To ban or not to ban? The Tik Tok Connundrum

[El Presidente]

Fascinating tug of war going on. For those with teen kids/young adults,  you know the impact Tik Tok has had. 

I would love our techies opinions on the transparency of Tik Toks back end workings.

 

 

A TIKTOK BAN WOULD HINDER NIL, HURT ATHLETES AND SPUR LAWSUITS

BY MICHAEL MCCANN

March 20, 2023 5:55am

Olivia Dunne would be among the college athlete NIL influencers who stand to lose if TikTok is banned in the U.S.ALEX GOODLETT/GETTY IMAGES

 

LSU gymnast Olivia Dunne has 7.3 million followers on TikTok. Haley and Hanna Cavinder of Miami women’s basketball have 4.4 million. They and other athletes use the video-sharing app to generate NIL earnings, sometimes reaching six or even seven figures.

They all stand to lose if TikTok is banned, as threatened by President Joe Biden and both Republican and Democratic lawmakers. 

But can the government lawfully ban the Chinese-owned app, which has more than 100 million U.S. users but comes with national security and privacy concerns? 

A ban would almost certainly trigger litigation by the apps corporate owners centered on First Amendment free speech and Fifth Amendment due process protections, but it could also spur legal action that has athletes and other influencers as plaintiffs.

Last Wednesday, The Wall Street Journal reported that the Biden administration has given TikTok’s owner, the Beijing-headquartered ByteDance, an ultimatum: Divest their stakes or the app will be banned. The message was relayed through the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, an inter-agency entity that reviews foreign firms’ investments for national security and related implications.

TikTok dismissed the demand as ineffective, arguing divestment wouldn’t address national security apprehensions since “a change in ownership would not impose any new restrictions on data flows or access.” The company also refuted underlying concerns by insisting it relies on “transparent” systems to ensure “U.S.-based protection of U.S. data.”

If he presses on, Biden would become the second U.S. president to try to ban TikTok. His predecessor gave it a shot and came up short. 

In 2020, President Donald Trump issued an executive order, followed by other administrative actions, intended to block transactions between ByteDance and U.S. citizens and strip TikTok from U.S app stores. The Chinese Communist Party, government officials worried, might use TikTok to access user data, spread propaganda and censor disfavored content. 

ByteDance and TikTok Inc., the California-based subsidiary that runs the app, sued Trump and then-Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross. They sought an injunction and other remedies to prevent the government from carrying out a ban.

ByteDance and TikTok Inc. raised several key arguments that would likely resurface in any new litigation. 

A ban, they argued, would “shutter a forum that millions of Americans use for speech and expression” and “unlawfully burden the freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment.” The companies noted they use the app to “create and share messages about a variety of issues and current events, including, for example, their support for small businesses and International Women’s Day.” They also argued that a ban would compromise First Amendment protections of their software code, “an expressive means of communication.”

ByteDance and TikTok Inc. also insisted a prohibition would violate Fifth Amendment due process protections. They maintained they were denied both notice of the proposed ban and a credible opportunity to be heard about it. The U.S. government, the companies argued, sought an “unjustifiable economic deprivation” that would “interfere” with “legitimate investment-backed expectations.”

Meanwhile, three TikTok influencers—Douglas Marland, Cosette Rinab and Alec Chambers—filed their own lawsuit against Trump and Wilbur. Each asserted they used TikTok to engage in speech and earn a living. Rinab, for example, has 2.3 million followers with whom she shares videos on behalf of fashion brands and other companies. According to court documents, Rinab earned between $5,000 and $10,000 per video in 2020.

Multiple federal judges ruled against the Trump Administration, reasoning that the alleged national security threat appeared more hypothetical than documented. They also surmised that a ban was excessive and that less draconian alternatives ought to be considered first.

The government’s scrutiny of TikTok is occurring while other foreign-owned companies face regulatory risks and legal issues stemming from investments in sports. Saudi-backed LIV Golf is mired in federal litigation with the PGA Tour, which has expanded the case to include the Public Investment Fund of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and its governor, Yasir Othman Al-Rumayyan, as defendants. The Justice Department has launched its own probe into the LIV Golf-PGA Tour dispute. Last year, Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich sold Chelsea F.C. in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine and monetary sanctions against Russian assets.

As foreign investors—particularly those with close ties to their governments—play more prominent roles in U.S. sports and sports-adjacent industries, expect more pushback on national security, human rights, and other important American interests.

The TikTok situation is unique if for nothing else than its ironies. China has banned TikTok, along with Facebook, Instagram and some Google services. Then there’s the U.S. government attempting to ban a communications platform in order to prevent … government influence.

 

[NSXCIGAR]

I could care less about data. News flash--if you're on the internet the "bad guys" have your data. 

TikTok appears to be a highly psychologically destructive platform, particularly for minors. I can understand not wanting the CCP to be able to control the minds of western youth which it seems TikTok is pretty effective at doing.

[Corylax18]

I've yet to hear a single sound argument as to why Tik Tok is crucial to any individuals life. We had Tik Tok, for over a decade, before Tik Tok. Anybody Remember Vine? It was stupid and everyone made fun of it. Guess what, its still stupid, changing the name didn't change that. 

First Facebook was more important than life, then it was twitter, now tik tok. They're all the same, cancers on society. The less social media any human being is exposed to (adult or youth) the better off they are.  

[El Presidente]

6 minutes ago, Corylax18 said:

I've yet to hear a single sound argument as to why Tik Tok is crucial to any individuals life. We had Tik Tok, for over a decade, before Tik Tok. Anybody Remember Vine? It was stupid and everyone made fun of it. Guess what, its still stupid, changing the name didn't change that. 

First Facebook was more important than life, then it was twitter, now tik tok. They're all the same, cancers on society. The less social media any human being is exposed to (adult or youth) the better off they are.  

 

Thank you Grandpa Simpson!  

 

 

Sorry Cory...couldn't resist 

[Corylax18]

1 minute ago, El Presidente said:

Sorry Cory...couldn't resist 

Haha, thats fair. 

Despite being relatively young, I've just never been a social media guy. I remember sitting in my first dorm room, watching people on MySpace for the first time and just not getting it. I had a facebook page, but it just wasn't my thing. I don't understand why people use all these apps so religiously, yet alone how they get to a place where they feel they cant live with out it. 

There is clearly something very intentionally addictive built into the algorithims of this stuff, not just tik tok. That addictive mentality, meshed with China's openly stated intentions makes a very bad combination in my eyes. I'd be perfectly happy if they banned all the others in the same bill though. 

[dominattorney]

4 minutes ago, El Presidente said:

 

Thank you Grandpa Simpson!  

 

 

Sorry Cory...couldn't resist 

Hilarious burn, Prez. @Corylax18 is not wrong in my opinion. However, it is times like these when men and women of sound moral fiber must test their political and philosophical commitments. I think all social media is terrible. I think TV is terrible too. However, I advertise on both mediums. Guess what? Plenty of adults have a tiktok. Our lawyer ads kill it there for some reason. Completely shocked me and o told my marketing man he was high as a kite when he first suggested it but I'm the one eating crow about it now. 

That aside, I remain committed to free choice absent intervention from the government or any other party. I must stand on that principle and defend tik toks right to exist. 

 

[BoliDan]

I'd be fine if all social media suddenly stopped. Tik Tok in particular has been horrible specifically. It showed that my car is easily stolen and even had a challenge to post videos stealing cars like mine. I woke up to this one morning in my driveway.

Drilled out the lock. They probably opened the door and realized the club and recording device and backed off. My front camera didn't catch any faces. 

[Corylax18]

2 minutes ago, dominattorney said:

That aside, I remain committed to free choice absent intervention from the government or any other party. I must stand on that principle and defend tik toks right to exist. 

I understand that too, but I think we're past the point where that mentality can be universally applied. Look at the Huawei/ZTE situation.

While I agree that ZTE, Huawei and Bytedance have every right to exist, their use as Trojan horses is not protected/sacred, in anyway. 

[dominattorney]

Just now, Corylax18 said:

I understand that too, but I think we're past the point where that mentality can be universally applied. Look at the Huawei/ZTE situation.

While I agree that ZTE, Huawei and Bytedance have every right to exist, their use as Trojan horses is not protected/sacred, in anyway. 

Is not everything of this nature a potential Trojan horse if viewed in the correct light? I said the same about Facebook back when it started "don't use this, they'll just take your data to make money" and I got laughed at. It was true, still is, yet people don't care. I'm certain our government or a private individual is doing what Huawei and Tik Tok are doing to other countries. 

[Corylax18]

Just now, dominattorney said:

I'm certain our government or a private individual is doing what Huawei and Tik Tok are doing to other countries.

Yes, they 100% are, but that's not good justification to stop trying to fight it. Its like the whole ICC Warrant for Putin.

The US, China and Russia don't support the ICC because we all want our own immunity from past and for future war crimes. Its insane. 

Not cracking down on someone else because your committing the same crimes is about as low as it gets. 

It was a joke 20 years ago, but the terrorist won. As soon as we were willing to throw out all our rules, none of it meant anything anymore. So now, none of this shit means anything, to most people. As you alluded to above. 

[dominattorney]

3 minutes ago, Corylax18 said:

Yes, they 100% are, but that's not good justification to stop trying to fight it. Its like the whole ICC Warrant for Putin.

The US, China and Russia don't support the ICC because we all want our own immunity from past and for future war crimes. Its insane. 

Not cracking down on someone else because your committing the same crimes is about as low as it gets. 

It was a joke 20 years ago, but the terrorist won. As soon as we were willing to throw out all our rules, none of it meant anything anymore. So now, none of this shit means anything, to most people. As you alluded to above. 

oooh boy.  It's amazing we haven't found time to sit down and smoke together yet.  Not to say we'd be able to what with you always off to the island and me always in trial, but damned if that 50 miles between us isn't the Atlantic Ocean in practice. 

Completely agree with this as well.  What alternative can we pose that is fair?  Ban all social media?  I wouldn't hate that.  As an actual citizen of the real world and not a mouthpiece for the hopelessly overprivileged owners of billions upon billions, I can't say that it wouldn't be for the best.  It makes me cringe to hear the arguments of these large corporations "but people use this stuff to express themselves so the first and 5th amendments blah blah blah."  True, in theory.  In my mind, akin to a knave hiding under the skirt of lady justice after flinging turds into the punch-bowl of police society. 

It's almost hopelessly utopian to try to forge a legitimate response to this problem.  On one hand, you can say "America OK, all other countries bad" and just let the Zuckerbergs and Bezos' have their cake (and all of ours) and eat it too.  On the other hand, you could say "all is OK because of the principles upon which we stand and have allowed to be corrupted by the all powerful."  That's my position at present time, and I stand by it as a pragmatic solution.  It's also a partially chaotic opinion to hold because I recognize that it invites a host of unknown variables.  Looked at simply, you have a largely Republican Congress trying to ban Tik Tok, in large part to prevent the spread of misinformation.  Think about that and try not to laugh about it.  I know it's hard for me to do.  To give into this logic is simultaneously satisfying and indicative of a wilful blindness to the ways of the world. 

Finally, there's the almost hopelessly utopian solution, which cannot simply address this problem in a vacuum as it is inherently tied to other issues, probably none more prominent than inequality and the divide between the owners and the rest of us.  It is essential nearly to embrace a type of communist viewpoint (I hate the word communism personally--much prefer to consider it in terms of anti-capitalism) in which we have to limit the wealth, and by extension influence, of people and corporations who's wealth and influence has gotten out of hand.  I do not personally find this utopian option to be disagreeable if it can be implemented.  History has shown however, that utopian projects often create worse disasters than the harms they were implemented to mitigate. 

[Guest Nekhyludov]

2 hours ago, NSXCIGAR said:

TikTok appears to be a highly psychologically destructive platform, particularly for minors. I can understand not wanting the CCP to be able to control the minds of western youth which it seems TikTok is pretty effective at doing.

This is the biggest risk in my view. I don't know how much of the evidence that TikTok is a CCP social engineering weapon is reliable v. how much is just conspiracy theory fear mongering. But if there's any meaningful risk that the CCP is deliberately impairing Western youth, that's ample reason to ban it outright as a matter of national security.

[NSXCIGAR]

9 minutes ago, Nekhyludov said:

I don't know how much of the evidence that TikTok is a CCP social engineering weapon is reliable v. how much is just conspiracy theory fear mongering.

I don't think you need evidence of local break-ins before you lock your doors at night. The CCP has a psychologically destructive tool. That's all I need to know. It's not a matter of are they using it--it's a matter of can they use it. 

[Greenhorn2]

Is Tik Tok the social media platform where idiots teach others how to be idiots? If so, shut it down, we have enough already.

[NSXCIGAR]

3 hours ago, dominattorney said:

I'm certain our government or a private individual is doing what Huawei and Tik Tok are doing to other countries. 

Of course, but we are *supposed* to have a vote and oversight over what happens in our own countries. You can't really argue with the platform being foreign as not being a difference in kind. Congress has broad authority to regulate pretty much anything foreign. 

You have to be out of your damn mind to give a kid a smartphone. I remember when the internet came out everyone was scrambling to figure out how to keep their kids safe from it. And that was just grainy images of boobs! The frightening part is they were right--the internet is for adults and should only be used by minors with adult supervision. 

These kids are experiencing mental health issues that rival the use of drugs and alcohol. 

[Fuzz]

What is China learning from Tik Tok? White people can't dance? Eddie Murphy told us that back in the 80s. Lip syncing is a perfectly fine art form? Then Milli Vanilli should be given back their Grammy! Kids do stupid things? Dang, every single one of us knows that! We still do dumb things as we get older. Tit Tok is allowing the CCP to monitor and influence people? Dang, news media (and not just local... yes, I am looking at you Rupert), politicians, celebrities, corporations, religion, television etc have been doing that for decades if not centuries.

Tik Tok is only a small part of the greater problem. The over abundance and ease of access to technology is the real problem. With the internet at our fingertips, the need to actually learn and understand is vastly diminished. We just get fed information, good and bad, and we then spew that out as fact. Social media has been shaping our behaviour and warping our ideals. One has to only look at the lengths some people go to to get likes on their Twitter/Instagram/TikTok accounts. The more followers, the more validation and sense of worth that person feels, it's almost like a drug. People, young and old, are killing themselves just to be the next viral sensation. Standing on a street corner, yelling out your crazy ideas is no longer good enough. Now you can reach billions with your wild, crazy, and stupid thoughts with the push of a button.

Social media, in all forms, needs to be curtailed and monitored not just Tik Tok.

 

[GoodStix]

57 minutes ago, Fuzz said:

Social media, in all forms, needs to be curtailed and monitored not just Tik Tok.

Agree with all your concerns.  Valid 👍

But I can’t advocate monitoring and curtailment in our western democratic societies.  Only because: by who?  Who gets to decide “truth”?  Dangerous.  I’d rather the “town square” be open to all speakers — bozos or wise — and let the people decide for themselves.

The only reason I support punting Tik Tok is its foreign influence by an adversary.  The world is dividing into two powerful multination geopolitical camps.  The west’s opposition controls Tik Tok.  Not best we let it flourish.

If war comes, and I absolutely wish not, or even a political press in western nations for greater military deterrence (allocation of budgets) then will of the people - resolve - will matter.  Thus the information space matters.

Ok, back to a good smoke and dram 🙂

[Arabian]

banning TikTok will not solve the issue, another app will take its place. as long there's demand and interest in what I call silly and cheap content, China or any XYZ country will be happy to supply.  

[Chibearsv]

Is TikTok doing something either in reality or in theory that is any different than what Facebook/Meta or Instagram or any of the other "social media" have potential to do?  For that matter, what about any other app that you download to your trackable device?  If anyone actually cared about their privacy and security, they would never access the internet or use a smartphone.  So why ban TikTok? Because it's Chinese?  

I don't get it.

[MrBirdman]

Repeal Section 230 immunity. If your website is hosting videos about how to easily steal my car, and you are using an algorithm to specifically target its delivery to susceptible youth, you should be liable when the 13-year old down the street steals my car then accidentally drives off the road and kills himself. 

[dominattorney]

1 hour ago, MrBirdman said:

Repeal Section 230 immunity. If your website is hosting videos about how to easily steal my car, and you are using an algorithm to specifically target its delivery to susceptible youth, you should be liable when the 13-year old down the street steals my car then accidentally drives off the road and kills himself. 

There's an actionable idea if I ever heard one. Good show. 

Only problem from here is how do you prove the algorithm exists for purposes of sticking it to them in a lawsuit?

Possibly a cleaner idea would be force them to mlre actively minitor and remove videos that encourage criminal conduct?

[dms99]

I look at tiktok, twitter, FB and all the rest of the social media platforms as one giant cesspool. They were all created for one purpose only, to make money.The negatives far outweigh the positives (if there are any) and It's depressing to see that this is the world we've created for our children.

[MrBirdman]

50 minutes ago, dominattorney said:

Only problem from here is how do you prove the algorithm exists for purposes of sticking it to them in a lawsuit?

I think the existence of those algorithms is well-attested. It’s how they drive up viewership. 70% of YouTube views are from recommended content.

[Fuzz]

7 hours ago, GoodStix said:

The only reason I support punting Tik Tok is its foreign influence by an adversary.  The world is dividing into two powerful multination geopolitical camps.  The west’s opposition controls Tik Tok.  Not best we let it flourish.

 

Adversary or competitor? Let's not forget, one of the USA's major trade partners is China. This is not like the cold war between USSR and USA. China's global influence has been growing steadily over the past 2 decades, in regions that let's face it, the West never gave a rat's ass about. Just like in business, if you are so focused on one interest, you will completely miss your competitor scooping up all the other little jobs around and start edging past you.

Tik Tok, are doing the same thing as all other social media apps, mining data. Instead of just worrying about a "foreign" owned app, you might want to also clean up your own backyard too. Domestic threats are just as valid as foreign ones.

[BEVOSREVENGE]

3 minutes ago, Fuzz said:

 Let's not forget, one of the USA's major trade partners is China. This is not like the cold war between USSR and USA. China's global influence has been growing steadily over the past 2 decades, in regions that let's face it, the West never gave a rat's ass about.

I think there is evidence that the US is moving to build a new supply chain that isn't dependent upon China.  It will take time and this is very much similar to the cold war against the USSR in that we intend to isolate China as much as possible.  How can there be any other choice when Xi has made himself president for life and purged all political opponents?

Agree that cleaning up the social media of both foreign and domestic companies would be a prudent practice.

YMMV