Like, I know why it’s being banned or has been banned or whatever. I just don’t understand the rage behind to keep this shitty ass social media platform that is essentially Vine 2.0

TikTok has been the detriment to society today as Facebook was and is. People doing stupid challenges. People’s attention span getting lower and lower. People pretending they’re more popular than life itself because of their faux acting and lip-syncing.

Why keep the piece of shit?

  • Reil@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    24 minutes ago
    1. The legal framework and argumentation used to justify the ban is worrisome and can be applied overbroadly in the suppression of speech.

    2. Despite this broad possible argumentation, it has just been, and will likely continue to be, wielded in a way targeted towards suppression of speech in a targeted, nationalistic, and at times overtly racist ways. (See: “Senator, I’m Singaporean, not Chinese.”)

    3. Like it or not, it’s become a large repository of internet history and online conversation. The loss of the platform is the loss of that history.

    If the government had particular problems with the platform’s practices and behaviors, it would have been able to field an actual lawsuit with real charges, or levy fines. This “sell or be banned” is a clear grab for power more than any actual gesture towards protecting the people.

  • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 hour ago

    I know why it’s being banned or has been banned or whatever.

    Maybe you don’t. It is the only non zionist media platform in the US. The zionist offers to buy it are happy to not include the algorithm behind its success. Just to let them censor it. The ban did move forward during the Oct 7th and election cycle psyops, and Tiktok did not prevent voter suppression that gives Israel 4 years to implement its final solution.

    It doesn’t specifically have any strong/empire reason to be banned now. FB/Google/Musk donations to Trump are new reasons, that can enhance their properties.

    If you actually knew all of this already, then you might not ask why it matters. Do you “know differently”?

  • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 hours ago

    App plaforms contain propaganda but America wants to control the propaganda. TikTok shows what happens when America does not. Suddenly when presented with different viewpoints not allowed on American platforms, people change their opinion of America. See the censorship on Palestine on American platforms as an example.

  • Maggoty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Monopolization of social media is a bad thing. The two remaining largest social media companies have both publicly begun supporting far right narratives. (Meta and X)

    So what it comes down to is really the possibility that the TikTok algorithm gets controlled. But that’s a distraction. SCOTUS already decided that corporations have first amendment rights. So even if TikTok is controlling it’s algorithm in that way, it has the right to do so. Either that or Hobby Lobby has to pay for birth control for it’s employees.

    If you’re worried about national security then these billionaires publicly turning their platforms into international political machines would be a problem too. But they clearly aren’t a priority.

    So what’s left other than racism and protectionism? The law is also absolutely unconstitutional because it mentions TikTok by name and that’s a big nono. The Constitution bans that and requires that all laws are enforced equally specifically because the ability to single out one entity with legislation is breathtakingly corrupt.

    If you don’t like TikTok that’s fine. But you need to realize what this law is capable of. After banning TikTok by name they can also point the finger at any other social media company (and a couple other sectors) and simply declare them to be controlled by a foreign adversary. Even if it’s wholly owned by US Citizens.

    They gave themselves the power to force a fire sale and you all cheered because they said TikTok.

  • kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    14 hours ago

    When Tik Tok gets banned they can and will ban other platforms (ex: Lemmy, Mastadon, Peertube, Matrix, Signal). They will also attempt to ban secure vpns (MullvadVPN) and “encurage” censorship on major platforms.

  • nucleative@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    14 hours ago

    My TikTok feed is full of content that I find interesting and educational, from creators who work hard to make something valuable.

    For them, banning TikTok means the work they put in to curating an audience will be partially lost, they’ll retain only the followers who find them on another app. If they are monetizing, they’ll potentially have to start over. That may discourage some who are just getting started from developing their craft.

    If china, bytedance, meta, or any other platform is collecting user data in such a way as to be a national threat they definitely need to cut it out and this should be regulated. For example, it should be impossible to identify the location of military generals based on where their wives access TikTok from, or who’s having an affair with who based on proximity to each other, or to develop a vast dataset of individually identifiable profiles of every user that could be used to selectively damage their character.

    Aside from these problems, which are potentially solvable, I think the individual creator/maker economy is an awesome way to give more power to the people.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 hours ago

      We can’t even get running apps to not post the exact running route of soldiers in conflict zones. And if adultery wasn’t an actual crime in the military then it wouldn’t matter so much. You go to your security officer and tell them, matter handled.

      Part of the reason we’re so worried is because we demand so much of people with security clearances that they already regularly lie about their activities. Weed, sex workers, and black listed bars. All of which can get your clearance revoked, and none of which would interfere with the work of most people with clearances.

      Trying to block out society isn’t going to work. We need to tackle that aspect from the other side.

    • DigitalDilemma@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 hours ago

      My TikTok feed is full of content that I find interesting and educational, from creators who work hard to make something valuable.

      Exactly as I’ve found it too. My feed has a lot of old mine explores, vehicle repair, walking and similar ‘educational’ content. I’ve learned a lot of stuff - and I’m probably older than the demographic is perceived. The algorithm was extremely quick to start showing me the stuff I like - far, far better than any of the other apps.

      I’m not American, but much of the content I see is made by Americans, so if this ban happens it will change what I see quite dramatically.

      OP asked a question in an extremely toxic and biased way, well done for answering it reasonably.

  • Max-P@lemmy.max-p.me
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    16 hours ago

    It has its bads and a lot of the content is worthless trash, but it’s also a really good way to see what’s going on around the world from those people’s perspectives. You see a lot of stuff that doesn’t make it to Reddit or Twitter.

    It’s a lot harder to be against Ukraine when you can see the horrors minutes after a Russian strike.

    The government hates it because they can’t control it. They’d rather people only see what the mainstream media says, and not the fact everyone sympathizes with Luigi.

    The free speech argument is genuine, despite how much I hate the shady practices of the platform.

    • wewbull@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      I find it interesting that people here appear to be valuing the “free speech” aspects of tiktok, but Meta has been hounded this week for the change in its moderation this week leaving it much more up to the community and less autocratic.

  • babyincubi@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Because it’s censorship by the goverment? also all the bad shit you mentioned can be easily found in most other social media too, should those be banned as well then?

      • babyincubi@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        Trusting the goverment to do that without ulterior motives makes no sense, regardless of what you think of social media.

        • apotheotic (she/her)@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          51 minutes ago

          Perhaps not the government, but for example the EU and GDPR is kinda great. Seeing this style of regulation put in place for social media is of utmost priority IMHO. Peoples brains are fucking fried, mine included, and I’ve been off basically all social media platforms for years now.

  • 0ops@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    18 hours ago

    I don’t use tiktok, I’ve never been interested in using tiktok, and if it was just going out of business or something then I would give precisely zero fuckaroos.

    But I don’t need the government making the decision to block it for me arbitrarily. I confess that I’m not studied up on the reasoning behind blocking it (I’ve mostly heard about security concerns), but if Congress and the supreme court actually cared about digital security, then they’d be passing a bill of digital rights right now. Instead of doing that, they’re set on going after TikTok specifically, which tells us two things:

    • Because they aren’t passing blanket digital privacy rights, it’s likely that TikTok is not the only company committing these privacy violations, but they don’t want to punish the “wrong” company.
    • Given the previous point, it follows that they don’t actually care about digital privacy (duh), so the actual reason for banning them is likely something else. Other people in this thread have pointed out that the US government can’t control propaganda on TikTok like they can other social media, but it could also be as simple as clearing the way for American competitors/lobbyists who stand to profit from the ban.

    So yeah, like you I don’t use tiktok so I’m not directly affected by the ban, I might’ve even supported it if it was due to an impartial bill of digital rights, but reasoning behind the actual ban is clearly bullshit on principle just by being so specific, and it sets a dangerous precedent. You saying that TikTok is shit so you don’t care if it gets injustly and unconstitutionally banned is no different then saying that George Floyd was a criminal so you don’t care if he was murdered by cops sans-due-process. You’re being distracted, soulifix. Think about it, if the government cared about addressing the issues with TikTok that you brought up in your post, why are they going after TikTok specifically instead of addressing that behavior generally?

  • Didros@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    21 hours ago

    government bans social media because it makes it too easy to see the devastating results of wars that we profit off of

    “Who cares about Tik Tok dances?!?!”

  • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    edit-2
    24 hours ago

    Look, TikTok is trash, but clearly the people championing this ban don’t care at all about data privacy or social media manipulation. Ban none, or ban them all.

    The one true way to resolve this issue (IMO) is to pass a digital bill of rights, regulating these social media corporations, and forcing them to make their products safe for all ages.

    Banning one of many is pissing in the wind, and I don’t enjoy urine in my face (no judgement if that’s your thing, it’s just not mine).

    • wewbull@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      The government forced twitter (as was) and meta to push government lines during COVID, silencing and expelling all other voices. That was well received by many.

      Is it the total ban of the platform that takes it over the line?

    • treadful@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      20 hours ago

      I can’t believe it, but this is like the least argued part of this whole thing. But IMO it’s the only thing that matters.

      • otp@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        17 hours ago

        I don’t think it’s talked about because it’s missing the point, isn’t it? It’s about digital security and privacy. The fact that it’s a social media platform doesn’t make a difference. If a mobile game were able to harvest data inappropriately the same way, wouldn’t the problem be the same?

        Not that I agree with the ban, but making it about freedom of speech seems like a stretch to me.

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          16 hours ago

          I don’t think it’s talked about because it’s missing the point, isn’t it? It’s about digital security and privacy. The fact that it’s a social media platform doesn’t make a difference. If a mobile game were able to harvest data inappropriately the same way, wouldn’t the problem be the same?

          If that was the actual reason then the same ban would apply to all other platforms like Meta and Google. Clearly, the US government doesn’t give two shits about security and privacy as long as they’re not cut out of the loop.

        • treadful@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          16 hours ago

          It’s about digital security and privacy.

          To whom? Not the law makers who caused this to happen. If that were the case, maybe they would write laws that reflected that instead of just banning one company.

          If a mobile game were able to harvest data inappropriately the same way, wouldn’t the problem be the same?

          Where are all the mobile apps that Congress explicitly banned?

        • Mangoholic@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          15 hours ago

          Its not about privacy or data collection they already forced TikTok to use us based servers of a us company, which by law has to give the government any data without notifying the user. Its purely about control an censorship. Also why would they allow fair competition in the free market.

  • airportline@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    22 hours ago

    A TikTok ban would consolidate more power into the hands of Mark Zuckerberg and Meta. Arguably, that’s worse.

  • Coskii@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    For me it’s not about TikTok. It’s about using whatever flimsy, poorly worded law they will make to ban a platform I don’t use to open the door for further bans and possible censorship in the future. A platform should be allowed to function if it can. If it’s horribly made, or supremely unprofitable it’ll find its own way out. I don’t use it, I don’t plan on ever using it, and honestly it doesn’t affect my daily life outside of my mother in law thinking that some of the pallet crafts on there are worthwhile and me having to explain that they’ll look good for a moment and then fall apart rather quickly.

    • Glide@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      1 day ago

      A platform should be allowed to function if it can. If it’s horribly made, or supremely unprofitable it’ll find its own way out.

      I mean, this doesn’t allow for any form of ethical analysis, though. Should every drug be legalized? How about gambling?

      I’m not saying I am for the TikTok ban persay, but if the only conditionals for whether a product or service should exist are “is it ‘well made’ and does it make money,” we are setting ourselves up to achieve a corporate dystopia rather quickly.

      They government should consider what parts of TikTok make it not okay, and target those forms and functions with well reasoned laws. Unfortunately, as you said, I suspect they’ll target things that are good and users like, while pretending that the issue is entirely about one small portion of the complete law. Ie, stress that the issue is one of security, and then write a law saying that all social media in the US must be willing to submit it’s data to the American government. (To be clear, I have no idea what the actual law they wrote is, but this is the kind of shit I expect them to get up to )

      • Coskii@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        23 hours ago

        I know it’s not really the topic you considered… But yes, I do believe every drug should be legalized. If you consider the benefits alone it should be obvious that it is the correct choice.

        Drugs made by lisenced people/locations that use safe ingredients and are open to litigation if they end up making a bad batch.

        The revenue collected isn’t going to some drug lord overseas, it’s going into the country which you live instead.

        Dispensaries can be used secondary as a councelling/rehabilitation center.

        The long and the short if it is that if people want them, they will get them. I live in a place that hasn’t legalized weed yet… But if you are around certain neighborhoods at around 9am, it starts to smell very obvious that legality doesn’t matter. While currently that’s not surprising as many states near mine have legalized, we’ll before that happened things were exactly the same.

        I don’t want people to be addicted to drugs, but I don’t see why we as a society shouldn’t benefit at all from someone who is.

        • Glide@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 hours ago

          I’m not talking about weed, though. It’s been traditionally over policed but that doesn’t mean we should stop policing all drugs. There’s hardly any sense in saying that severely addictive drugs with visible negative effects on the human body should be sold for recreational use for profit. The majority of opiods are a good example of this.

          But more to the point, giving moral purchase to profit justifies the abuse of the consumer. I can’t say for certain whether the TikTok ban is government overreach, as I’m not knowledgeable enough on the topic to speak with any authority, but “it makes money, so it’s fine” really shouldn’t be the end of the conversation.

    • tyler@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      20 hours ago

      Like the other user said, this is clearly a problem if you allow any platform to exist. Let’s take this to an extreme extent. Say a company invents a platform that is 100% addicting, because they’ve figured out how to mind control you. Watching a single video means you will never stop using the platform and you will say whatever the creators want. Clearly that shouldn’t be allowed to exist. Things that social media sites do approximate that. They manipulate users brains into doing things that they normally wouldn’t do. This is why regulation exists. Clearly my example is farcical, but it’s meant to explain why you don’t allow just anything to exist. As a society, certain things are more dangerous than others, and we regulate those things.

      Clearly this ban isn’t about that, it’s about a Chinese government doing something that the US government only wants US companies to be able to do.

      • N0x0n@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        19 hours ago

        That’s exactly how I feel… I see my parents being addicted to YouTube shorts/amazon/TEMU… And it makes me really sad to see them in that addiction state :(.

        Those things should be illegal…

        Clearly this ban isn’t about that, it’s about a Chinese government doing something that the US government only wants US companies to be able to do.

        👆