sale of TikTok’s algorithm, which provides unique content to each user depending on their clicks and interests, forcing a potential buyer to build a brand new algorithm system, even though the initial algorithm made the app popular in the first place.

“The platform consists of millions of lines of software code that have been painstakingly developed by thousands of engineers over multiple years,” the failed petition stated.

Meanwhile, there is growing optimism that President-elect Donald Trump will be able to shift control of the app over to American investors.

“I am optimistic that President Trump will facilitate an American takeover of TikTok to allow its continued use in the United States and I look forward to welcoming the app in America under new ownership,” stated Rep. John Moolenaar (R-Mich.) of Michigan, while calling the recent ruling a “loss for the Chinese Communist Party.”

Stay informed! Receive breaking news blasts directly to your inbox for free. Subscribe here. https://www.oann.com/alerts

[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…

[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.”

[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…