News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
It's not simply about collecting data. That's only part of the problem.
Why do people keep repeating this like it's the only thing.
Tiktok controls the algorithm controlling which clips get shown. Combined with the data, this means they can propaganda individuals so hard it will make your head spin.
Yeah! Only Facebook can propagandize my sweet ass!
This is not an argument against banning TikTok. This is an argument for banning Facebook (and all other centralized social media) right along with it.
No shit. Who cares about TikTok?
Being consistent is considered a good thing. Ban one, ban none.
The only thing Facebook cares about is pushing propaganda for is profit.
China has a far more nefarious goal.
...Profit but Chinese?
Until you have an open source algorithm then any organization controlling a social media site can push propaganda. Just like they do here in the US.
The reason that Tiktok is being banned has nothing to do with data. We know this because you can just buy data about Americans legally from data brokers. This isn't about Chinese propaganda either. The real reason is that Tiktok is not easily put on a leash by the federal government. The real reason is that Tiktok has a large amount of popular leftist and anti-establishment voices. The real reason is that the US wants to funnel people into the social media sites that jump when the government tells them to.
Not leftist; pro-China. There's some pretty clear indications that TikTok suppresses posts critical of China and China's interests--despite those topics generating high engagement--while not suppressing information, say, critical of the US. They're clearly acting as an agent of the Chinese gov't.
That's the thing about state media from China & Russia & Iran. Yes, they are censored in the sense they aren't going to be critical of their host country.
However they are also a means by which certain anti-establishment voices from the West are able to get a platform. For example RT will historically interview people like Chomsky. It's not because Chomsky ideologically aligns with Russia. It's because "enemy of my enemy is my friend". So just because something is censored in one direction, it does not mean everything else on the platform is false.
So if we go to TikTok, China is perfectly fine with certain leftist anti-establishment media whereas it would be algorithm'd away on the other major social media sites.
Again, it has nothing to do with TikTok being pro China. It has everything to do with the US government not being able to control what is on the platform for their own interests. TikTok does not have to answer to the US, and instead of us being OK with that because we're a free country- we're cracking down on dissent because we are becoming increasingly authoritarian.
People on the left in the west have plenty of platforms; they just don't see the kinds of engagement that other ideologies do. To paraphrase, the right looks for coverts, the left looks for traitors. People on the left in the west are honestly their own worst enemy; they do a bang-up job at gate-keeping and pushing people away over minor ideological differences, and that drives engagement down.
Correct. But it does answer to China. And that's a problem. Independent social media isn't a problem; social media under the direct authority of a hostile authoritarian gov't is.
The propaganda here is being pushed generate profit.
In China it's being pushed for political power.
There is a difference.
when large tech companies invest and support specific political candidates and take certain politically minded moves- it's for profit.
but if i'm acting in a political manner for profit versus i'm acting in a profitable manner for politics - what is the functional difference?
there is less difference between the chinese system and the US system than many would like to think. the main difference is where the source of the power lies. in the US it's corporate - in China it's the state. but what we have been seeing in the last couple decades is both of them are experiencing a convergent evolution into a merging of corporate and state power. coincidentally it's what many scholars identify as one of the major tenants of fascism in Germany & Italy
The functional difference is the desired outcome.
China wants to control citizens even more than the US government does, by a massive margin.
Just look at the censorship China already has in place, the actual genocide of minorities, and look at what they'd love to be doing to Taiwan (and what they already did to Hong Kong)
Despite what the Cheeto says, the US isn't going to be invading anywhere to expand the US.
neither US and China need to aggressively invade countries to expand and maintain their power base. modern imperialism is propagated economically, through proxy wars, and fought in the ideological space. all things the US and China both work very hard to accomplish
but we are talking about the economic systems of both countries. the fact that large corporations are becoming increasingly chummy with the state. we are starting to look more like China as China has liberalized and looks more like us