Was the whole TikTok drama a bait-and-switch to make Trump look good? (www.independent.co.uk)
from QuantumSpecter@lemmy.world to technology@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 09:25
https://lemmy.world/post/24529642

#technology

threaded - newest

Ulrich@feddit.org on 21 Jan 09:26 next collapse

I feel like this is an incredibly obvious yes. They were down for 12 hours. They put Trump’s name as their savior in the error message… Then the CEO shows up to his inauguration. Trump freely admits that it is because he believes TikTok helped him win the election:

“I have a warm spot in my heart for TikTok because I won youth by 34 points,” Trump said in December. “And there are those that say TikTok had something to do with that.”

So. Yeah. Of fucking course it was. Fuck national security and all that nonsense, ME ME ME!

9point6@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 09:47 next collapse

I was thinking the same, I’m 99% certain Trump required his name to be included in the welcome back message as a condition for not implementing the ban.

It’s very poorly written theatre

baggachipz@sh.itjust.works on 21 Jan 13:07 next collapse

The audience who enjoys this theater isn’t exactly sophisticated. Pro wrestling has more complex plot and believable characters.

neatobuilds@lemmy.today on 21 Jan 14:23 collapse

And a bribe

Bogasse@lemmy.ml on 21 Jan 09:59 next collapse

And didn’t they explicitly state that they went down because “the US government is not working on a solution”, 12h before this government changed?

Ulrich@feddit.org on 21 Jan 15:14 next collapse
atrielienz@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 17:29 collapse

Yes. www.bbc.com/news/articles/clyeer3qp12o

It said that unless the government immediately stepped in to assure the video app it would not be punished for violating the looming ban, it would be “forced to go dark on January 19”.<<

Glasgow@lemmy.ml on 21 Jan 10:34 next collapse

Also they’re now censoring anything anti Trump.

trashboat@midwest.social on 21 Jan 14:07 collapse

Do you have a source for that? I’ve heard about this, too, but the evidence was dubious at best

Glasgow@lemmy.ml on 21 Jan 14:10 collapse

newsweek.com/tiktok-blocking-anti-trump-content-w…

beejjorgensen@lemmy.sdf.org on 21 Jan 14:37 collapse

“These reports have not been confirmed at this time,” the article notes.

atrielienz@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 14:42 collapse

www.tiktok.com/…/7462086721652428078

Looks like they may be coming from inside the house.

Ulrich@feddit.org on 21 Jan 16:59 collapse

I can’t see this. Would you care to explain?

atrielienz@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 17:28 collapse

Some Tik Tok creators are complaining on the platform that they are being censored, specifically in regards to talking poorly about the Trump administration.

As much as some people harp on Tik Tok being a bastion of non-censorship, it has been proven repeatedly that this is not actually true. They just pick and choose carefully what to censor and when. Most platforms do that. It’s not surprising. It also wouldn’t be surprising for them to not promote or prioritize content with their algorithm that could be seen by the current POTUS as inflammatory because they are attempting to gain favor with him at the moment in exchange for potential political favors in regards to the platform in the future.

theguardian.com/…/revealed-how-tiktok-censors-vid…

Ulrich@feddit.org on 21 Jan 17:37 collapse

Thank you. I understand the situation, I was asking specifically about what “inside the house means” and what’s coming out of it?

atrielienz@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 19:59 collapse

Oh. I see. Sorry. I didn’t understand. Inside the house means the claims are originating directly from users of Tik Tok on the Tik Tok platform. There was an old horror movie about a babysitter getting prank calls about the children in the house being in danger. It turned out the calls were coming from inside the house.

thoughtcatalog.com/…/the-call-is-coming-from-insi…

Cheems@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 14:50 collapse

It did not make him look good to anyone with more than half of a brain.

Ulrich@feddit.org on 21 Jan 15:15 collapse

Fortunately no one with half a brain voted for him anyway

Cheems@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 17:22 collapse

Truly all the more scary

seven_phone@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 09:39 next collapse

Why, he had no need of it whatsoever, unfathomably he has won control of everything and owes no one anything. Also the world is just not this well managed, it’s all just chaos and carnage and design in hindsight.

NaibofTabr@infosec.pub on 21 Jan 10:26 next collapse

Ah, but he does need something… continual attention and praise. Narcissists gonna narcissist.

jacksilver@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 15:02 collapse

Then why mention his name at all. It’s just like the covid checks, Trump demands/wants the attention.

kvasir476@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 10:12 next collapse

I don’t think there was any grand Machiavellian scheme. Trump just capitalized on historic democrat incompetence to make himself look good.

Guntrigger@sopuli.xyz on 21 Jan 10:35 collapse

Which part of Trump proposing, implementing and then yesterday delaying the ban was down to Democrat incompetence?

kvasir476@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 10:46 collapse

Please explain how Trump managed to implement this ban with a democrat controlled senate and Joe Biden as president.

massive_bereavement@fedia.io on 21 Jan 11:39 next collapse

I think both of you are right: The idea of banning TikTok came during his presidency and he campaigned for it.
However it was a policy supported by Biden and with bipartisan vote, which means Dems were playing at home, so it was on them to not look stupid.

It is mentioned in some news that the Facebook people pushed a lot for TikTok's ban so they could capitalize on a user exodus, though that TikTok feasts on user data and shares it back in China is also true.
However you don't solve that with a ban, you solve that with a proper privacy policy. But no US company wants that, no sir.
So the Dems were played like the devil went down to Georgia and they were the proverbial fiddle.

But.. I guess saying this is preaching to the choir as most people in here are dutifully aware of privacy. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Guntrigger@sopuli.xyz on 21 Jan 12:30 collapse

Thanks, I’ll field this extremely easy question - By executive order before it was a bipartisan bill supported by every level of government:

In 2020, President Donald Trump proposed a ban of the app as he viewed it as a national security threat. In August, he signed an executive order instructing that ByteDance divest from the app, though the order was blocked by a court injunction in September and was reversed by the Biden administration in 2021.

To me, making sure that everyone agrees with a new policy before it becomes law, and sending it through the proper channels to be debated and then enacted, doesn’t really seem like a dumb thing.

The dumb thing would be to propose a new law, enact it unilaterally, have it revoked because it was enacted unilaterally, then have everyone agree on it anyway when you pass it through the proper channels, then toss it in the trash yourself at literally the first opportunity.

queermunist@lemmy.ml on 21 Jan 14:35 collapse

So why did Democrats fall for it?

atrielienz@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 14:40 collapse

To try to make him look bad, is my theory.

queermunist@lemmy.ml on 21 Jan 14:41 collapse

So they’re fucking stupid?

atrielienz@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 16:00 collapse

The law stipulates that the POTUS is the person who determines that a platform or app is in violation. Once that happens, an investigation is launched through the AG’s office and applicable agencies. After that the AG’s office makes a determination about whether or not the app/platform is in violation of the law. Once that happens, the platform or app can appeal. But if they lose that appeal then they have a limited time to divest to another entity before their platform is banned and the POTUS can pause not revoke this process for a period of time (to give the app time to divest as is required). So basically Trump now has given Tik Tok a stay of execution so to speak but that doesn’t mean they won’t be forced to shut down or divest.

This was a direct politically planned and intended effect of this push so close to the inauguration, so far as I can tell. It’s politicians doing political stuff.

Right now he looks like the savior (and that’s intentional, both Tik Tok and Trump get something out of that). But in the long term I don’t know that most Tik Tok users are going to remember that Trump bought the app back and to actually remove the law requires an act of Congress. That will take more time than the limited amount that Trump can essentially delay the removal of the app from app stores and American servers.

I honestly think this was a fuck you to Trump from Biden because essentially Biden’s political career is over. Trump is going to do a lot of damage over the next 4 years and do as much as he can to undo any of the progress that has been made. It’s kind of a petty move on Biden’s part, but Trump started this colossal movement against Tik Tok in the first place.

queermunist@lemmy.ml on 21 Jan 16:09 collapse

Long term Trump probably won’t benefit from this, but it does give him a strong boost right at the start of his term while he’s also passing a bunch of controversial executive orders.

Flisty@mstdn.social on 21 Jan 22:06 collapse

@queermunist @atrielienz there is also a contingent calling it all out and either leaving or moving to a non-US account if they can. The problem is the algorithm/platform is a pretty strong siloing mechanism. https://www.tiktok.com/@oliviacarneyx/video/7461706669509201198

NaibofTabr@infosec.pub on 21 Jan 10:25 next collapse

Give’em the disease then sell’em the cure.

NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 10:39 next collapse

It will go on like that for several years now. One shit show, and then the next one, and then the next three ones…

db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 21 Jan 10:55 next collapse

I will argue that so was the Israel cease-fire “strong-man” act. In fact my conspiracy theory is that Israel explicitly delayed the cease-fire so that Trump could look strong by finishing it, then whined a bit in the newspapers to sell it. This is not even the first time they GOP has done this, as per the Iran hostages affair.

LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 21 Jan 11:21 next collapse

Yeah and it’s not far-fetched considering how openly Netanyahu endorsed Trump. With Trump in office Netanyahu can do whatever he wants, waging a costly in terms of PR war will be no longer necessary.

massive_bereavement@fedia.io on 21 Jan 11:31 next collapse

Sounds like the Iran hostage crisis remake.

jubilationtcornpone@sh.itjust.works on 21 Jan 12:54 collapse

Which was itself a sequel to Nixon trying to stall peace negotiations during the Vietnam War.

massive_bereavement@fedia.io on 21 Jan 15:19 collapse

How can they get away with the exact same plan every time, this is some scoobydoo bullshit.

spamfajitas@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 13:19 next collapse

Judy Woodruff was forced to publicly apologize because Trump and Bibi said they didn’t talk about delaying it, but I still think she was right:

newsweek.com/donald-trump-accused-crime-benjamin-…

I mean, I’d trust unnamed sources over these two guys any day.

db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 21 Jan 14:49 collapse

because Trump and Bibi said they didn’t talk about delaying it

Oh well, if the two known liars said so…

MothmanDelorian@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 13:21 next collapse

I believe it was because under Trump Israel would get better terms as Miriam Adelson paid for that.

Initiateofthevoid@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 21 Jan 14:22 collapse

Headline from fox news: “Oliver North: Israel will have to put people on the ground and it will be bloody”

Reality is truly stranger than fiction. If any writer continued to use a character like him for so long in such obvious ways without suffering any consequences, readers’ suspension of disbelief would be shattered.

He was there for Iran-Contra. He is still here for Israel-Hamas. The exact same playbook. Place political gain over national interest. Put lives needlessly in danger and extend suffering for an easy win.

Jimmycakes@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 11:21 next collapse

Obviously. They see the game. They played the game.

Docus@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 11:51 next collapse

The only thing that can make Trump look good is his obituary

misk@sopuli.xyz on 21 Jan 12:49 next collapse

TikTok had to make Trump look good as he presumably saves it so they did that stunt. In the end both sides know TT has to agree to selling majority stake because it isn’t anything China didn’t do to US firms multiple times already.

Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works on 21 Jan 13:04 next collapse

He’s already truly beloved by most. This really isn’t needed to rally further support. This seems like nonsense. To any thoughtful few there are no options for redemption for this dumb shit.

MothmanDelorian@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 13:15 collapse

Put down whatever it is that’s causing ypu to believe Trump is beloved by most. He has the second lowest approval rating in history.

Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works on 21 Jan 16:50 collapse

Give him a chance. He has a big base of hateful bigots and his approval rating is climbing. He’s currently at 50%. Are you locked in a big liberal city or something? Where I am at people absolutely rave about him. I’ve never seen banners for presidents hanging on homes, so many bumper stickers. Even in NYC, every gift shop is full of trump memorabilia. He’s wildly popular and while polarizing factors will make approval ratings and averages not get much higher than 50%, the hateful scum that love him really love him.

MothmanDelorian@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 17:23 collapse

there are no approval ratings for a day one POTUS.

Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works on 21 Jan 17:37 collapse

There are constant polls on ‘popularity’. Fox News has recent data and Marquette and Reuters do too. Sure these are imperfect but it’s a pretty sane thing to say he is beloved / popular. Denying that is what had people so shocked when he one the popular vote. People are so siloed now that they fail to see how so much of the population really likes the guy. This willful ignorance is dangerous.

Saw the same kind of denial about Putin. People not in touch with real Russians felt he was a just a feared overlord. Truth is majority of people there really like him.

MothmanDelorian@lemmy.world on 22 Jan 00:23 collapse

Popularity and approval rating are not the same. Approval trating is asking peoplehow he is doing as POTUS. Popularity determines if you know who they are.

Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works on 22 Jan 01:03 collapse

Not if you know who they are but if you like them. Trump is well liked by many if not most Americans. A decent amount of people downright practically worship the guy. In the sense that he is a dumb senile oaf he is not classically charismatic, but he has the attention and artificial grandeur attached to him that is usually related to charisma.

small44@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 13:33 next collapse

The original idea came from him. To me it just makes trump a hypocrite

sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works on 21 Jan 13:59 next collapse

How so? It was politically convenient to go after TikTok when he did it, and it’s politically convenient to reverse course now. That’s a pretty consistent gameplan from Trump, attack something when it’s popular, reverse when reversing is popular.

small44@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 14:06 next collapse

When he came with the ban idea he used the same argument of national security that is the hypocritical part. Like you say the real reason is just political convenient

sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works on 21 Jan 14:08 collapse

He also claimed national security when he messed with tariffs. At this point, it’s just an excuse to do something to grab headlines.

Initiateofthevoid@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 21 Jan 14:09 collapse

Hypocrisy: The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.

Holding a position when politically convenient and reversing your stance on that position due to political convenience is hypocrisy. It may be typical and expected, but it’s still hypocrisy.

sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works on 21 Jan 14:14 collapse

But Trump has no values or beliefs, the only thing he’s consistent about it putting his name in headlines. So reversing is absolutely consistent with his values.

sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 21 Jan 14:19 next collapse

It used to be that politicians suffered in the polls when they flip flopped, but the only one Trump would suffer is if he went against his base.

Like when he floated that maybe the covid vaccine was ok.

sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works on 21 Jan 14:23 collapse

Honestly, his base tends to follow him, so as long as it’s not a core belief, he could flip on a number of things without incident.

It’s disgusting and I really don’t understand why his base tolerates it.

Evkob@lemmy.ca on 21 Jan 18:04 collapse

I really don’t understand why his base tolerates it.

Because the relationship between him and his “base” isn’t one between citizens and politician, it’s a literally a cult following their leader.

Initiateofthevoid@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 21 Jan 14:37 next collapse

Hypocrisy: The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess

Having no values or beliefs and being self-consistent with ulterior personal values does not change the definition of the word.

If one professes beliefs, feelings, or values that one does not possess, one is a hypocrite.

sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works on 21 Jan 14:45 next collapse

Can you really call it “professing” if nobody actually believes you and you know nobody will believe you?

Initiateofthevoid@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 21 Jan 15:23 collapse

Yes.

Profess: 1) To affirm openly; declare or claim. 2) To make a pretense of; pretend.

If one makes a pretense of holding beliefs, feelings, or values that one does not hold, one is a hypocrite.

Whether anyone else understands the pretenses of the hypocrite or not does not change the definitions of the words.

futatorius@lemm.ee on 21 Jan 16:45 collapse

He’s also a habitual liar.

Windex007@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 14:40 collapse

So what you’re saying is he professes to have beliefs which he doesn’t actually have?

sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works on 21 Jan 14:43 collapse

Nobody believes that anything he says constitutes a belief…

Windex007@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 14:54 collapse

That’s irrelevant. When he says “I believe X”, he is professing that he believes something. Just because we know he’s lying doesn’t mean he isn’t saying it.

That kinda logic scares the hell out of me, btw. People are just so numb to it that it’s like their brains are short circuiting.

sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works on 21 Jan 15:02 collapse

That’s kind of like random people confessing to killing Brian Thompson. Is it really a confession if everyone knows you’re lying? Likewise, is it really a protestation if neither the speaker nor listener believes it?

DancingBear@midwest.social on 21 Jan 16:26 next collapse

Not the same at all

Windex007@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 17:34 collapse

Yes it is, and saying it isn’t is normalizing a terrifying thing.

The crux of your argument is that someone isn’t lying is nobody believes them. Ergo, Donald Trump isn’t a liar.

This is the EXACT fucking playbook you see in Russia and North Korea. The way you are thinking right now is SPECIFICALLY how dictators WANT you to think. It excuses lies and paves the way to the concept of there being no such thing as objective truth because everyone is lying anyways, but they’re not even lies because you were never going to believe it anyways. You’ll just exhaustedly shrug and choose a dissonance that’s a lower energy mental state.

sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works on 22 Jan 00:53 collapse

It’s less about lying though.

Hypocrisy, at least colloquially, means saying one thing and doing another, such as governors giving stay at home orders and hosting large parties during COVID mitigations.

Saying we should ban TikTok and then saying we shouldn’t ban it isn’t hypocrisy. If we’re being charitable, it’s him changing his mind, and if we’re not, it’s simple populism. There’s a good reason the ban was scheduled for just before inauguration, they knew it would be unpopular and didn’t want it to impact the elections.

Trump is absolutely a liar, probably worse than most politicians. He’s also often a hypocrite. I just don’t think “hypocrite” applies in this instance.

lauha@lemmy.one on 21 Jan 15:10 next collapse

If we were talking about a sane person, I don’t see why a person cannot change his mind.

Trump is just playing the fools.

Duamerthrax@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 17:09 collapse

Trump doesn’t have a mind to change. I doubt he even remembers he ever proposed a ban and this is just some advisor telling him that doing the opposite of Biden will get him likes.

jaemo@sh.itjust.works on 21 Jan 23:13 collapse

Trump’s basically a fractal hypocrisy, which is, as I understand it, why and how the grift keeps grifting.

obinice@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 14:09 next collapse

Given that he was the one that called for it to be banned extremely vocally, and he’s not been able to keep it banned for more than a few hours even as the now leader of that country, seemingly caving under pressure to flip his stance on the matter (showing off the bat that he’s very politically weak)…

I don’t see how this makes him look anything but weak, or inept.

foggenbooty@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 15:50 next collapse

Ahh, but see you’re been following this over several months/years, or looked up what actually happened. You’re not the target for this dupe.

This tactic works incredibly well as you’ll find you are outside the norm. I still remember people ranting about how Obama was late responding to Hurricane Katrina.

Welcome to Politics 2.0 where the information is freely available but the facts don’t matter.

Spookyghost@sh.itjust.works on 21 Jan 16:51 collapse

“Caving under pressure”? This is a massive win for him, he just got every single major corp app out there to agree to push his agenda and thrawrt his opponents. How many posts today have been showing search results in various apps being fucky?

Bytedance didnt have to block their app yesterday, they did it perfomantly, and virtually everyone bought it hook like and sinker.

You are dreaming if you think the perception of this event to the average person is the weakness of a certain inflated organge hemmoroid.

His cohort of billionare buddys now control discussion and content on a hugely concerning portion of all public communication channels that currently exist.

Humans on average are already disappointingly stupid. Now this administration is actively discoraging free, critical thought and discussion and encouraging the use of algorithmically powered, emotionally draining, knowledge obfuscating, personal data collection software viruses that people willingly install.

On those apps he and his friends look like amazing heroes, and will for the next 4 years, regardless of the events of reality. Then we will have to vote with millions of people who only use these apps for information. Best of luck to us all.

ech@lemm.ee on 21 Jan 14:24 next collapse

The whole thing? No. The 14 hour temper tantrum? Absolutely.

RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 14:27 next collapse

I really doubt it. Trump just did the obvious, grabbed the low hanging fruit, and contradicted the Biden administration because that’s all he can do. No conspiracy needed; that would afford trump forethought and cunning he isn’t capable of. He can’t think past his next Big Mac or tweet.

zeca@lemmy.eco.br on 21 Jan 17:02 collapse

you underestimate too much. trump is just a face, there are plenty of people working with him and planning all kinds of shit. any kid plans some trickeries while playing board games. what makes you think a political group is incapable of forethought?

Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works on 21 Jan 14:33 next collapse

If it’s that problematic with propaganda then banning it after an election was a meaningless gesture. It served it’s purpose and reversing the ban was simply transactional. They paid money and kissed the ring.

2ugly2live@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 14:36 next collapse

Lmao, yes.

He “brought it back” before he was even in office. And since no one looks up anything, I’m sure it did it’s job.

cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 21 Jan 14:36 next collapse

Tiktok is an app for stupid people so naturally stupid people would be more gullible.

Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 16:20 next collapse

No, this is just what it looks like when evil encoaches. Having no true ethical or moral obligations it decides everything on a case by case basis and if it can’t be controlled then it is destroyed.

futatorius@lemm.ee on 21 Jan 16:44 next collapse

If so, it didn’t work. It made him look dimwitted and easily swayed.

Both of which, he is.

Kolanaki@yiffit.net on 21 Jan 17:11 collapse

Only to people who aren’t complete fucking morons. Which, doesn’t seem to be enough.

Letme@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 16:46 next collapse

Sort of, yes. It is a counterintelligence/disinformation app, and for that reason it makes MAGA look good. MAGA now controls all 3 of the top disinformation apps: Twitter, Facebook , and Tiktok. This is the war on truth; facts and honesty lost.

peregrin5@lemm.ee on 21 Jan 17:35 collapse

Not to mention they’ve bought out every previously legitimate news source.

scytale@lemm.ee on 21 Jan 16:56 next collapse

<img alt="" src="https://files.catbox.moe/ioufq9.png">

peregrin5@lemm.ee on 21 Jan 17:35 collapse

What is this format from?

ChairmanMeow@programming.dev on 21 Jan 17:40 collapse

Dune 2 I think.

peregrin5@lemm.ee on 21 Jan 18:01 collapse

Ah I have yet to watch it. Didn’t realize Walken was in it.

PanArab@lemm.ee on 21 Jan 17:07 next collapse

Why did the Democrats fall for it though?

Crikeste@lemm.ee on 21 Jan 20:43 collapse

Because they’re very dumb.

technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 21 Jan 17:17 next collapse

Nobody except genocide joe thought it was a good idea to censor an extremely popular app because it revealed the truth about his genocide.

samus12345@lemm.ee on 21 Jan 17:22 next collapse

That’s old news, it’s “Genocide Don” now.

peregrin5@lemm.ee on 21 Jan 17:38 collapse

Biden reversed Trump’s previous executive order banning it and said he would just support whatever Congress decides, and both sides of Congress bipartisanly supported a ban. But sure… Only Genocide Joe. 🙄

BigBenis@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 18:01 next collapse

While the whole situation is shitty, I find it hard to believe a massive company would shut down services for 12 hours, losing millions in revenue and likely millions of users, all as a PR stunt for a foreign leader.

thisphuckinguy@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 18:46 next collapse

This man will always be a moron.

cybersandwich@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 18:51 next collapse

I think people are making this almost more nefarious than it probably is.

TikTok turned it off because they had to. Trump alluded to not enforcing the law, so I think they decided to shoot their shot and say “we are turning this back on because Donny Boy said we are good. THANK YOU for not coming after us!”

As more of a “forcing function” that basically 1. Gives trump credit for this which strokes his ego 2. Makes trump look bad and somewhat insulates them from him immediately turning it back off.

A couple things: I don’t think trump gives a FUCK about TikTok. Not enforcing this law causes a constitutional issue because congress passed it and the SC upheld it.

Isn’t the “not enforcing the law” stance, the position Republicans took when impeaching Mayorkas?

Naia@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 21 Jan 19:03 next collapse

Trump started the whole thing because he was unpopular on Tiktok. Republicans jumped on board because young people were politically organizing on the platform and they don’t like that.

But up to that point, there was no really effort, even as much as they tried to claim “national security”.

Then when the real information about Palestine was being spread there the democrats jumped on board because they are the same as republicans when if comes to foreign policy.

That’s what started the actual push that gained momentum. They had no actual evidence about the stuff they claimed. Also, if the claim applied to Tiktok, it applies to all the other social media. But they don’t actually care about privacy. They only care about a platform that they couldn’t control and wasn’t catering to them.

If they cared about privacy, they would have pushed general privacy legislation and/or regulation and oversight on all social media.

The reversal was Biden realizing he does not have a good legacy and with Trump, there was a lot more content this time around that was pro-trump (and also tiktok gave him a million dollars). So now he gets to claim he “saved tiktolk” when he was the start of the whole thing.

GasMaskedLunatic@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 21 Jan 21:10 next collapse

Yes.

pedroapero@lemmy.ml on 21 Jan 21:53 next collapse

All CEOs understood how to behave with such an arrogant person: flatter him and he will bow to your every wims.

MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml on 22 Jan 02:21 collapse

Still doesn’t look good.