TikTok says it offered the US government the power to shut the platform down in an attempt to address lawmakers’ data protection and national security concerns.
It disclosed the “kill switch” offer, which it made in 2022, as it began its legal fight against legislation that will ban the app in America unless Chinese parent company ByteDance sells it.
The law has been introduced because of concerns TikTok might share US user data with the Chinese government - claims it and ByteDance have always denied.
TikTok and ByteDance are urging the courts to strike the legislation down.
“This law is a radical departure from this country’s tradition of championing an open Internet, and sets a dangerous precedent allowing the political branches to target a disfavored speech platform and force it to sell or be shut down,” they argued in their legal submission.
They also claimed the US government refused to engage in any serious settlement talks after 2022, and pointed to the “kill switch” offer as evidence of the lengths they had been prepared to go.
There is a substantial difference between posting content to a platform trying to influence people, and actually changing the platform algorithm to surface or suppress ideas a foreign (or even domestic) state likes or doesn’t.
Lemmy certainly doesn’t have the second type. And even american commercial social media sites don’t really do it for a specific political agenda; For them it’s only about whatever’s more profitable.
Lemmy is an open system in and of itself, and the resultant platform algorithms are open by design, it’s just wishful nonsense to think a state actor can’t ‘surface or suppress’ ideas even here with a little effort.
And even american commercial social media sites don’t really do it for a specific political agenda
Oh my sweet summer child, we’re at the coercion of news media redux for social media…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_surveillance_in_the_United_States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens'_Commission_to_Investigate_the_FBI
https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/hearings/ciasuseofjournal00unit.pdf
https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/cia-rdp91-00901r000500050029-0
And all of those examples are about parts of the US government stopping other parts of the same government from trying to get our corporations to do what they want. China has no system to control itself like that. It doesn’t have to ask BiteDance anything; They own it and would shut it down in a heartbeat if they couldn’t absolutely control it.
What?
Those examples are after-it-actually-happened reports of the US government actively getting corporations to do what they want.
Get your head out of the sand.
I don’t trust China, but I’m not going to lie to myself to feel better about a political hitjob, even if Bytedance has it’s multinational corporate governance primarily under China.
Kapersky is the example you want to point at for an example of a bad actor corp capturing classified data and sending it to an adversarial government. TikTok just trended anti-political messages for a few different popular politicians and lit a match as a result.
How could you post so many links about social media influence on politics and miss the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica scandal?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook–Cambridge_Analytica_data_scandal
