Great job, US government. You went so overboard with your “TikTok is an evil Chinese app” and deciding to ban it that you’re pushing kids to go even deeper into the Chinese app ecosystem. The US go…
Not that I care about TikTok one way or another, but one of the best arguments I’ve seen against banning it dealt with supposed protection of Americans’ data. And I’m pretty sure that’s the approach that lawmakers have taken with this; it’s not that Chinese propaganda is bad, it’s that China shouldn’t have this much private info on Americans. I believe that’s the primary angle they’ve taken to get around First Amendment concerns.
Anyway, the argument is, “Oh, but it’s OK for US tech companies to harvest data? That’s it’s OK that we have weak privacy and data protection laws? As long as US companies are doing it, then it’s not a problem?” Because, remember the laws says that the company becomes “unavailable” in the US if not sold to an American company. Presumably, if TikTok were sold to a US company, then the app could continue with no issue, tracking and collecting tons of data on Americans to be packaged and sold to the highest bidders.
I will admit, I was somewhat more pro-ban before hearing that argument. But now I’m more neutral. I don’t use it, so I’m not/shouldn’t be affected. But the government trying to hide behind data privacy and protection to ban TikTok does feel rather empty.
And I’m pretty sure that’s the approach that lawmakers have taken with this
well, sometimes…I linked in this comment to some statements made by the Republican congressman who sponsored the original bill. he was pretty clear that he wanted the ban because he thinks TikTok is pushing propaganda, not just from the Chinese, but the Chinese Communist Party (which has been a long-standing right-wing bogeyman - that congressman was even the chair of the “House Select Committee on the CCP”)
I believe that’s the primary angle they’ve taken to get around First Amendment concerns.
this is true, in the same way that Trump in his first campaign promised a “Muslim ban” and then when they tried to actually implement it they realized they needed to frame it as a “travel ban…applying to countries that happen to have a lot of Muslims…oh and also North Korea because look at us, we’re definitely not discriminating against people based solely on religion”
everyone (except the right-wing hacks on the Supreme Court) saw through the “travel ban” facade pretty easily. it’s been disappointing to see how many people uncritically repeat “well, there’s a data privacy angle to it too…” as if it’s a legitimate justification and not just another facade.
Not that I care about TikTok one way or another, but one of the best arguments I’ve seen against banning it dealt with supposed protection of Americans’ data. And I’m pretty sure that’s the approach that lawmakers have taken with this; it’s not that Chinese propaganda is bad, it’s that China shouldn’t have this much private info on Americans. I believe that’s the primary angle they’ve taken to get around First Amendment concerns.
Anyway, the argument is, “Oh, but it’s OK for US tech companies to harvest data? That’s it’s OK that we have weak privacy and data protection laws? As long as US companies are doing it, then it’s not a problem?” Because, remember the laws says that the company becomes “unavailable” in the US if not sold to an American company. Presumably, if TikTok were sold to a US company, then the app could continue with no issue, tracking and collecting tons of data on Americans to be packaged and sold to the highest bidders.
I will admit, I was somewhat more pro-ban before hearing that argument. But now I’m more neutral. I don’t use it, so I’m not/shouldn’t be affected. But the government trying to hide behind data privacy and protection to ban TikTok does feel rather empty.
well, sometimes…I linked in this comment to some statements made by the Republican congressman who sponsored the original bill. he was pretty clear that he wanted the ban because he thinks TikTok is pushing propaganda, not just from the Chinese, but the Chinese Communist Party (which has been a long-standing right-wing bogeyman - that congressman was even the chair of the “House Select Committee on the CCP”)
this is true, in the same way that Trump in his first campaign promised a “Muslim ban” and then when they tried to actually implement it they realized they needed to frame it as a “travel ban…applying to countries that happen to have a lot of Muslims…oh and also North Korea because look at us, we’re definitely not discriminating against people based solely on religion”
everyone (except the right-wing hacks on the Supreme Court) saw through the “travel ban” facade pretty easily. it’s been disappointing to see how many people uncritically repeat “well, there’s a data privacy angle to it too…” as if it’s a legitimate justification and not just another facade.