The TikTok Problem Is Not What You Think

[BootinUp]

Matt Stoller at BIG writes

There are many reasons members agreed to support this legislation, and there are open questions about what will happen in the Senate, and then what happens in the marketplace if this bill gets signed into law. There are also many objections, such as the claim that this legislation is an abridgment of free speech, that it’s xenophobic, that it will jeopardize the hard work of creators or businesses who depend on TikTok, or that addressing TikTok ownership shouldn’t happen because we haven’t passed basic privacy protections or regulated social media in any significant way.

While I support the bill, and find most of these objections lacking in credibility, there is some legitimacy to the skepticism, which I’ll get into. But what I want to offer is some basic framing, which is that this legislation has to be understood not as a substitute to a broader movement for reform of social media and privacy, but as part of it. And there are two basic points here. The first is while it’s true that Congress hasn’t passed a ‘comprehensive Federal privacy law,’ it’s also true the Biden administration is orchestrating a remarkable revolution in privacy protections by resurrecting old legal tools. There are reasons you haven’t heard of this revolution that have to do with the incentives of privacy scholars, but the litigation here is fierce and deeply bitter. The second is those who say ‘we can’t even regulate social media and now you want to divest TikTok’s ownership!’ have it 180 degrees backwards. Being able to address Chinese ownership of one video sharing platform is part of the movement to reform all platforms.

Ok, let’s dive in.

Biden Rewrites the Rules of the Internet
Two months ago, the Network Advertising Initiative (NAI), an advertising trade association composed of data brokers and tech giants like Google and Adobe, announced it was developing new industry standards for corporations who “collect and process sensitive consumer location data.” It might have seemed like a one off, except that major law firms were also sending out alerts and information to clients telling them to just stop using certain location data to target individuals. It turns out, people really don’t like it when corporations, or employers, abusers, etc know when they go to the doctor, church, a political rally, a gay bar, and so forth. And the industry of data brokers was listening.

Why? Well it’s because of a little noticed but pivotal legal change in enforcement by the Federal Trade Commission in a series of privacy cases. Traditionally, brokers could do anything they wanted with your data (with a few exceptions), as long as they disclosed they were doing it. So usually there was some long web form that you’d click on, and that’s it, your data is now their data. That’s the ‘notice and consent’ framework. The FTC brought cases, but these were under the framework of deception, not using your sensitive data but lying to you about it. Brokers could also fix this situation with another impenetrable click-through screen you wouldn’t notice. But in August of 2022, the commission brought a different kind of case, against a data broker called Kochava, arguing that collecting and using certain kinds of data, whether that was disclosed or not, was unfair. It was a novel legal claim, and it wasn’t clear if a judge would ratify it.

Continued

[Lovie777]

1. From what I'm reading............................

Tik Tok will remain operational but under another controller, i.e. supervised and run by an arm of the USA.

I think.

[BootinUp]

2. Its a nice illusion. nt

[mzmolly]

12. Which arm of the USA?

American oligarchs who support Trump?

[cachukis]

3. Great discussion of the background.

[58Sunliner]

4. Why now? Republicans want to buy the platform youth uses.

Big mistake IMO.

[Uncle Joe]

72. I believe it's just part of *rumps' reelection campaign which he started in 2020

while he was in the White House with his executive order.

He just now flipped on the issue, because he knows young people love it, but he also knew that when he proposed banning it in the first place.

So whichever side on the issue that President Biden decides to come down, rump will just take the opposite.

Either it will be "Biden succumbs to Chinese communist capitulation" or *rump believes it will help him and hurt Biden with young people, progressives and strong advocates of the 1st Amendment.

[58Sunliner]

73. He flipped because they are trying to buy it.

Same group minus Musk who bought Twitter-how did that go? The Saudis apparently don't want a medium that people can use that is US based that they can't control. They, collectively, want another avenue of abuse and disinfo and the ability to track people-dissidents.

[Lovie777]

5. I'm under the impression that Tic or Tix Tok will not fall into the...................

arms of the RWers.

[Scrivener7]

7. Steve Mnuchin is putting together a group to buy it. So there is every possibility that it will.

[ancianita]

38. Where are the links related to all this part about Mnuchin? No one's posting them.

[Ponietz]

63. Yesterday:

[link:https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143208897|

[ancianita]

68. I see. Thank you.

I usually don't miss BRDS's posts. So again, thanks!

[Scrivener7]

6. Here's where he lost me:

But the partisan nature of executive leadership simply cannot be a key factor in how we think about this problem, certainly not above concern over foreign ownership of platforms. All people have biases, but more importantly, all executives with access to the amount of capital necessary to buy and run a platform are going to prioritize their own profits above any political bias. Importantly, this is not true about China, because nation-states prioritize geopolitical ambitions over profits.

I could not disagree with this more. He's saying putting Tik Tok into the hands of MAGA is totally preferable to keeping it where it is. He's saying MAGA buyers will be just fine and run it fairly because they'll be motivated by profits and not their insanity. We've seen how that works on AM radio. This will be thousands of times worse.

He's just dead wrong there.

China, with all the problems it represents, is infinitely preferable as Tik Tok's owner to Steve Mnuchin and his MAGA investment group.

[BootinUp]

9. We will have to disagree. nt

[ancianita]

10. Why would you think this...

China, with all the problems it represents, is infinitely preferable as Tik Tok's owner to Steve Mnuchin and his MAGA investment group.

Another perspective:
Steve Mnuchin and MAGA investment are under legal regulation jurisdiction in the US. Nothing China does can be controlled, only reacted to.
China offers our billionaire class a piece of their action without any guarantee that the nation they live in will be secure from the stealth cyber actions of this powerful & hostile world competitor.
These decisions are pro-active, and more far reaching in curbing the billionaire class's dealings with China (which can harm the US without international recourse) than the billionaire class's grifty manipulations of MAGA, which they use as domestic distraction but which, under the umbrella of national security, can be legally manageable.

[Scrivener7]

15. They aren't going to use this as a "domestic distraction." This is a right wing attempt to take over social media.

If they secure Tik Tok, they will have locked down the major three.

Paradoxically, China actually DOES have a profit incentive not to fall off the American political system's deep end.

And PS: NOTHING you do on social media, whether China owns it, Zuckerberg owns it or Musk owns it, is secure from stealth cyber actions by powerful and hostile forces. Look at what Zuckerberg did in the 2016 election.

[BootinUp]

19. The current situation on Facebook and Instragram/Threads

is far better than it was in 2016 (correct me if I am wrong). That is precisely because it is an American company. Meanwhile TikTok/China is experimenting with how to fuck us over. Is Biden and his team really so wrong?

[Scrivener7]

21. If it gives Tik Tok to MAGA, yes this is really so wrong.

[ancianita]

28. Maybe not. Who knows the mind of the billionaire class but through their actions both seen and reported.

China has more profit incentive to weaken this country while it builds data/product markets in the Southern Hemisphere.

The fact that Zuckerberg has changed FB since 2016 (not just putting more attention into AI market power, but having to send compensation checks to its users -- I've received four -- for his stealth uses of facial recog gathering and sales) shows the administration's pressures work, perhaps not as much as WE want, but nevertheless. That's an old example from Obama days. Another example is how studies show that FB helped get out the youth vote in 2012. The company paid a record $5 billion fine to the Federal Trade Commission in 2019 over the Cambridge Analytica scandal. Zuckerberg's shifted in his allegiance to American interests, even if Musk hasn't.

To buy into the belief that there's nothing this administration can do -- nevermind WE -- is to, wittingly or not, buy into the rw "politics of inevitability," something Russia and China have established in their autocratic market and political ecosystems. I'd never endorse that Biden do anything but what he's having his teams do to continue his long term goals of protecting Americans' privacy, and in doing that, protecting our national security.

[Scrivener7]

32. He has sent you checks for stealth uses of facial recognition gathering and sales. He sent you checks for that.

Do you get it?

He took your information and sold it. Then a law was passed and you got a check. You have NO idea whether the checks you received represent a fair price for the sale of all your data. And the sale of all your data was done without your permission. There is NO fair price for that, in my opinion. And I guarantee they made a ton more on your information than those checks they sent you.

And do you believe they have stopped collecting that data? Do you have any proof they have stopped selling it? The fact is, you didn't know when they did it the first time and you don't know if they're doing it now.

You use social media at your own risk. The social media companies will occasionally pay fees and appear before congressional committees for the absolutely enormous violations of your privacy because those are prices of doing business. But the reality is neither Biden's government nor any other has control over it.

Your comment on "buying into right wing inevitability" is just silly. This is happening. If Mnuchin and Trump and MAGA get control of TikTok, do you REALLY think it won't be disastrous to our Democracy?

Someone here is buying into something, but it's not me.

[ancianita]

37. I hear you. But you need to hear that it COST Zuckerberg. The government you fault will

always be slower to keep up with technological advancements, but the Biden administration is getting there nonetheless, in preempting future abuses of third party access to data.

I haven't read that Mnuchin and MAGA will buy TikTok. Can you link that? Because the OP article doesn't mention it.

[Scrivener7]

43. And again. I guarantee the cost compared to the revenue was miniscule.

I am not faulting any government. I am simply stating a fact. Social media companies are black boxes. Their algorithms are proprietary. Nothing yet has changed that. They can be doing anything they want inside that box and neither Biden nor you nor me nor anyone else would know it.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/14/business/steven-mnuchin-tiktok/index.html?cid=external-feeds_iluminar_msn

[ancianita]

41. About this... Neither do you know that they do. Why do you think the Biden FTC's tackling this at all. So we DO know.

And do you believe they have stopped collecting that data? Do you have any proof they have stopped selling it? The fact is, you didn't know when they did it the first time and you don't know if they're doing it now.

"Buying into something" that you link no proof for. What you DO have are FTC rulings backed up by courts that give power to regulators of platforms.

I know who's buying into fear and distrust of our current administration, and it's not me.

[Scrivener7]

44. Oh, Lord. Have a nice day.

[ancianita]

62. lol you, too

[mzmolly]

13. I fully agree with you.

I don’t think China likes Trump. I’m in agreement with China.

[ancianita]

8. An excellent analysis that underscores just how brilliant Joe Biden's administration is, and how media

do well when they keep up with its wise goals for the country. It's time we caught up with the EU through court rulings that validate the FTC and its regulations of privacy data and marketing uses. Concerns about China are just the tip of the issues the Biden administration is tackling.

[mzmolly]

14. Then the Biden administration should tackle all of the issues

at once. Typically I would agree with the administration. I don’t think you can piecemeal this.

[Scrivener7]

16. I think, while you don't have a fully cooperative legislative branch, you can ONLY do it piecemeal.

[mzmolly]

47. Then don't do it now.

Eom

[Scrivener7]

49. I disagree with that. Getting any control over this, if that's even possible, will take years if not decades.

Right now we have none. You have to start somewhere.

[mzmolly]

50. That'll sell well. Just like "defund police" -

“Ban TikTok” - people are already tuned out and pissed off.

[Scrivener7]

52. I never said I was for banning tiktok, and I'm not for it. Not sure where you got that.

[mzmolly]

58. Pardon my reactionary misunderstanding.

[Scrivener7]

64. No worries!

[ancianita]

20. Making the perfect the enemy of the good? First things first: build legal precedent. That's not a piecemeal

approach. That's the rule of law approach. So far, the administration is winning this data regulation war.

[redqueen]

27. Then why aren't they tackling election machines / software first?

Why is TikTok the top priority?

[ancianita]

36. I thought the elections machines' viability had been tested in the courts? Do you have links to back up what you

say is an 'untackled' problem? Are you thinking what rethugs think? That there's evidence that machine voting isn't to be trusted? They not only think that, but they give their voters no other alternatives by bashing early and mail in voting,

If it hasn't hit the courts, then we need links to show how machine voting has failed. And if there is proof they've failed, why haven't they been sued?

[mzmolly]

48. It's not good without considering the outcome.

At this point, we have a gaggle of wealthy Trumpers with an agenda offering to buy in. No thanks!

[mzmolly]

11. Let's deal with it after Biden is reelected & on a more comprehensive level.

The convoluted rationale, no matter how reasonable it may be, is not going to turn out youth voters.

[moniss]

18. It will be for

voter suppression.

[moniss]

17. When I look at Tik Tok

I see such a prevalence of fake videos that for any thinking person are obvious. Like someone walking past the cops and then spinning like a cartwheel 6 feet in the air while doing 3 full twists etc. So with Gen "whatever" glued to their device 24/7 you can imagine how many faked videos are going to appear about the election. You can also be assured that somehow the denials/corrections will be "conveniently" limited. At the very least it would be the kind of thing like we saw last time with faked crowds, locations etc. Think Cambridge Analytica on steroids.

[Scrivener7]

22. And the Cambridge Analytica crap happened because Zuckerberg made it happen in his fully US owned company

[redqueen]

25. With zero calls to ban it.

Pretty revealing

[Scrivener7]

29. Lots of folks here were quite sneery when concerns were raised. They insisted there was nothing wrong

with Facebook. Sharing photos of restaurant meals and the grandkids was more important, and there was no other way in the universe to do that without enriching a traitor to the United States.

[redqueen]

31. Ugh. Glad I wasn't here to see that.

That misogynistic asshole took payment IN RUBLES for political ads.

[Scrivener7]

34. And installed a team in Trump Tower to help Cambridge Analytica identify likely targets to apply psy ops to to get them

to radicalize for him or agitate against Hillary.

[mzmolly]

51. What makes you think that will not happen

with TikTok?

[dlk]

23. Doesn't the Chinese government control the TikTok algorithms?

Therein lies the problem.

[Scrivener7]

26. And Musk controls the X algorithms, and Zuckerberg, who gave Facebook over to Jared to use as his

personal database in the 2016 election, controls the Meta/Facebook algorithm.

And if Mnuchin has his way, he and Trump and their allies will control the TikTok algorithm after the sale. To me, that's a worse problem.

[Elessar Zappa]

33. Facebook's algorithms aren't near as bad anymore.

Musk’s platform is bad as is TikTok. I’m not sure what my position is on this bill. I keep going back and forth.

[Scrivener7]

35. Are you sure about that? What makes you think so?

The fact is, no one knows what the Facebook algorithms are like other than Facebook employees. And apparently they are often siloed from each other to prevent them from knowing much.

[Elessar Zappa]

54. Just personal experience and what I've read.

I’m not seeing right wing crap like I did in 2020 and especially 2016.

[Scrivener7]

56. That just means they have identified you as a non-productive target for the right wing.

It doesn't mean they have any less influence on the right wing, or on those who could be persuaded to become right wing.

In a way, that just means they're more efficient .

[SouthernDem4ever]

39. They are all worse and need comprehensive legislation

but as far as tik tok goes, nothing can be done with it since it's current owners are under Chinese control. If everyone is afraid it falls into maga hands, just don't have it at all, right?

[Scrivener7]

45. I wouldn't care. I hate social media, for all these reasons, and don't use any but DU. But I don't think anyone

has the political standing to just junk it. There would be hell to pay.

[SouthernDem4ever]

46. You may be right that's it's a catch22

Try and fix social media and lose votes or just let it stay rogue and ruin everything anyway.

[dlk]

53. The big problem with the algorithms is that the user is the product to be monetized

Our personal data is being looted by the social media companies for their own profit. Our personal data is ours should belong to us.

[Scrivener7]

55. I used to say if you use social media, you have to be aware that is happening and that you are agreeing

to it. Because I believe this, the only social media I use is DU.

BUT we have now gotten to the point where it almost doesn't matter if you use it or not. They are such octopuses, they're getting your data anyway and doing whatever they want with it without any regard to your permission or wishes. I'm sure there is almost as much of my data out there as social media users.

[Voltaire2]

65. there is no evidence that the chinese government 'controls the algorithm' of tik tok.

[dlk]

67. Controls the data...

[Voltaire2]

69. two different things but not the data either.

I don't see conclusive evidence that US personal data is being shared with China. I see speculation that some of it might be, despite Tik Tok having agreed to and implemented a process to keep US data stored here in the US.

[redqueen]

24. I am disgusted that this issue is being treated seriously while our election system is still vulnerable

About ready to just give up any hope at this point

[BootinUp]

30. I greatly admire your passion.

Do not give up. Keep an open mind that others on your side might be right some times.

[SouthernDem4ever]

40. What makes you think the election system security isn't being dealt with?

I am just asking because the last election was depicted as the most secure in history. Were they lying?

[redqueen]

57. Thread on GD has other articles

This more recent piece reports the issues as well

https://pulitzercenter.org/stories/transparent-open-source-vision-us-elections

[FakeNoose]

42. K & R bookmarking

Thank you!

[OAITW r.2.0]

59. I don't use Tik-Toc, X, Facebook, but I am interested in what happens with DU.

I can imagine a scenario where some rich RW billionaire offers EarlG and elad, say, $5MM to buy DU. Obviously, it would include a non-compete clause to keep them from starting a new DU. Approximately 5 minutes after the sale is complete, DU goes offline, forever. Then what?

[BootinUp]

60. I refuse to accept this argument that we

Decide National Security based on what apps we like. And did you try the article? There is some good information there.

[mzmolly]

61. Trump is the bigger danger to our collective

security. We better be sure this move doesn’t end up helping him win.

[BootinUp]

66. I believe this is a situation where we take

A stand on principle. The chips will come later.

[OAITW r.2.0]

70. Argument? It's a real concern.

RW money could change anybody's perspective. That's how you kill Left of Center discussions.

[BootinUp]

71. Not sure I follow what you mean.

There are always concerns. I agree with the article I posted in this case.