Comment by next_xibalba

Comment by next_xibalba 19 hours ago

73 replies

From a geopolitical perspective, this issue about 3 items:

1) Influence- TikTok gives the CCP significant direct influence over the views of Americans.

2) Data- TikTok collects massive amounts of data on 100s of millions of Americans. Opens many avenues for spying, extortion of influence, etc.

3) Reciprocity- Foreign tech companies are essentially banned from operating in China. Much like with other industries, China is not playing fair, they’re playing to win.

Insofar as TikTok has offered a “superior” product, this might be a story of social media and its double edge. But this far more a story of geopolitics.

w0m 18 hours ago

> 1) Influence- TikTok gives the CCP significant direct influence over the views of Americans.

There is no credible argument that the CCP doesn't directly control the alg as it's actively being used for just that in tawain/etc.

Does the US really want a (hostile?) foreign govt to have clear direct access to influence 170m americans, an entire generation - completely unfettered? Incredible national security implications. Bot farms can influence X/Meta/etc, but they can be at least be fought. TikTok itself is the influence engine as currently constructed.

  • jonathanlb 16 hours ago

    > Does the US really want a (hostile?) foreign govt to have clear direct access to [...] americans

    Apparently, American users want this? Approximately 700k users have joined RedNote, a Chinese platform. It's out of the frying pan and into the fire for Americans.

    • tivert 4 hours ago

      > Apparently, American users want this? Approximately 700k users have joined RedNote, a Chinese platform. It's out of the frying pan and into the fire for Americans.

      There are 335 million Americans, and a lot of them are stupid and/or foolish.

    • w0m 16 hours ago

      For perspective on the the root issue, that number seems incredibly high, and it's still only ~.5% of estimated active American TikTok users.

    • sanktanglia 12 hours ago

      Well yes, people are addicted to this content so of course they'll seek out alternatives. People want to be distracted by pretty pictures and funny stories and someone telling them their opinions are right

    • airstrike 10 hours ago

      700k rounds to zero. YouTube has ~240 million US accounts, Instagram has ~170 million.

  • hwillis 16 hours ago

    > Does the US really want a (hostile?) foreign govt to have clear direct access to influence 170m americans, an entire generation - completely unfettered?

    As the SCOTUS said itself:

    “At the heart of the First Amendment lies the principle that each person should decide for himself or herself the ideas and beliefs deserving of expression, consideration, and adherence.” Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. v. FCC

    • w0m 15 hours ago

      Functionally; as TikTok is a known/controlled mouthpiece for the CCP - it's infringing the first amendment rights of the foreign govt within US borders?

      • hwillis 12 hours ago

        1. source?

        2. A core principle of the constitution is that those rights apply to noncitizens as well as citizens. They are human rights, not citizen rights. It's significantly more ridiculous for corporations to have free speech than a government. They don't have less of a right to free speech because we don't like them.

jagermo 19 hours ago

1) to be honest, when I see how russia, Iran and other states influence all other networks (especially when it comes to voting), not sure how tiktok is worse than all of them - just think of Facebook & Cambridge Analytica https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook%E2%80%93Cambridge_Ana...

2) yes, that is an issue.

3) fair point.

  • Manuel_D 19 hours ago

    Russia illegally spent something like $100,000 on political ads. Thats basically nothing compared to aggregate political spending.

    • mjparrott 14 hours ago

      It is mind blowing to me that this fact is not widely understood. A mountain was made out of a molehill. $4B was spent in 2016. $12B in 2024. Yet $100,000 somehow is believed to have made any difference whatsoever. Literally 0.0025% of the total in 2016.

      *Source: https://www.emarketer.com/content/political-ad-spend-nearly-...

      • seizethecheese 13 hours ago

        This is, of course, because both USA political parties run their own propaganda machines

      • lossolo 12 hours ago

        Because it's a good scapegoat, why take responsibility for losing an election when you can easily shift the blame to someone else?

    • epolanski 15 hours ago

      Meanwhile US channels this propaganda money through no profits.

      • dv_dt 14 hours ago

        Yup exactly the same thing is happening only with money laundered through nonprofits and political pacs. Once its there the same buy data and place ads & influence is completely legal - which makes the singled out ban on TikTok at odds with the stated purpose of it

  • next_xibalba 19 hours ago

    Cambridge Analytica had zero effect on the 2016 elections. It was the mother of all nothingburgers. I encourage all who see this comment to dig into the truth of that case.

    The huge difference is that while foreign adversaries run influence networks on other social media platforms (and are opposed and combatted by those platforms) TikTok (the platform itself) is controlled by the foreign adversary (the CCP).

    • throwawayq3423 15 hours ago

      It was more a proof of concept. If that could be done on a small scale, why not a large one?

      And elections are decided by margins, pushing them even slightly has massive, irrevocable consequences.

fidotron 19 hours ago

> 1) Influence- TikTok gives the CCP significant direct influence over the views of Americans

More to the point: it removes the ability of the existing American establishment to monopolise the viewpoints presented to Americans.

  • next_xibalba 19 hours ago

    Americans are already quite free to seek a broad range of domestic and foreign viewpoints. Chinese citizens, on the other hand, are not. At all.

    The key point here is that an algorithm can invisibly nudge those viewpoints, and a foreign adversary controls the algorithm.

    Insofar as your claim is that powerful people and institutions care most about power, I agree. It’s very telling that TikTok would shutdown instead of divest. (Meanwhile, U.S. companies have routinely taken the other side of the deal in China: minority stake joint ventures in which “technology transfer” is mandated. AKA intellectual property plundering.)

    • fidotron 18 hours ago

      > Americans are already quite free to seek a broad range of domestic and foreign viewpoints.

      The reality is they live in an establishment controlled media bubble, that is itself full of propaganda.

      Being free does not mean free to live in a lie constructed for the benefit of someone else, it means being free to live in reality, and that freedom is being denied to Americans. At least the Chinese are aware of their reality.

      • next_xibalba 18 hours ago

        I can navigate my browser to Al Jazeera, RT, or Xinhua without interference. Meanwhile, China has a national firewall imprisoning its netizens. So, while most Americans opt to live inside filter bubbles, they are free to escape if they so choose. Not so for the citizens of China, who live in the iron grip of the CCP.

        That’s to say nothing of censorship. I can post “f** Joe Biden” on any social platform in the U.S. Meanwhile, a Chinese netizen compares Xi to Winnie the Pooh and gets a visit from the police. And their post never sees the light of day.

        These aren’t differences of degree. They are differences of category.

    • davidcbc 18 hours ago

      > The key point here is that an algorithm can invisibly nudge those viewpoints, and a foreign adversary controls the algorithm.

      Compared to all the other algorithmic social media in which domestic adversaries control the algorithm.

      • unethical_ban 17 hours ago

        Yes, exactly, finally you get it. Because yes, China is worse.

    • w0m 18 hours ago

      > It’s very telling that TikTok would shutdown instead of divest.

      TBF; The CCP passed laws that likely make it illegal for TikTok to sell/export that kind of information (the algo). They can't divest without also neutering the sticking power of the service.

      • next_xibalba 18 hours ago

        And why did the CCP pass those laws? Perhaps bc they understood it would block divestment, acting as a poison pill to would be acquirers, thereby forcing foreign governments to fight their own public in outright banning TikTok.

  • throwawayq3423 15 hours ago

    > More to the point: it removes the ability of the existing American establishment to monopolise the viewpoints presented to Americans.

    There is no evidence this exists.

  • unethical_ban 17 hours ago

    It doesn't have to be either /or. You should be skeptical of US spy agency behavior, and still recognize the threat of Chinese influence via psyops algorithm to the United States.

xnx 19 hours ago

0) Protectionism- TikTok is eating Meta's lunch. Meta can't make a social app as good as TikTok in the same way GM can't make a car as good a value as BYD.

  • luma 19 hours ago

    Much like Google was eating the lunch of everything in China and the CCP, in response, made it essentially impossible for them to operate.

    This is not new behavior between the two countries, the only thing new is the direction. US is finally waking up to the foreign soft power being exercised inside our own country, and it isn't benefiting us.

    • joshuaissac 16 hours ago

      > Google was eating the lunch of everything in China and the CCP, in response, made it essentially impossible for them to operate.

      Google was operating in China until 2010 when they got banned because they stopped censoring search results. Other Western search engines like Bing continue operate in China.

      • throwawayq3423 15 hours ago

        They also got their source code stolen by Chinese state hackers. The word "hostile" doesn't begin to describe their experience operating on the mainland.

      • nmfisher 9 hours ago

        Completely tangential, but from personal experience, the performance of Google Search had been degraded for at least 2 years prior, so when it was banned it was already mostly useless anyway.

        GMail continued for a few years after that - I'm not even sure if it was ever actually banned, or just suffered the same fate (death by a thousands timeouts).

  • next_xibalba 19 hours ago

    This is just a different bias on point 3, reciprocity. BYD benefits from state subsidies and state sponsored intellectual property theft on an industrial scale. See again, point 3.

  • swatcoder 19 hours ago

    That certainly plays some role in why domestic social media companies haven't stirred up resistance to the ban, but is more like #50 in terms of geopolitical strategy.

    The domestic companies lost some attention share to TikTok sure, and a ban or domestic sale would generally be in their interests, but it's not like they were about to be Myspaced. They've remained among the most valued companies -- presently and in forecasts -- even while it was "eating their lunch"

    • xnx 19 hours ago

      > it's not like they were about to be Myspaced. They've remained among the most valued companies

      It hasn't been an overnight switch, but the trajectory did not look good for US companies. TikTok was even eating into TV viewing time. There's a fixed amount of attention and TikTok was vacuuming it up from everywhere.

  • JumpCrisscross 19 hours ago

    I won’t say that isn’t relevant; when you’re building a coalition you don’t say no to allies. But it was a cherry on top of a well-baked pie. Not a foundational motivation.

    • xnx 19 hours ago

      True, but I'd say that in this area (vs. manufacturing where tariffs can be applied), it's more taboo/embarrassing to admit how dominated Instagram was. Reels is the cheap knockoff of the genuine article.

      • JumpCrisscross 19 hours ago

        > it's more taboo/embarrassing to admit how dominated Instagram was

        Where? Stockholders have been vocally livid about it.

  • unethical_ban 17 hours ago

    >Meta can't make a psyop as dangerous

    We should treat social media as the addictive, mind altering drug it is, and stop acting like a free market saturation of them is a good thing.

    China having their more potent mind control app pointed at the brains of hundreds of millions of people is not something to celebrate.

dmix 16 hours ago

> TikTok collects massive amounts of data on 100s of millions of Americans. Opens many avenues for spying, extortion of influence, etc.

you can buy all of that from data brokers

  • hwillis 16 hours ago

    It's not even about them:

    > If, for example, a user allows TikTok access to the user’s phone contact list to connect with others on the platform, TikTok can access “any data stored in the user’s contact list,” including names, contact information, contact photos, job titles, and notes. 2 id., at 659. Access to such detailed information about U. S. users, the Government worries, may enable “China to track the locations of Federal employees and contractors, build dossiers of personal information for blackmail, and conduct corporate espionage.”

    https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-656_ca7d.pdf

    It seems farcically ridiculous to me to ban the app because it somehow could let china blackmail CEOs.

bsimpson 15 hours ago

It has blown my mind how "free Palestine" has become a meme. That war started with a bunch of terrorists kidnapping/raping/murdering college-age kids at a music festival, and college kids around the world started marching _in support of_ the perpetrators.

At some point, I realized that I avoid social media apps, and the people in those marches certainly don't.

I know that there's more to the Israel:Palestine situation than the attack on the music festival, but the fundamental contradiction that the side that brutalized innocent young people seems to have the popular support of young people is hard to ignore. I wonder to what degree it's algorithmically driven.

  • spencerflem 13 hours ago

    In response, Israel has killed tens of thousands of Palestinians, 80% civilians, 70% women and children, have destroyed more than half of their buildings residential or otherwise, displaced millions, refuse aid. Disproportionate does not begin to cover it

  • kbloop 13 hours ago

    to say it started on October 7th is beyond being misinformed or a misrepresentation.

    >that the side that brutalized innocent young people

  • runarberg 12 hours ago

    It looks like you are comparing a specific terrorist group to Israel as a society. Be aware that there is a large propaganda machine which uses this tactic to dehumanize Palestinians in order to justify a genocide against them.

    Now if you wanted to compare atrocities—which honestly you shouldn’t—you would compare the Palestinian children that were brutalized both in the Gaza genocide, and in any one of the number of IDF incursions into Gaza and the West Bank before and after oct 7. That is compare victims to one side, to the victims of the other side.

    But people generally don’t pick sides like that. They don‘t evaluate the atrocities committed by one armed group to the atrocities committed by the other and favor one over the other. And they certainly don‘t favor one civilian group over another based on the actions of their armed groups. People much more simply react to atrocities as they happen. And Israel has committed enough atrocities during the Gaza genocide that social media will be reacting—both in anger and horror—for a long time to come.

soramimo 19 hours ago

Bravo, perfect summary of the issue at hand.

It'll be revealing to see which political actors come out in favor of keeping tiktok around.

lvl155 19 hours ago

Nail in the head with reciprocity. I think the US honored its end of the bargain over the past four plus decades since China started manufacturing goods for US companies. China clearly benefited since they are now the second largest economy. Along the way China grew ambitious which is fine but they made an idiotic policy error in timing. They should’ve waited a couple more decades to show teeth.

lossolo 12 hours ago

1. Is there any real evidence of the CCP using TikTok for anything?

3. Then what is Microsoft doing in China? What is Apple doing in China? Etc. No tech company is banned from China, the only companies that choose not to operate in China are those that do not agree to follow Chinese laws.

[removed] 17 hours ago
[deleted]