tik tok – Page 4 – Hellbound and Down

Freedom Is the Only Way to Beat Authoritarianism

Andy Kessler writes in his latest Wall Street Journal column that the U.S. “is strong precisely because we don’t all think the same way. New ideas come from new ways of thinking.” Kessler puts it so well. We individuals generally see the present and future very differently, and it’s this very division praised by Kessler that powers so much advance.

The entertainment industry explains the business meaning of Kessler’s thinking well. Chevy Chase was offered the role of Otter in Animal House, but chose Foul Play instead. Donald Sutherland was offered $20,000 plus gross points in Animal House, but instead held out for $35,000 minus the points given his deep belief that the small movie wouldn’t generate much box office.

Chase and Sutherland’s errant business choices remind us that the good and great decisions are rarely obvious at the time. The previous truth would in a better world awaken the political class to how wrongheaded its actions vis-à-vis TikTok are. Implicit in their attacks and their legislative role in a TikTok ban is that TikTok’s alleged CCP-generated popularity will be used to spy on Americans with an eye on bringing the CCP’s authoritarian ways to the United States.

More realistically, data on Americans is the most valuable in the world, and it’s already sold around the world for exactly that reason. Which is a reminder that data on the American people already existed (and will exist) in abundance with or without TikTok, and it will be sold around the world (including to producers, politicians, or both in China) with or without TikTok.

At the same time, the desire among the world’s producers to know about us Americans is something to celebrate, not legislate against: they want to know about us because we’re the most productive people on earth. The better they understand us, the better their ability to meet and lead our needs.

What’s important is that the prosperity of the American people is, per Kessler, borne of freedom; of Americans disagreeing about everything and getting to vivify their discordant viewpoints in the marketplace. Economic progress is the happy end result of disagreements expressed. We generally describe those who express disagreements via the profit motive as entrepreneurs.

Bringing the genius of disagreement back to TikTok, protectionist U.S. politicians shouldn’t seek a ban, rather they should allow commerce in the U.S. to freely run its course. And they should do so confidently based on what happens every day in the United States.

Keep reading

Rand Paul ‘Festivus’ grievances: US millions for Ukraine TikTokers

Every December 23, Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) releases a “Festivus Report” based on the spoof holiday featured in the 1990s television show “Seinfeld.” On this made-up holiday, people would engage in an annual “airing of grievances,” and when it comes to wasteful government spending, each year Paul always has a very long list of beefs.

But this year, in finding over $1 trillion in wasteful, stupid spending, like $12 million for a pickleball complex, $15 million in new furniture for empty federal offices, $873,000 for film making in Jordan, and over $400,000 to study lonely rats, there appears to be some substantial spending related to Washington’s ongoing role in the Ukraine-Russia conflict.

Th 2024 ‘Festivus Report’ reveals that, “despite American taxpayers providing nearly $174 billion in aid and military assistance to Kyiv since the beginning of Russia’s war in Ukraine, someone over at State thought it was a brilliant idea to drop an additional $4.8 Million for ‘KYIV, Ukraine public affairs – Influencer Staff.’”

That’s right. Apparently the U.S. government was bankrolling Ukrainian TikTokers and Instagram personalities. To the tune of $4.8 million.

From Paul’s report:

“Apparently, what we really need in a war zone are more Instagram stories and TikTok dances. The dangers here are more than just cringeworthy content; this kind of spending opens the door to disinformation, propaganda, and international PR disasters. And don’t even get me started on the potential to escalate tensions with other nations.”

Sen. Paul proceeds to mock the funding’s aim: “after all, nothing says ‘peacekeeping’ like a viral video.”

More “Festivus” airing of the grievances: “But the absurdity doesn’t end there. The State Department also splurged $15,220 on an ‘influencers event’ and another $22,231 on a ‘USAID Social Media Influencers Campaign.”

Keep reading

TikTok Battles Canada’s Crackdown, Pitching Itself as a “Misinformation” Censorship Ally

In Canada, TikTok is attempting to get the authorities to reverse the decision to shut down its business operations by going to court – but also by recommending itself as a proven and reliable ally in combating “harmful content” and “misinformation.”

Canada last month moved to shut down TikTok’s operations, without banning the app itself. All this is happening ahead of federal elections amid the government’s efforts to control social media narratives, always citing fears of “misinformation” and “foreign interference” as the reasons.

TikTok, owned by China’s ByteDance, was accused of – via its parent company – representing “specific national security risks” when the decision regarding its corporate presence was made in November; no details have been made public regarding those alleged risks, however.

Now the TikTok Canada director of public policy and government affairs, Steve de Eyre, is telling the local press that the newly created circumstances are making it difficult for the company to work with election regulators and “civil society” to ensure election integrity – something Eyre said was previously successfully done.

In 2021, he noted, TikTok initiated collaboration with Elections Canada (the agency that organizes elections and has the power to flag social media content) which included TikTok adding links to all election-related videos that directed users toward “verified information.”

And the following year, TikTok was invested in monitoring its platform for “potentially violent” content, during the Freedom Convoy protests against Covid mandates.

More recently, TikTok was also on its toes for “foreign interference and hateful content” related to Brampton clashes between Sikhs and Hindus.

Keep reading

D.C. Circuit Court Upholds TikTok Ban, Prioritizing ‘National Security’ Over Free Speech

A federal appeals court ruled Friday that the federal government can tell a foreign-owned website that it must either sell itself to an American owner or be banned.

TikTok is one of the most popular social media sites on the planet, with more than a billion monthly active users worldwide and 170 million in the United States. Both Democrats and Republicans have long complained that the app—owned by ByteDance, a company based in China—is a potential vector for Chinese propaganda.

Much of the controversy stems from the level of control that the People’s Republic of China (PRC) demands over the private companies operating within its borders. The theory goes that Beijing could force ByteDance to turn over TikTok user data, or manipulate user algorithms to promote content favorable to the Chinese Communist Party.

Given China’s well-earned reputation as a repressive state, those could conceivably happen—though the key word there is conceivably. While many lawmakers have insisted that TikTok is an active national security threat, they have presented no evidence for this, at most claiming to have seen classified information that affirms their warnings.

During his first term, President Donald Trump threatened to ban TikTok outright unless it were purchased and operated by an American company. (Trump has reversed course since leaving office, now promising to “save” the app.) And this year President Joe Biden signed the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act. Singling out TikTok and ByteDance by name, the law made it functionally illegal for “a foreign adversary controlled application” to operate within the United States, or for any other entity to provide “internet hosting services to enable the distribution, maintenance, or updating” of the app.

The law defined the term “controlled by a foreign adversary” to include not only companies owned wholly by Chinese entities but also one in which a citizen of an adversarial nation “directly or indirectly own[s] at least a 20 percent stake.” In other words, even if the overwhelming majority of a company’s shares were owned by Americans, it could be banned or forced to divest so long as the remaining shares were held by Chinese, Russian, or Iranian citizens.

In order to continue operating within the United States, the only recourse would be to sell TikTok to an American company by January 19, 2025—Joe Biden’s last full day in office.

Keep reading

	Bigus Macus on DC Grand Jury Declines to Indi…
	Florida Plans to Bec… on Florida plans to become first…
	Florida Plans to Bec… on Florida plans to become first…
	Who Is Funding and O… on Who Is Funding and Organizing…
	How the US Regime Su… on How the US Regime Subsidizes I…

According to reports, the Supreme Court justices “sound likely” to uphold the TikTok ban, which is scheduled to go into effect on January 19.