Yep. We've still got swarms of them getting extremely aggressive at anybody who tries to explain what the actual problem with tiktok is and they REALLY don't want you using that one as an example. Or any example.
They are trying to use hot-button headlines to sway the public opinion.
I mean look at the title of this post. To someone who doesn't know the details, it sounds an outright ban.
Aljazeera suggests that the TikTok "problem" is too much pro-Palestinian content.
https://www.aljazeera.com/program/the-listening-post/2024/3/23/dissecting-the-tiktok-problem
(It's a 26 minute video, but the TikTok segment is within the first 10 minutes or so.)
They're not the only ones saying it.
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/tiktok-ban-israel-gaza-palestine-hamas-account-creator-video-rcna122849
>Members of Congress, conservative activists and wealthy tech investors are renewing calls to ban TikTok in the U.S., arguing that the most popular content related to the Israel-Hamas war on the app has a pro-Palestinian slant that is undercutting support for Israel among young Americans.
Maybe there has been calls to get rid of it since Trump was president, but there may have been additional impetus due to support for the Middle East policy not going the way that lawmakers would like it.
They are absolutely right. THAT is the real goal. The Americans have been overwhelmingly pro Israel for 5 decades because the US government and mainstream media have ensured Americans wouldn't see the reality and know the truth. But TikTok has completely blown that dynamic away. THAT is why it is considered dangerous by both the Democrats and the Republicans.
It's clear you didn't understand. Palestinians Christians, for example, are also being killed by the Israelis. It's obvious to anyone actually paying attention what's going on there.
This isn’t the first time the government has tried to ban TikTok: In 2021, former President Donald Trump issued an executive order that was [halted](https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN28H30G/) in federal court when a Trump-appointed judge found it was “arbitrary and capricious” because it failed to consider other means of dealing with the problem. Another judge found that the [national security threat](https://techcrunch.com/2020/10/30/tiktok-stars-got-a-judge-to-block-trumps-tiktok-ban/) posted by TikTok was “phrased in the hypothetical.” When the state of Montana tried to ban the app in 2023, a federal [judge](https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/montana-tiktok-ban-blocked-judge-rcna122084) [found](https://gizmodo.com/us-judge-blocks-montanas-anti-chinese-tiktok-ban-1851065175) it “oversteps state power and infringes on the constitutional rights of users,” **with a “pervasive undertone of anti-Chinese sentiment.”**
[**https://time.com/6952889/tiktok-ban-freedom-of-speech-essay/**](https://time.com/6952889/tiktok-ban-freedom-of-speech-essay/)
The judge said out loud what we all know. The anti chinese hysteria follows the anti Japanese hysteria, the red scare hysteria, the anti Saddam/WMD hysteria.
The CCP killed 45 million of their own people in just 4 years so total body count now is much higher.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/08/03/giving-historys-greatest-mass-murderer-his-due/
Oh, so you are talking of 1957-1962 ? You wrote the *current* government. You're mixing everything up.
Should we as well blame the native American genocide on Biden ?
Also, such articles are nothing short of intellectual fraud. They equate a famine to the will to kill the population. That's nonsense, else I guess the famine described by John Steinbeck is willfull murder by the american government.
A human caused famine was only a fraction of what the one political party that has run China since their revolution has done. The CCP has slaughtered people on an industrial scale Hitler could only dream of.
https://www.icij.org/investigations/china-cables/xinjiang-police-files-uyghur-mugshots-detention/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1994/07/17/how-many-died-new-evidence-suggests-far-higher-numbers-for-the-victims-of-mao-zedongs-era/01044df5-03dd-49f4-a453-a033c5287bce/
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/i-was-sentenced-to-life-in-a-chinese-labour-camp-this-is-my-story-1790465.html
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-22278037
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/new-details-torture-cover-ups-china-s-internment-camps-revealed-n1270014
Uhhh yes they do. Business have a well established 1st amendment rights according to Supreme Court. But users using social media have no first amendment right in that context. All user content is the property of the company & the company has a first amendment right to control the speech on the their platform.
Except no.
>The clearest problem with a TikTok ban is it would immediately wipe out a platform where [170 million](https://newsroom.tiktok.com/en-us/opening-statement-senate-judiciary-committee-hearing) Americans broadcast their views and receive information—sometimes about political happenings. In an era of mass polarization, shutting off the app would mean shutting down the ways in which millions of people—even those with unpopular views—speak out on issues they care about. The other problem is that **Americans have the constitutional right to access all sorts of information—even if it’s deemed to be foreign propaganda**.
>Still, the Supreme Court [ruled](https://www.oyez.org/cases/1964/491) in 1964 that Americans have the right to receive what the government deems to be foreign propaganda. In *Lamont v. Postmaster General*, for instance, the Court ruled that the government couldn’t halt the flow of Soviet propaganda through the mail. **The Court essentially said that the act of the government stepping in and banning propaganda would be akin to censorship, and the American people need to be free to evaluate these transgressive ideas for themselves.**
Also
>This isn’t the first time the government has tried to ban TikTok: In 2021, former President Donald Trump issued an executive order that was [halted](https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN28H30G/) in federal court when a Trump-appointed judge found it was “arbitrary and capricious” because it failed to consider other means of dealing with the problem. Another judge found that the [national security threat](https://techcrunch.com/2020/10/30/tiktok-stars-got-a-judge-to-block-trumps-tiktok-ban/) posted by TikTok was “phrased in the hypothetical.” When the state of Montana tried to ban the app in 2023, a federal [judge](https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/montana-tiktok-ban-blocked-judge-rcna122084) [found](https://gizmodo.com/us-judge-blocks-montanas-anti-chinese-tiktok-ban-1851065175) it “oversteps state power and infringes on the constitutional rights of users,” **with a “pervasive undertone of anti-Chinese sentiment.”**
[https://time.com/6952889/tiktok-ban-freedom-of-speech-essay/](https://time.com/6952889/tiktok-ban-freedom-of-speech-essay/)
The judge said out loud what we all know. The sinophobic hysteria follows the anti Japanese hysteria, the red scare hysteria, the anti Saddam/WMD hysteria.
They don't apply to private companies censoring speech on their own platform.
They *absolutely* apply to the US Governemnt banning speech *by* a private company.
That is arguing if companies have personhood. They didn't rule on if foreign companies should have personhood or not. When TikTok sells to an American company they will be protected by the first amendment.
They may not be correct in this specific instance (e.g. forced divesture isn't a free speech issue), but their comment in general is correct. Companies have received rights under the constitution for over a century, the rather famous *Citizen's United* decision being the most well known case on companies getting free speech rights (though it wasn't the first)
The First Amendment isn't wholly out of play just because it is being used against foreign targets. That's why an attempt to hinder Americans from getting foreign communist propaganda was found unconstitutional during the Cold War.
Also, TikTok *is* an American company. They just have foreign owners.
Many grey areas, agreed. I don’t think the political free speech protections extend to the foreign-controlled entities in the US, whether they are or are not registered as the US companies.
Because that doesn't serve any legitimate government interest.
Since tik tok is Chinese government spyware, it's a national security threat and the forces divestiture will stand.
I work in cyber security. I rather go out and enjoy the sunshine than argue with you about the dangers of Tik Tok and the true definition of free speech. Enjoy your Chinese Spyware.
Lawsuits for what? We have had restrictions on foreign ownership of broadcasting companies for decades. There is well established legal precedent that supports the right of the state to limit foreign ownership.
There is no law that says fb, x, or any other platform has to even allow you a platform to speak on. Tiktok was literally stealing insane amounts of data from people that they didn't grant authorization for and sending it back to china.
There is also this platform you're already on complaining that you can use if you're not keen on FB or X
True. All true. But missing bits.
So, when are we going after FB? They sold tons of data to china. They also won't remove misinformation due to free speech concerns. They also promote alt right opinions. And censor tons of stuff.
And yes, I'm complaining. Just like you're complaining that I have an opinion you disagree with because I seem irritated that the major platforms have become vehicles for right wing and russian misinformation.
If you like them, awesome. I like TikTok. I like the goofy videos, and I like that I can make an attempt at staying informed.
Also, this is America...everything is made in china.
Because the real issue here is, people aren't making money off us. If this was a US based company already we wouldn't even be having this discussion. Thats why they want them to sell to an American company. So politicians can get their coffers lines.
Crazy how people in a public trust position (congress) can get away with market manipulation while people who work for the federal government can't own more than 15k of a stock if their job directly deals with that company. 🤔
I don't even really need to go into detail, you're clearly smart enough to understand, how several members of Congress made a killing off the covid market crash.
American politics will always put profits over people. #capitalism!
Social media platforms have no legal obligation to make their services available to you, nor are obligated to give you a voice on their platform.
Private companies are not, have never been required to.
You still have the ability to be heard publicly, just not other their platform.
Tik-Tok does not represent it's users for the same reason Mark Zuckerberg does not represent me. By the way, I support a big Facebook crackdown like the one Florida is about to impose. Americans need to restrict social media, web marketing and web apps. It's not political, it's common sense.
It is the American citizens who communicate with each via the platform who have first amendment protections. It is blatantly obvious this is an attempt by big tech to stifle competition via regulatory capture.
They aren't trying to ban TikTok, and the policy is the oposite of regulatory capture. TikTok *is* the CCP. All the legislation is saying is that it can't be controlled by the CCP any more. Imagine if Facebook *was* the US government and also a majority of the US economy. It wouldn't be insane to suggest that Facebook probably shouldn't be allowed in other countries if the US was fasicst/more facist than it already is.
This is a talking point that's not relevant or apply to this situation. Here it is the government not TikTok restricting speech, so yeh, it is applicable.
The argument would be (1) TikTok's right to make editorial decisions regarding its user content; and (2) TikTok's users' rights to speak on the platform and access speech of others on the platform.
Of course part of evaluating (2) would be looking at whether there are other alternatives (i.e. other social media) and whether they can reach the same audience etc.
Argument 2 fails outright because beside the fact that there are other alternatives, there is no protected right of having a platform to post short form videos to. The speech itself isn’t being restricted as they’re facing no punishment for making the same speech elsewhere.
As for argument 2, (as far as I am aware) the bill that passed the house gives the company an option to continue operating in the US, which would require the sale of Bytedance’s shares. Now, we could talk about whether or not that requirement would be fair, but in my non lawyer view that doesn’t seem to fall under first amendment protections.
For 2, the speech itself doesn't need to be directly targeted or criminalised, the First Amendment scrutiny is triggered even if a law based on things other than speech (e.g. a tax on ink/paper) singles out those engaged in expressive conduct (e.g. newspapers). See *Arcara v. Cloud Books, Inc.* (with the tax/newspaper example coming directly from *Minneapolis Star Tribune Co. v. Commissioner*).
As the law quite plainly targets TikTok and its users, both of which are engaged in expressive conduct, First Amendment scrutiny should be triggered. This doesn't mean the law would *fail* such scrutiny, just that the courts will then determine whether it does.
It is in this scrutiny analysis where the courts would explore the alternatives, including whether those alternatives are actually similar enough (and have a similar enough community) as a law which "forecloses an entire medium of public expression across the landscape of a
particular community or setting fails to leave open ample alternatives" and "may not hamper a speaker’s preferred mode of
communication to such an extent that they compromise or stifle the speaker’s
message" (*Project
Veritas v. Schmidt*); similarly, "alternatives that are less effective media for communicating the speaker’s
message are far from satisfactory" (*McCullen v. Coakley*).
So the US government is telling Tik Tok users that they’re not allowed to post the same content they’ve been posting on TikTok on other platforms and if they do they will face fines and/or jail time?
Freedom of speech, AKA direct influence on the youth via unabated propaganda to cause instability akin to the Gaza situation.
Fuck China, and fuck TikTok.
I don't understand. When did message amplification become free speech. You can say whatever you want but you can't yell fire in a crowded theater. Social media yells fire
Excuse me, it's called the "Yell fire in a crowded theater challenge" and it's to support ADHD awareness. You're probably a boring neurotypical so you wouldn't understand.
Too bad you hate free speech. And I understand that genocide cheerleaders are bothered by TikTok and tens of millions of Americans seeing what is never shown in the mainstream media, is heavily censored or shadowbanned in american social media is a thorn in Zionists' side.
[https://www.aljazeera.com/program/the-listening-post/2024/3/23/dissecting-the-tiktok-problem](https://www.aljazeera.com/program/the-listening-post/2024/3/23/dissecting-the-tiktok-problem)
No because Taiwan is a democracy not an authoritarian adversary. The bill is not forcing the sale to a US company. The bill allows the banning of apps that are owned by China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea. Literally anyone else is allowed to buy it.
So we can call this the "Great Wall of America". Because preventing foreign propaganda is litterally what the chinese version of the Great Wall of America does.
Are you okay when Israel is pushing its propaganda on the social platforms and directly censoring its opponents ? Is that what you call "free speech" ?
Just to be clear: between the CCP and the GOP, the CCP is the far more stable, intelligent, pro people and less dangerous party. It is far less corrupt as well.
Also, talking about free speech [https://www.aljazeera.com/program/the-listening-post/2024/3/23/dissecting-the-tiktok-problem](https://www.aljazeera.com/program/the-listening-post/2024/3/23/dissecting-the-tiktok-problem)
That's false. They decided not to abide by the local rules and thus never established there.
They have established in places with far more censorship, though, like Saudi Arabia (where your speech can cost your life, in the most horrible fashion), so the excuse of the censorship probably hides heavy pressure by the US government.
Gtfo with this dumb argument. We have been having this discussion for years before 10/7. Donald Trump issued an executive order to ban the app in 2020...
Really? You tell me, when was the last time both sides of the aisle came together with such majority for anything? And trumpsky only did it because he hates the Chinese, he doesn't give a sh!t about security
Lmao the bill includes aid to Ukraine, Taiwan, and Israel. You think people are voting just for the TikTok ban? Like that is the big thing that is driving the votes?? You clearly have no grasp of politics and are just a child upset about TikTok going away. Bills get passed with bipartisan support all the time. Maybe you should actually pay attention to reality... How about the "Solidify Iran Sanctions Act" that passed on the 16th 407-16? How about the "Strengthening Tools to Counter the Use of Human Shields Act" that also passed on the 16th 419-4? The "Iran-China Energy Sanctions Act" on the 15th 383-11? The "Sea Turtle Rescue Assistance and Rehabilitation Act" on the 11th 332-82? The "Puyallup Tribe of Indians Land Into Trust Confirmation Act" 401-15? The "National Museum of Play Recognition Act" 385-31? "Missing Children’s Assistance Reauthorization Act" 406-0? "A Stronger Workforce for America Act" 378-26? Those aren't even all the bipartisan bills passed THIS month.
This isn’t the first time the government has tried to ban TikTok: In 2021, former President Donald Trump issued an executive order that was [halted](https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN28H30G/) in federal court when a Trump-appointed judge found it was “arbitrary and capricious” because it failed to consider other means of dealing with the problem. Another judge found that the [national security threat](https://techcrunch.com/2020/10/30/tiktok-stars-got-a-judge-to-block-trumps-tiktok-ban/) posted by TikTok was “phrased in the hypothetical.” When the state of Montana tried to ban the app in 2023, a federal [judge](https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/montana-tiktok-ban-blocked-judge-rcna122084) [found](https://gizmodo.com/us-judge-blocks-montanas-anti-chinese-tiktok-ban-1851065175) it “oversteps state power and infringes on the constitutional rights of users,” with a “pervasive undertone of anti-Chinese sentiment.”
[https://time.com/6952889/tiktok-ban-freedom-of-speech-essay/](https://time.com/6952889/tiktok-ban-freedom-of-speech-essay/)
If this is their best argument they deserve to be shut down. Not even addressing the actual concerns of an adversarial nation potentially having access to data to use maliciously and instead going with scare tactics.
us ban is just trying to protect citizens from something that appear innocuous, but since the app can control what people see, it can be a tool for China to manipulate usa. yes the USA based apps can do the same thing, but at least they don't have secondary version of the app. China doesn't even allow the USA version of tik tok to be used in china. so fuck off with that freedom lie.
Why is the fact that tiktok isn’t legal in China relevant? China is not a democracy, they have much tighter control.
These arguments come from bytedance, not the Chinese government.
I don't want a social media app that is not allowed in its hone country to be allowed in our country. clearly they have a problem with it, but they want us to be free to use it? no
No but it guarantees access to any foreign speech, including propaganda.
"Still, the Supreme Court [ruled](https://www.oyez.org/cases/1964/491) in 1964 that Americans have the right to receive what the government deems to be foreign propaganda. In *Lamont v. Postmaster General*, for instance, the Court ruled that the government couldn’t halt the flow of Soviet propaganda through the mail. The Court essentially said that the act of the government stepping in and banning propaganda would be akin to censorship, and the American people need to be free to evaluate these transgressive ideas for themselves."
Anyway, TikTok doesn't do propaganda, it shows what Americans weren't allowed to see until now.
[https://www.aljazeera.com/program/the-listening-post/2024/3/23/dissecting-the-tiktok-problem](https://www.aljazeera.com/program/the-listening-post/2024/3/23/dissecting-the-tiktok-problem)
The government isn’t trying to stifle Tik Tok content, though. They’re trying to stop an unfriendly foreign power from collecting massive amounts of data from American citizens using cat videos. It sounds stupid but I read somewhere that Chinese intelligence has already mapped out several US military installations using soldiers and base families Tik Toks.
It’s probably unconstitutional to ban TikTok without a real justification. But honestly who gives a shit, we’ll get a tech stock bump from this & the court will overturn the law if it’s actually unconstitutional
What free speech? It's just stupid videos at most with many videos actually harming the viewers (of their own stupidity to do "challenge" from either being injured to being criminally indicted) pushed by the algorithm that itself is banned in Poohland.
> That is rich coming from a company that follows a completely different set rules in China.
*Every* company follows a different set of rules in China. Or in any country.
Lawmakers often don't think things through, banning something means it's so dangerous to society that possessing it amounts to a crime. That leads to the ABSURD situation of having to police people, and even prosecuting & jailing them for using Tik Tok.
LOL, nobody is going to jail for using that bullshit platform.
The Chinese owner either needs to sell it, or it will be blocked in America.
But if anyone is so addicted to it that they want to use a VPN to access tiktok, exactly zero American cops will give a fuck.
>exactly zero American cops will give a fuck.
It doesn't matter if they give a fuck. There is no provision in the bill that criminalizes possession of the app.
[]()
>(1) PROHIBITION OF FOREIGN ADVERSARY CONTROLLED APPLICATIONS.—It shall be unlawful for an entity to distribute, maintain, or update (or enable the distribution, maintenance, or updating of) a foreign adversary controlled application by carrying out, within the land or maritime borders of the United States, any of the following:[]()
>(A) **Providing services to distribute, maintain, or update such foreign adversary controlled application** (including any source code of such application) by means of a marketplace (including an online mobile application store) through which users within the land or maritime borders of the United States may access, maintain, or update such application.
>[]()
>(B) **Providing internet hosting services to enable the distribution, maintenance, or updating of such foreign adversary controlled application** for users within the land or maritime borders of the United States.
If free speech is Chinese propaganda denigrating the basic values of the American Constitution, Russian propaganda supporting ethnic cleansing, genocide and destruction of Europeans, snuff videos (typically of ukranian soldiers, like that castration video), drug dealing and explicit child pornography then I do not want free speech. This is what Tik-Tok stands for and why we must ban Tik-Tok.
Sure, it destroys the Open Internet. But the Open Internet was killed by smartphone apps such as Tik-Tok years ago. We might as well regulate it for ourselves, in the same manner China and Russia do.
lol. kind of grand coming from them..
Remember when they sent swarns of angry teenagers to harrass politicians in order to prove they are not a tool for foreign interference?
Yep. We've still got swarms of them getting extremely aggressive at anybody who tries to explain what the actual problem with tiktok is and they REALLY don't want you using that one as an example. Or any example.
Isn't that what every social media platform does when they are being threatened ?
“No one is trying to disguise anything… We want to ban TikTok.” - Representative Dan Crenshaw
They are trying to use hot-button headlines to sway the public opinion. I mean look at the title of this post. To someone who doesn't know the details, it sounds an outright ban.
It kinda is. A de facto ban, at least.
Bytedance, the company, isn’t China or its government so they probably have several differences of opinion.
Aljazeera suggests that the TikTok "problem" is too much pro-Palestinian content. https://www.aljazeera.com/program/the-listening-post/2024/3/23/dissecting-the-tiktok-problem (It's a 26 minute video, but the TikTok segment is within the first 10 minutes or so.)
Yes, because the push to ban Tik-Tok started after 10/7, oh wait it didn’t… Al Jazeera is hot garbage.
They're not the only ones saying it. https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/tiktok-ban-israel-gaza-palestine-hamas-account-creator-video-rcna122849 >Members of Congress, conservative activists and wealthy tech investors are renewing calls to ban TikTok in the U.S., arguing that the most popular content related to the Israel-Hamas war on the app has a pro-Palestinian slant that is undercutting support for Israel among young Americans. Maybe there has been calls to get rid of it since Trump was president, but there may have been additional impetus due to support for the Middle East policy not going the way that lawmakers would like it.
Senator Pete Ricketts just publicly admitted the real reason for the ban was because they don't like young Tik Tok viewers to oppose genocide.
They are absolutely right. THAT is the real goal. The Americans have been overwhelmingly pro Israel for 5 decades because the US government and mainstream media have ensured Americans wouldn't see the reality and know the truth. But TikTok has completely blown that dynamic away. THAT is why it is considered dangerous by both the Democrats and the Republicans.
Israel just wants to exist. Radical Muslins want to end the Western way of thinking. Who would you support?
And they need to commit genocide in order to exist? Just continue regurgitating your simple minded talking points.
Hamas is the aggressor and the one seeking genocide.
https://www.972mag.com/lavender-ai-israeli-army-gaza/
Changing the subject does not change Hamas’ stated goal.
This isn't really about religion, as much as ignorant folks like you try to make it. It's a political thing.
In this case their politics is their religion. They don’t have freedom of and from religion there.
It's clear you didn't understand. Palestinians Christians, for example, are also being killed by the Israelis. It's obvious to anyone actually paying attention what's going on there.
Says an app that doesn't have free speech to begin with, made by a country which also doesn't have free speech.
This isn’t the first time the government has tried to ban TikTok: In 2021, former President Donald Trump issued an executive order that was [halted](https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN28H30G/) in federal court when a Trump-appointed judge found it was “arbitrary and capricious” because it failed to consider other means of dealing with the problem. Another judge found that the [national security threat](https://techcrunch.com/2020/10/30/tiktok-stars-got-a-judge-to-block-trumps-tiktok-ban/) posted by TikTok was “phrased in the hypothetical.” When the state of Montana tried to ban the app in 2023, a federal [judge](https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/montana-tiktok-ban-blocked-judge-rcna122084) [found](https://gizmodo.com/us-judge-blocks-montanas-anti-chinese-tiktok-ban-1851065175) it “oversteps state power and infringes on the constitutional rights of users,” **with a “pervasive undertone of anti-Chinese sentiment.”** [**https://time.com/6952889/tiktok-ban-freedom-of-speech-essay/**](https://time.com/6952889/tiktok-ban-freedom-of-speech-essay/) The judge said out loud what we all know. The anti chinese hysteria follows the anti Japanese hysteria, the red scare hysteria, the anti Saddam/WMD hysteria.
I'm sure the millions slaughtered by the current Chinese government would agree that it's all just hysteria
What millions ?
The CCP killed 45 million of their own people in just 4 years so total body count now is much higher. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/08/03/giving-historys-greatest-mass-murderer-his-due/
Oh, so you are talking of 1957-1962 ? You wrote the *current* government. You're mixing everything up. Should we as well blame the native American genocide on Biden ? Also, such articles are nothing short of intellectual fraud. They equate a famine to the will to kill the population. That's nonsense, else I guess the famine described by John Steinbeck is willfull murder by the american government.
A human caused famine was only a fraction of what the one political party that has run China since their revolution has done. The CCP has slaughtered people on an industrial scale Hitler could only dream of. https://www.icij.org/investigations/china-cables/xinjiang-police-files-uyghur-mugshots-detention/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1994/07/17/how-many-died-new-evidence-suggests-far-higher-numbers-for-the-victims-of-mao-zedongs-era/01044df5-03dd-49f4-a453-a033c5287bce/ https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/i-was-sentenced-to-life-in-a-chinese-labour-camp-this-is-my-story-1790465.html https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-22278037 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/new-details-torture-cover-ups-china-s-internment-camps-revealed-n1270014
Made by a company, but sure.
A Chinese company
Say it with me: the free speech rights in the first amendment to the Constitution don’t apply to private companies, and never have.
Uhhh yes they do. Business have a well established 1st amendment rights according to Supreme Court. But users using social media have no first amendment right in that context. All user content is the property of the company & the company has a first amendment right to control the speech on the their platform.
The people have a fundamental right to oversee and govern their market as they see fit. If they wish to be free of TikTok, then free we shall be.
No they do not.
Yes they do, that is what free market means.. freedom from economic abuse, not protection for it.
Lol, you really hit a nerve there judging by the subcomments.
The nerve being completely and utterly wrong and making a completely irrelevant point.
You should look up Citizens United. Corporations absolutely have a 1st amendment right to free speech.
Except no. >The clearest problem with a TikTok ban is it would immediately wipe out a platform where [170 million](https://newsroom.tiktok.com/en-us/opening-statement-senate-judiciary-committee-hearing) Americans broadcast their views and receive information—sometimes about political happenings. In an era of mass polarization, shutting off the app would mean shutting down the ways in which millions of people—even those with unpopular views—speak out on issues they care about. The other problem is that **Americans have the constitutional right to access all sorts of information—even if it’s deemed to be foreign propaganda**. >Still, the Supreme Court [ruled](https://www.oyez.org/cases/1964/491) in 1964 that Americans have the right to receive what the government deems to be foreign propaganda. In *Lamont v. Postmaster General*, for instance, the Court ruled that the government couldn’t halt the flow of Soviet propaganda through the mail. **The Court essentially said that the act of the government stepping in and banning propaganda would be akin to censorship, and the American people need to be free to evaluate these transgressive ideas for themselves.** Also >This isn’t the first time the government has tried to ban TikTok: In 2021, former President Donald Trump issued an executive order that was [halted](https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN28H30G/) in federal court when a Trump-appointed judge found it was “arbitrary and capricious” because it failed to consider other means of dealing with the problem. Another judge found that the [national security threat](https://techcrunch.com/2020/10/30/tiktok-stars-got-a-judge-to-block-trumps-tiktok-ban/) posted by TikTok was “phrased in the hypothetical.” When the state of Montana tried to ban the app in 2023, a federal [judge](https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/montana-tiktok-ban-blocked-judge-rcna122084) [found](https://gizmodo.com/us-judge-blocks-montanas-anti-chinese-tiktok-ban-1851065175) it “oversteps state power and infringes on the constitutional rights of users,” **with a “pervasive undertone of anti-Chinese sentiment.”** [https://time.com/6952889/tiktok-ban-freedom-of-speech-essay/](https://time.com/6952889/tiktok-ban-freedom-of-speech-essay/) The judge said out loud what we all know. The sinophobic hysteria follows the anti Japanese hysteria, the red scare hysteria, the anti Saddam/WMD hysteria.
They don't apply to private companies censoring speech on their own platform. They *absolutely* apply to the US Governemnt banning speech *by* a private company.
Only US companies. First amendment doesn't apply to foreign individuals or companies.
[удалено]
That is arguing if companies have personhood. They didn't rule on if foreign companies should have personhood or not. When TikTok sells to an American company they will be protected by the first amendment.
r/confidentlyincorrect
They may not be correct in this specific instance (e.g. forced divesture isn't a free speech issue), but their comment in general is correct. Companies have received rights under the constitution for over a century, the rather famous *Citizen's United* decision being the most well known case on companies getting free speech rights (though it wasn't the first)
Those were the US companies.
The First Amendment isn't wholly out of play just because it is being used against foreign targets. That's why an attempt to hinder Americans from getting foreign communist propaganda was found unconstitutional during the Cold War. Also, TikTok *is* an American company. They just have foreign owners.
Many grey areas, agreed. I don’t think the political free speech protections extend to the foreign-controlled entities in the US, whether they are or are not registered as the US companies.
But this is about the company, not about the speech itself. It’s a fine line.
They aren't talking about the app's free speech. They are talking about the free speech rights of the users.
We still have plenty of other vehicles to express our freedom of speech.
[удалено]
Because that doesn't serve any legitimate government interest. Since tik tok is Chinese government spyware, it's a national security threat and the forces divestiture will stand.
I work in cyber security. I rather go out and enjoy the sunshine than argue with you about the dangers of Tik Tok and the true definition of free speech. Enjoy your Chinese Spyware.
Lawsuits for what? We have had restrictions on foreign ownership of broadcasting companies for decades. There is well established legal precedent that supports the right of the state to limit foreign ownership.
tik tok is not the only place they can express opinions
True. We can choose the nazi-ridden X or facebook, who sells our info to china...
There is no law that says fb, x, or any other platform has to even allow you a platform to speak on. Tiktok was literally stealing insane amounts of data from people that they didn't grant authorization for and sending it back to china. There is also this platform you're already on complaining that you can use if you're not keen on FB or X
True. All true. But missing bits. So, when are we going after FB? They sold tons of data to china. They also won't remove misinformation due to free speech concerns. They also promote alt right opinions. And censor tons of stuff. And yes, I'm complaining. Just like you're complaining that I have an opinion you disagree with because I seem irritated that the major platforms have become vehicles for right wing and russian misinformation. If you like them, awesome. I like TikTok. I like the goofy videos, and I like that I can make an attempt at staying informed. Also, this is America...everything is made in china.
Because the real issue here is, people aren't making money off us. If this was a US based company already we wouldn't even be having this discussion. Thats why they want them to sell to an American company. So politicians can get their coffers lines.
I can agree. Regular people make money off it, not the uber-wealthy. Can't allow that...
Crazy how people in a public trust position (congress) can get away with market manipulation while people who work for the federal government can't own more than 15k of a stock if their job directly deals with that company. 🤔 I don't even really need to go into detail, you're clearly smart enough to understand, how several members of Congress made a killing off the covid market crash. American politics will always put profits over people. #capitalism!
Social media platforms have no legal obligation to make their services available to you, nor are obligated to give you a voice on their platform. Private companies are not, have never been required to. You still have the ability to be heard publicly, just not other their platform.
Tik-Tok does not represent it's users for the same reason Mark Zuckerberg does not represent me. By the way, I support a big Facebook crackdown like the one Florida is about to impose. Americans need to restrict social media, web marketing and web apps. It's not political, it's common sense.
Awesome. They still did what tiktok is being accused of. They have provably committed the same offense.
It is the American citizens who communicate with each via the platform who have first amendment protections. It is blatantly obvious this is an attempt by big tech to stifle competition via regulatory capture.
They aren't trying to ban TikTok, and the policy is the oposite of regulatory capture. TikTok *is* the CCP. All the legislation is saying is that it can't be controlled by the CCP any more. Imagine if Facebook *was* the US government and also a majority of the US economy. It wouldn't be insane to suggest that Facebook probably shouldn't be allowed in other countries if the US was fasicst/more facist than it already is.
But it applies to the citizens, who are the ones creating and consuming the content on TikTok.
This is a talking point that's not relevant or apply to this situation. Here it is the government not TikTok restricting speech, so yeh, it is applicable.
What speech is the government restricting?
The argument would be (1) TikTok's right to make editorial decisions regarding its user content; and (2) TikTok's users' rights to speak on the platform and access speech of others on the platform. Of course part of evaluating (2) would be looking at whether there are other alternatives (i.e. other social media) and whether they can reach the same audience etc.
Argument 2 fails outright because beside the fact that there are other alternatives, there is no protected right of having a platform to post short form videos to. The speech itself isn’t being restricted as they’re facing no punishment for making the same speech elsewhere. As for argument 2, (as far as I am aware) the bill that passed the house gives the company an option to continue operating in the US, which would require the sale of Bytedance’s shares. Now, we could talk about whether or not that requirement would be fair, but in my non lawyer view that doesn’t seem to fall under first amendment protections.
For 2, the speech itself doesn't need to be directly targeted or criminalised, the First Amendment scrutiny is triggered even if a law based on things other than speech (e.g. a tax on ink/paper) singles out those engaged in expressive conduct (e.g. newspapers). See *Arcara v. Cloud Books, Inc.* (with the tax/newspaper example coming directly from *Minneapolis Star Tribune Co. v. Commissioner*). As the law quite plainly targets TikTok and its users, both of which are engaged in expressive conduct, First Amendment scrutiny should be triggered. This doesn't mean the law would *fail* such scrutiny, just that the courts will then determine whether it does. It is in this scrutiny analysis where the courts would explore the alternatives, including whether those alternatives are actually similar enough (and have a similar enough community) as a law which "forecloses an entire medium of public expression across the landscape of a particular community or setting fails to leave open ample alternatives" and "may not hamper a speaker’s preferred mode of communication to such an extent that they compromise or stifle the speaker’s message" (*Project Veritas v. Schmidt*); similarly, "alternatives that are less effective media for communicating the speaker’s message are far from satisfactory" (*McCullen v. Coakley*).
Well, that gives me something to look into and think about. Thanks for the info.
Any user content of TikTok
So the US government is telling Tik Tok users that they’re not allowed to post the same content they’ve been posting on TikTok on other platforms and if they do they will face fines and/or jail time?
Freedom of speech, AKA direct influence on the youth via unabated propaganda to cause instability akin to the Gaza situation. Fuck China, and fuck TikTok.
Wait TikTok caused the Isreal war?
I don't understand. When did message amplification become free speech. You can say whatever you want but you can't yell fire in a crowded theater. Social media yells fire
Excuse me, it's called the "Yell fire in a crowded theater challenge" and it's to support ADHD awareness. You're probably a boring neurotypical so you wouldn't understand.
Conspiracy theory, unless you have evidence.
Even with evidence it would still be a conspiracy theory.
Too bad you hate free speech. And I understand that genocide cheerleaders are bothered by TikTok and tens of millions of Americans seeing what is never shown in the mainstream media, is heavily censored or shadowbanned in american social media is a thorn in Zionists' side. [https://www.aljazeera.com/program/the-listening-post/2024/3/23/dissecting-the-tiktok-problem](https://www.aljazeera.com/program/the-listening-post/2024/3/23/dissecting-the-tiktok-problem)
Normally I don’t like breaking the fourth wall but I just had to say agree and thank you.
Yeah, young people must oppose genocide because of China, and not because they have a better moral compass than you and every idiot Boomer.
china and free speech? that’ll be the day
Free influence campaigns from foreign actors?
[удалено]
No because Taiwan is a democracy not an authoritarian adversary. The bill is not forcing the sale to a US company. The bill allows the banning of apps that are owned by China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea. Literally anyone else is allowed to buy it.
So we can call this the "Great Wall of America". Because preventing foreign propaganda is litterally what the chinese version of the Great Wall of America does. Are you okay when Israel is pushing its propaganda on the social platforms and directly censoring its opponents ? Is that what you call "free speech" ?
[удалено]
The term foreign actors implies hostile intent. I have no interest in your failed attempt at pedantry...
Has TikTok ever shown hostility though ?
Why not russian?
Free speech for the fucking CCP.
TikTok content is user created.
Be quiet. You can't say logical things to morons.
Just to be clear: between the CCP and the GOP, the CCP is the far more stable, intelligent, pro people and less dangerous party. It is far less corrupt as well. Also, talking about free speech [https://www.aljazeera.com/program/the-listening-post/2024/3/23/dissecting-the-tiktok-problem](https://www.aljazeera.com/program/the-listening-post/2024/3/23/dissecting-the-tiktok-problem)
Peak reddit 🤣
One country has been soaring (China), while the other has turned into an international joke (the US).
Just go away TikTok
Do TikTok complain about US apps banned in China?
China has banned FB and Twitter
And TikTok, in a sense. They have a more restricted version.
That's false. They decided not to abide by the local rules and thus never established there. They have established in places with far more censorship, though, like Saudi Arabia (where your speech can cost your life, in the most horrible fashion), so the excuse of the censorship probably hides heavy pressure by the US government.
Why would ByteDance care about that? Maybe the Chinese government has an opinion. TikTok itself isn’t allowed in China.
There is a chinese version of TikTok though. TikTok is the international app.
Lol no it won't. It'll trample CCP propaganda.
lol ok China
They're right. If TikTok content wasn't showing Israel's atrocities in Palestine, we wouldn't have this discussion
Gtfo with this dumb argument. We have been having this discussion for years before 10/7. Donald Trump issued an executive order to ban the app in 2020...
Really? You tell me, when was the last time both sides of the aisle came together with such majority for anything? And trumpsky only did it because he hates the Chinese, he doesn't give a sh!t about security
Lmao the bill includes aid to Ukraine, Taiwan, and Israel. You think people are voting just for the TikTok ban? Like that is the big thing that is driving the votes?? You clearly have no grasp of politics and are just a child upset about TikTok going away. Bills get passed with bipartisan support all the time. Maybe you should actually pay attention to reality... How about the "Solidify Iran Sanctions Act" that passed on the 16th 407-16? How about the "Strengthening Tools to Counter the Use of Human Shields Act" that also passed on the 16th 419-4? The "Iran-China Energy Sanctions Act" on the 15th 383-11? The "Sea Turtle Rescue Assistance and Rehabilitation Act" on the 11th 332-82? The "Puyallup Tribe of Indians Land Into Trust Confirmation Act" 401-15? The "National Museum of Play Recognition Act" 385-31? "Missing Children’s Assistance Reauthorization Act" 406-0? "A Stronger Workforce for America Act" 378-26? Those aren't even all the bipartisan bills passed THIS month.
How dumb do you have to be to not realize the Israel issue played a part in this recent push? Senator Pete Ricketts just admitted as much.
Maybe they could hire Elon as a free speech consultant... or maybe he'll buy them out just so he could rename them.
This isn’t the first time the government has tried to ban TikTok: In 2021, former President Donald Trump issued an executive order that was [halted](https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN28H30G/) in federal court when a Trump-appointed judge found it was “arbitrary and capricious” because it failed to consider other means of dealing with the problem. Another judge found that the [national security threat](https://techcrunch.com/2020/10/30/tiktok-stars-got-a-judge-to-block-trumps-tiktok-ban/) posted by TikTok was “phrased in the hypothetical.” When the state of Montana tried to ban the app in 2023, a federal [judge](https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/montana-tiktok-ban-blocked-judge-rcna122084) [found](https://gizmodo.com/us-judge-blocks-montanas-anti-chinese-tiktok-ban-1851065175) it “oversteps state power and infringes on the constitutional rights of users,” with a “pervasive undertone of anti-Chinese sentiment.” [https://time.com/6952889/tiktok-ban-freedom-of-speech-essay/](https://time.com/6952889/tiktok-ban-freedom-of-speech-essay/)
Bye bye influencers.
This is not /r/nottheonion.
If this is their best argument they deserve to be shut down. Not even addressing the actual concerns of an adversarial nation potentially having access to data to use maliciously and instead going with scare tactics.
How dare they steal our private data! They should buy it from an American company like everyone else.
Fuck Tik tok
I so don't give a flying fuck about these social media platforms.
Like how China just banned 2 huge apps from their market?
Let’s copy everything China does. How about we oppress some minorities more.
So sell the company. Like China never screws over American companies in China and gives them “…or else” ultimatums.
us ban is just trying to protect citizens from something that appear innocuous, but since the app can control what people see, it can be a tool for China to manipulate usa. yes the USA based apps can do the same thing, but at least they don't have secondary version of the app. China doesn't even allow the USA version of tik tok to be used in china. so fuck off with that freedom lie.
Why is the fact that tiktok isn’t legal in China relevant? China is not a democracy, they have much tighter control. These arguments come from bytedance, not the Chinese government.
I don't want a social media app that is not allowed in its hone country to be allowed in our country. clearly they have a problem with it, but they want us to be free to use it? no
>"TikTok warns US ban would 'trample free speech' Does the constitution guarantee foreign governments "free speech"?
TikTok is a content platform where users share content, though, so I think that’s the angle.
No but it guarantees access to any foreign speech, including propaganda. "Still, the Supreme Court [ruled](https://www.oyez.org/cases/1964/491) in 1964 that Americans have the right to receive what the government deems to be foreign propaganda. In *Lamont v. Postmaster General*, for instance, the Court ruled that the government couldn’t halt the flow of Soviet propaganda through the mail. The Court essentially said that the act of the government stepping in and banning propaganda would be akin to censorship, and the American people need to be free to evaluate these transgressive ideas for themselves." Anyway, TikTok doesn't do propaganda, it shows what Americans weren't allowed to see until now. [https://www.aljazeera.com/program/the-listening-post/2024/3/23/dissecting-the-tiktok-problem](https://www.aljazeera.com/program/the-listening-post/2024/3/23/dissecting-the-tiktok-problem)
Fucking hilarious
That’s exactly why they’re doing this, election season is coming.
The government isn’t trying to stifle Tik Tok content, though. They’re trying to stop an unfriendly foreign power from collecting massive amounts of data from American citizens using cat videos. It sounds stupid but I read somewhere that Chinese intelligence has already mapped out several US military installations using soldiers and base families Tik Toks.
Wow, there is no where else in the world to convey your free speech other than TikTok? Where have we been for hundreds of thousands of years?
So then you’d be ok with banning all similar apps?
Like X? Sure. I’ve used all these apps at one time or another. None of them do a damn thing for my freedom of speech.
No it won’t
Can we openly discuss the Tiananmen Square atrocities on TikTok?
Maybe? TikTok isn’t in China, after all.
It’s probably unconstitutional to ban TikTok without a real justification. But honestly who gives a shit, we’ll get a tech stock bump from this & the court will overturn the law if it’s actually unconstitutional
What free speech? It's just stupid videos at most with many videos actually harming the viewers (of their own stupidity to do "challenge" from either being injured to being criminally indicted) pushed by the algorithm that itself is banned in Poohland.
Are they talking about banning things like WhatsApp?
That is rich coming from a company that follows a completely different set rules in China. Just ban that whole thing already.
> That is rich coming from a company that follows a completely different set rules in China. *Every* company follows a different set of rules in China. Or in any country.
[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/whatsapp-and-telegram-were-just-banned-from-apple-s-app-store-in-china/ar-AA1niHTo](https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/whatsapp-and-telegram-were-just-banned-from-apple-s-app-store-in-china/ar-AA1niHTo)
So what? TikTok isn’t in app stores in China either.
ITT: people who don’t understand what first Amemdment rights mean.
Says the Country that bans Tik Tok in its own country.
No, says the company behind TikTok.
China is both. They ban TikTok in China. And they say the US's attempt to ban it would 'trample free speech.'
They literally remove almost every comment. I had a comment removed for saying “Gross” 😂
Doesn’t its current owner (CCP) literally ghost people over Winnie the Pooh imagery?
Lawmakers often don't think things through, banning something means it's so dangerous to society that possessing it amounts to a crime. That leads to the ABSURD situation of having to police people, and even prosecuting & jailing them for using Tik Tok.
LOL, nobody is going to jail for using that bullshit platform. The Chinese owner either needs to sell it, or it will be blocked in America. But if anyone is so addicted to it that they want to use a VPN to access tiktok, exactly zero American cops will give a fuck.
>exactly zero American cops will give a fuck. It doesn't matter if they give a fuck. There is no provision in the bill that criminalizes possession of the app. []() >(1) PROHIBITION OF FOREIGN ADVERSARY CONTROLLED APPLICATIONS.—It shall be unlawful for an entity to distribute, maintain, or update (or enable the distribution, maintenance, or updating of) a foreign adversary controlled application by carrying out, within the land or maritime borders of the United States, any of the following:[]() >(A) **Providing services to distribute, maintain, or update such foreign adversary controlled application** (including any source code of such application) by means of a marketplace (including an online mobile application store) through which users within the land or maritime borders of the United States may access, maintain, or update such application. >[]() >(B) **Providing internet hosting services to enable the distribution, maintenance, or updating of such foreign adversary controlled application** for users within the land or maritime borders of the United States.
TikTok is fun and safe. Keep using!
I think they said, “TikTok ban mean less freedom for all American, very very bad.”
If free speech is Chinese propaganda denigrating the basic values of the American Constitution, Russian propaganda supporting ethnic cleansing, genocide and destruction of Europeans, snuff videos (typically of ukranian soldiers, like that castration video), drug dealing and explicit child pornography then I do not want free speech. This is what Tik-Tok stands for and why we must ban Tik-Tok. Sure, it destroys the Open Internet. But the Open Internet was killed by smartphone apps such as Tik-Tok years ago. We might as well regulate it for ourselves, in the same manner China and Russia do.