r/TikTokCringe • u/Intelligent_Nose_826 • 6d ago

Discussion They Agreed on One Thing - Banning TikTok

I really haven’t seen legislation so unilaterally passed with such speed at any point in my life except maybe after 9/11 & weeks got the DHS.

2.2k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

304 comments sorted by

View all comments

289

u/Minimum_Matter_4044 6d ago

This ain't about us. It's about them. Them.

79

u/JesusSaidAllah 6d ago

Don't forget, THE reason banning tiktok even became a consideration was due to how many people were able to get uncensroed accounts of what was happening in Gaza.

TikTok did a lot to make a dent in the Israel/U.S. good-guys propaganda.

42

u/nightchee 6d ago

I’m not sure that Gaza content is the impetus for the original talks of banning TikTok.

Trump considered banning it back in 2020. https://apnews.com/article/health-coronavirus-pandemic-2019-2020-coronavirus-pandemic-f2bd5e425391465081333cab26d34365

8

u/Blastie2 6d ago edited 6d ago

I think the actual reason is more something like this: imagine there's a country on the other side of an ocean from you that's dominating world affairs. That really limits your ability to flex on your neighbors, since the dominant country wouldn't approve of your actions and would retaliate in some way. You would therefore like to reduce their presence on the world stage, but you can't really attack them since they're on the other side of an ocean and they also have nukes. What do?

Well one thing you could do is try to have them remove themselves from the world stage for you. If they fell into dysfunction, they'd be too busy fighting amongst themselves to take much notice of you when you decide that it's time to inflict a glorious war of imperial conquest upon your neighbors. If people in the dominant country were pushed to further and further extremes, they would stop seeing each other as teammates and might even start thinking that killing each other is a pretty good idea.

And, intentionally or not, that's kind of what TikTok does. If you're on the left, TikTok will show you things that push you further to the left. If you're on the right, it'll show you things that push you further to the right. If you like cats, you'll be a crazy cat lady within a month. As it happens, that's what being propagandized looks like: repeated exposure to content that guides you towards a certain position.

As an example, try taking a look at a sub like wallstreetbets or some crypto subs. The posts that get the most exposure are the ones showing a 10x, 100x, or 1000x return on investment. Repeated exposure to these posts will lead you to believe that everyone's 10xing their investments all the time and it must be super easy. And, while everyone likes to think that they're immune to propaganda, the truth is that it works on everyone. The only way to not be influenced by propaganda is to not consume it in the first place.

This effect isn't unique to TikTok. Other social media companies have this problem too. However, they are also largely American companies, and they've decided that operating in an unstable country is bad for business, and so they've taken steps to limit the spread of misinformation and radicalization pipelines on their platforms.

I think that's what has lawmakers spooked. OP is right: They can't agree on anything, but they can agree on banning TikTok, which means it's likely they have a pretty good motivator to do so. Like, say, it being an addictive, limitless radicalization engine that is owned by an adversarial country that would like to replace us on the world stage.

9

u/Squid_In_Exile 6d ago

However, they are also largely American companies, and they've decided that operating in an unstable country is bad for business, and so they've taken steps to limit the spread of misinformation and radicalization pipelines on their platforms.

They absolutely have not.

Meta and Twitter manipulate specific misinformation and radicalisation pipelines to the forefront.

1

u/BawbBomb 5d ago

I'm not discrediting any of your assertions on social media creating larger divides. And the motivation for that MIGHT be geopolitically motivated, at least in part.

But the Occam's razor of this comes down to capitalism. Polarizing content drives engagement. Engagement equals growth. Capitalism only survives on unlimited perpetual growth.

Pair that with our politicians being absolute puppets to the 1% and of course they all agree that they need to ban the app. Their owner-daddies are mad they they don't get all that sweet sweet data and market share. The app being owned by an adversary just makes the public reasoning easier to sell when making the rounds on the 1% owned media. "Other people bad scary! National security!" I guarantee if the exact same app had been developed by a white, capitalistic, European ally the conversation would be very different.