Meta Shatters Lobbying Record as House Passes TikTok Ban: Instagram owner Meta spent more than ever on lobbing Congress and the White House as legislation to potentially ban its competitor TikTok (readsludge.com)
from fossilesque@mander.xyz to technology@lemmy.world on 19 Jan 18:35
https://mander.xyz/post/23694352

#technology

threaded - newest

CthuluVoIP@lemmy.world on 19 Jan 18:43 next collapse

So what does Zuck do when Trump uses an exec order to stay the ban and pushes Republicans to reverse it?

fossilesque@mander.xyz on 19 Jan 18:45 next collapse

Algorithmically quell his own cybernetic rage.

someguy3@lemmy.world on 19 Jan 19:17 next collapse

Why does everyone think Trumps going to allow Tiktok. He doesn’t like China, and Musk is going to push him to ban it so he can buy it.

QuincyPeck@lemmy.world on 19 Jan 19:21 next collapse

I haven’t seen a comment age this quickly and poorly in quite some time.

someguy3@lemmy.world on 19 Jan 19:24 collapse

If you haven’t noticed Trump says a lot of things. He’s always talking out of both sides of his mouth. I’ll believe it when I see it, we’ll see tomorrow. Also, a delay is not overturning it.

QuincyPeck@lemmy.world on 19 Jan 19:40 collapse

It’s back now with a message thanking President Trump.

atrielienz@lemmy.world on 19 Jan 22:28 next collapse

Who asked for a 50% stake in the company.

laurelraven@lemmy.zip on 20 Jan 04:08 collapse

Which makes the whole thing so transparent considering Trump literally couldn’t have done anything as he’s still not president yet… The whole thing was a stunt.

Taldan@lemmy.world on 19 Jan 19:39 next collapse

ByteDance has a lot of money. Trump likes money. Trump’s only leverage over ByteDance is allowing TikTok, so he’ll do that in exchange for money

Zuckerberg and Meta are much more centralized in the US, which gives Trump far more options in terms of what he can offer them. Trump will give Zuckerberg something else to placate him. Probably lots of cheap H-1B labor

suigenerix@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 05:04 collapse

You’re partially right. Trump originally wanted to ban TikTok because “China.”

However, the platform’s influence on younger voters supposedly helped him to win the election, so he now favors it.

No surprise that Trump’s personal needs are far more important than real US security.

bdonvr@thelemmy.club on 19 Jan 20:13 next collapse

It’s already back up lmfao

atrielienz@lemmy.world on 19 Jan 20:42 collapse

Yep. But this doesn’t answer their question. I’m rooting for a Tik Tok CEO vs Meta CEO battle Royale at the inauguration.

Duamerthrax@lemmy.world on 19 Jan 22:36 collapse

Tom just sitting on the sidelines, eating popcorn.

skulblaka@sh.itjust.works on 20 Jan 16:39 collapse

Tom wouldn’t be caught dead in the same hemisphere as either of these fucks

SatanClaus@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 20 Jan 18:16 collapse

Tom just wanted to be friends. Why can’t more people be like Tom? 😂

kerr@aussie.zone on 19 Jan 22:20 next collapse

Trumps just gonna keep him hanging hoping he’s in the inner circle and bleeding him dry in the process.

LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 04:40 next collapse

Well I just hope they reverse the whole bill, so we can re-appropriate the tax money back we sent to aid Israel

ansiz@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 12:46 collapse

If Zuck gives Trump more money then why would he? Probably would just allow Meta to buy it or something dumb like that.

mox@lemmy.sdf.org on 19 Jan 18:46 next collapse

!business@lemmy.world

!politics@lemmy.world

Atelopus-zeteki@fedia.io on 19 Jan 19:15 next collapse

$7.6 million, pocket change to these chumps. Up the ante!

someguy3@lemmy.world on 19 Jan 19:18 next collapse

I think this was less about lobbying and more about bogeyman of China.

Mrkawfee@lemmy.world on 19 Jan 19:24 collapse

AIPAC lobbying also

finitebanjo@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 04:15 collapse

You know China vetoed a Gaza Ceasefire last march, right?

They’re also allied with Iran who militarized Hamas in the first place.

Saleh@feddit.org on 20 Jan 11:22 next collapse

Stop spreading lies.

Gaza: Security Council passes resolution demanding ‘an immediate ceasefire’ during Ramadan news.un.org/en/story/2024/03/1147931

finitebanjo@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 14:18 collapse

How does that argue anything I just said?

Saleh@feddit.org on 20 Jan 14:23 collapse

China passed a Ceasefire SC resolution in March 2024, when you claimed they vetoed against it. The opposite of what you claimed happened.

finitebanjo@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 14:28 collapse

LINK

Same source as your previous link, too.

Saleh@feddit.org on 20 Jan 14:41 collapse

China’s Ambassador Zhang Jun said that the most urgent action the Council should take is calling for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire, in line with the wishes of the UN General Assembly and the UN Secretary-General. Ambassador Zhang Jun, Permanent Representative of China, addressing the Security Council meeting on the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question. United Nations Ambassador Zhang Jun, Permanent Representative of China, addressing the Security Council meeting on the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question.

He said the Council had dragged its feet and wasted too much time in this regard.

With a view to safeguarding the UN Charter and the “dignity” of the Council, together with the view of Arab States, China therefore voted against the US draft.

He pointed to the new draft resolution from the 10 elected Council members now circulating: “This draft is clear on the issue of a ceasefire and is in line with the correct direction of the Council action and is of great relevance. China supports this draft.”

From the ceasefire resolution that was passed three days later, note with the US abstaining to vote and immediately lying about the binding character of the resolution to then continue arm Israel with billions worth of bombs to murder tens of thousands more Palestinians.

A US-proposed draft to end the war in Gaza was vetoed by permanent Council members China and Russia, in a vote of 11 favour to three against (Algeria, China, Russia) and one abstention (Guyana)
Several ambassadors voiced their support for a new draft proposed by the “E-10” group of non-permanent Council members, which calls for an immediate ceasefire
The vetoed draft would have made imperative an immediate and sustained ceasefire in Gaza, with an “urgent need to expand the flow of humanitarian assistance” to all civilians and lifting “all barriers” to delivering aid
Council members disagreed over elements of the draft, and some highlighted glaring exclusions despite having raised multiple concerns with the US during negotiations
Ambassadors largely supported swift action to bring food and lifesaving aid at scale into Gaza, where concerns of famine grew as Israel continues to block and slow walk shipments into the besieged enclave
Some Council members called for pursuing the two-State solution to the ongoing conflict
Israel’s ambassador was invited to speak, calling the draft’s failure to pass and condemn Hamas “a stain that will never be forgotten”

You are trying to frame not licking Netanyahus and the US boots as they commit a genocide as opposing a ceasefire, when in fact it was about demanding a ceasefire in line with the realities on the ground.

finitebanjo@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 15:53 collapse

China Vetoed a Ceasefire. Simple as.

Saleh@feddit.org on 20 Jan 17:29 collapse

Singling out events without looking what happened before and after. Seems familiar in the context of Israel…

technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 20 Jan 16:52 collapse

They’re also allied with Iran who militarized Hamas in the first place.

You say this like it’s a bad thing. TBH colonized people suffering from genocide should resist.

finitebanjo@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 17:57 collapse

You happily traded 47,000 of Palestinian lives for 1700 israelis, congratz and fuck off.

Gullible@sh.itjust.works on 19 Jan 19:36 next collapse

Shit, we should also ban insta, fb, and google places while we’re at it.

fossilesque@mander.xyz on 19 Jan 19:39 next collapse

Don’t tempt me with a good time.

Boomkop3@reddthat.com on 20 Jan 06:26 collapse

Actually, be very tempted please! Get 'm!

theUwUhugger@lemmy.world on 19 Jan 20:02 next collapse

We are on a social network platform too?

Korhaka@sopuli.xyz on 19 Jan 22:06 next collapse

As if the US government could understand this platform. It will be a shame to lose lemmy.world though

Duamerthrax@lemmy.world on 19 Jan 22:36 next collapse

Not really. It’s just a fancy forum.

Social network platforms have corporate controlled algorithms designed to maximize addiction. At the very least, you would need a “friend” system and who the fuck follows each other on here? When I was using reddit, one person followed me and it was a bot.

kibiz0r@midwest.social on 20 Jan 00:35 collapse

One where you can use any server and client you wish, as long as it implements the same freely-available spec. You can probably access the source code of the server and client you’re using.

As with many things: the problem is not the technology itself, but the terms that capital owners demand we accept in order to use it.

Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 20 Jan 12:05 next collapse

Just force them to use open standards and for it to be easy for people to move platform whilst keeping all the connections to their profile: the power of such social media entities is that people are locked-in because if they move they lose the connections of both followers and those they follow, which often means family and friends.

Basically a solution similar to that adopted in Europe for phone numbers - that you can take your number with you when you move providers - would reduced social media companies down to “just a pipe for social media connectivity” which would ultimatelly kill those with the worst practices given that the barrier to entry to be a “social media provider” is way lower than to be a fixed line telephony provider.

LittleBrownBird@lemmy.zip on 20 Jan 12:19 collapse

“but muh marketplace!” “but muh highschool friends I haven’t seen in a decade+!” “but muh extended family I haven’t spoken to since I was 8!”

Addicts won’t quit Meta. I’ve even seen posts on Lemmy with people defending Facebook. It’s gross.

DicJacobus@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 13:07 collapse

I used to say those same things, now I basically just keep messenger as a job requirement but the rest of it can F off

marketplace is nothing but spam and scam, and those “friends” the only ones I care to talk to, use discord, or regular phone text

Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works on 20 Jan 13:29 collapse

Isn’t messenger app the worst of them all?

SDK@midwest.social on 20 Jan 14:34 collapse

Yes. Messenger collects detailed information about every device on every WiFi network you connect to, including MAC addresses, IP addresses, OS and version, device names, open ports, duration of DHCP lease on each device, and much more. It does this every time you open the app, and on every WiFi network you connect to.

crank0271@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 18:07 collapse

Source for this? I don’t doubt it but would love to be able to reference something.

d00ery@lemmy.world on 19 Jan 19:52 next collapse

“Issues related to voter suppression/interference, political ads and misinformation policies.”

It’s nice to see meta have learned from their own mistakes and are now trying to protect democracy profits.

…wikipedia.org/…/Facebook–Cambridge_Analytica_dat…

tja@sh.itjust.works on 19 Jan 19:58 next collapse

The reason we have a Chinese competitor that we cannot directly control is that Meta is buying up every promising US platform and shutting it down. Or just trying to copy it so that the competitor does not get enough users

coherent_domain@infosec.pub on 19 Jan 22:01 next collapse

As if anti-trust law doesn’t exist. It is crazy to me nowadays, most tech startup’s goal from the very start is to sale to a big tech competitor. This certainly should have anti-trust implications.

bokherif@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 13:13 next collapse

Nope. The legal system is pay to win.

MisterFrog@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 13:00 collapse

“Something something FTC unconstitutional, not even sarcastically” - these oligarchs

mac@lemm.ee on 20 Jan 01:40 collapse

What platforms has meta bought and shut down?

I can think of zero examples myself.

suigenerix@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 04:35 next collapse

CrowdTangle, MetaSpark, Moves, Onavo, Bump, Parse, etc

LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 04:38 collapse

Not sure, most of the companies they buy they claim are to acquire their workers. They’ve bought over 90 companies from what I saw in a quick search.

Snapz@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 19:40 collapse

They buy to acquire IP and shutter competition gaining market share. Any employees are typically systematically let go or driven to quit intentionally within 6 months to a year.

Taldan@lemmy.world on 19 Jan 20:19 next collapse

I don’t know why I do this to myself, but I read through Meta’s disclosure

Every single lobbyist I looked at worked in DC before becoming a lobbyist. I knew it happened a lot, but it’s really depressing to see

Also, why do these disclosures not require companies to specify how the money was spent? There are only ~20 different lobbyists mentioned, and Meta spent 7.6M in a single quarter

mac@lemm.ee on 20 Jan 01:42 collapse

Yes, companies hiring people in politics or with government connections is a very normal thing

callouscomic@lemm.ee on 19 Jan 20:51 next collapse

Headlines that basically say the same shit twice really are swell.

mPony@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 11:34 collapse

If you want to produce the same shit twice, just use a colon.

finitebanjo@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 04:12 next collapse

Good, finally putting that money to good use.

filister@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 06:21 collapse

Stifling competition, great use indeed. Make today’s billionaires trillionaires.

finitebanjo@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 14:22 collapse

TikTok are not competition, they don’t even care about profit or they would have sold 80% of ownership and would continue operating legally.

They’re a weapon

filister@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 18:26 collapse

The same can be said for Meta and X. They even stopped moderating them. So why shall we ban TikTok and allow Meta and X to continue working? I am up for greater scrutiny of social media, but one that’s applied equally across all platforms.

finitebanjo@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 22:29 collapse

When Meta sold data to Russia via Cambridge Analytica they recieved the largest FTC fine in history, and that was long before the law was even conceived.

If the platforms did it today then they should face the full consequences the same as TikTok.

filister@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 05:29 collapse

And where is the proof that something similar has happened? Didn’t TikTok comply with every request of the US government?

And what about the lack of fact checking on Meta and X. Isn’t this a concern for you that they will spread misinformation even faster now? Where are their fines?

finitebanjo@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 12:10 collapse

Didn’t TikTok comply with every request of the US government?

No. The requirements are listed in H.R. 816 Divisions H and Division I.

TikTok knows they didn’t comply with them because they made a show of shutting down. TikTok servers are centralized in Beijing.

arbitrary_sarcasm@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 06:53 next collapse

Media headlines that use the word lobbying probably do it so that people don’t take up arms. If they were to instead call it bribery, I think a lot more people would take issue with the whole process.

ramirezmike@programming.dev on 20 Jan 07:09 collapse

they can’t really do that because that would be defamation and they would be sued for it. Bribery is a crime and while it is effectively the same as lobbying from our perspective, one is legal and one is not and a media outlet can’t just accuse someone of a crime without evidence unless they want to close up shop

Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 20 Jan 12:01 next collapse

When in practice Corruption is not investigated or prosecuted, nobody ever gets convicted of Corruption, the Media can’t talk about Corruption as it would otherwise be defamation, hence the country has no Corruption.

I haven’t lived in the US but I lived in the UK and this was exactly how Britain had “no Corruption”.

Dozzi92@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 13:11 collapse

Except the only thing that will be prosecuted, or adjudicated, is the claim of libel entered by Meta, for suggesting their millions are anything other than legal contributions to something or other.

There is a solution, though, staring us all right in the face.

Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 20 Jan 13:55 next collapse

Yeah.

Those of us paying attention have spotted long ago that the Ju$tice System is mainly a tool for violent enforcement of the power of the moneyed and well-connected elites on the majority of the population behind a charade of “rules are rules” and it being just an independent and a fair mechanism for equal application of the “rules defined by Society” to all (all of which is nowadays and in a painlfully obvious way, clearly a bundle of lies).

All it takes is comparing how the Ju$tice System reacts to merelly the peons breaching uneven contracts with big companies or to the occupation of the property of the very wealthy by the poor, compared to how it reacts to violent crime in poor neighbourhoods, to see how their Ju$tice is not in any way form or shape Fair or Just.

Maybe it’s less so in some countries and more so in others, but nowhere is it actually fair and independent.

ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works on 20 Jan 14:40 collapse

Just like how ABC paid/donated $15 million for reporting an unpleasant fact about the preaident-elect.

theneverfox@pawb.social on 20 Jan 22:33 collapse

How about legal bribery lobbying

Professorozone@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 11:10 next collapse

Well we knew it had to be something. I mean most of Congress is too old to know what a tik tok is.

bokherif@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 13:12 next collapse

They’re just too old for everything. They’re almost part of ancient history.

Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works on 20 Jan 13:27 collapse

Tic Tac Toe!

spujb@lemmy.cafe on 20 Jan 13:57 next collapse

“lobbing”

is this a trusted outlet? at least we can be pretty sure a human wrote it ha ha ha

JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 20 Jan 17:05 next collapse

Well it is called readsludge.com

spujb@lemmy.cafe on 20 Jan 17:09 collapse

right?!? lol

i know mbfc isnt the best but: mediabiasfactcheck.com/sludge/

Bias Rating: LEFT Factual Reporting: HIGH Country: USA MBFC’s Country Freedom Rating: MOSTLY FREE Media Type: Website Traffic/Popularity: Minimal Traffic MBFC Credibility Rating: HIGH CREDIBILITY

…so…. maybe? maybe its fine idk

fossilesque@mander.xyz on 20 Jan 17:35 collapse

I would also like to lob Congress.

spujb@lemmy.cafe on 20 Jan 17:38 collapse

please give me the lobbing machine 🙏

technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 20 Jan 16:51 next collapse

This is why we gotta ban TikTok!!! \s

IndustryStandard@lemmy.world on 20 Jan 23:08 next collapse

The 8200 division at Meta working overtime

dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de on 21 Jan 07:02 collapse

😂

scarabic@lemmy.world on 21 Jan 01:43 collapse

Sad trombone.