Supreme Court Upholds TikTok Ban, Sale Required by Chinese Parent Firm

DigitalDrifter

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Feb 22, 2013
51,681
30,787
2,605
Oregon
Could someone who knows how these platforms function, explain why users couldn't get the same kind of results from YouTube, or other platforms?
What makes TikTok special?

The Supreme Court ruled unanimously on Friday to uphold a federal law banning TikTok unless its China-based parent company, ByteDance, sells the app by Sunday. The justices determined that the app's ties to China pose significant national security risks, outweighing concerns about free speech for TikTok and its 170 million U.S. users.



 
Well for content creators it comes down to monetization. Tik Tok pays more and is more suited for shorter (in length) content than other platforms. I think YouTube is better for longer formats. Or at least that was the gist I got from a lengthy conversation I watched on YouTube from a Tik Toker.
 
Stupid Americans are migrating to RedNote, another Chinese spyware app.

Trump needs to ban all Chinese spyware apps.
 
It's a money-making machine so there are plenty of US buyers.....Piss on the Chi-Coms.


Ranked 7th overall in media with 16.1 billion in revenue (2024).
The Supreme Court can't force them to sell and this is all this ploy really was. Corporate America wanted tik tok and sent their political lapdogs out to strong arm that into happening but tik tok ain't selling. Or doesn't appear to be. They plan just to put up a message on their site explaining to Americans why they can no longer access it.
 
It's a money-making machine so there are plenty of US buyers.....Piss on the Chi-Coms.


Ranked 7th overall in media with 16.1 billion in revenue (2024).
Mr Wonderful from Shark Tank has a $20B offer on the table that doesn’t include the algorithm
 
I see three big problems with Tik Tok.
One is a lot of personal information runs through the platform. That platform is part of the Chinese. Whether that information is shared with the Chinese government is debatable but not beyond belief. That information is such as name, place you were when whatever was shared, what was shared, etc.
Two is a lot of people get what they consider news off this platform. None of it is actually from true reporters and is not verified.
Three is often what is shared is no more then someone’s opinion and nothing has been done to actually vet anything.

While I am not a big believer in social media I am less of a believer in something that could be used to harm someone through misinformation or sharing information about military, civilian or any other matters that could be used by one country against another
 
I see three big problems with Tik Tok.
One is a lot of personal information runs through the platform. That platform is part of the Chinese. Whether that information is shared with the Chinese government is debatable but not beyond belief. That information is such as name, place you were when whatever was shared, what was shared, etc.
Two is a lot of people get what they consider news off this platform. None of it is actually from true reporters and is not verified.
Three is often what is shared is no more then someone’s opinion and nothing has been done to actually vet anything.

While I am not a big believer in social media I am less of a believer in something that could be used to harm someone through misinformation or sharing information about military, civilian or any other matters that could be used by one country against another
Dipshit News reporters have been doing that from before social media was even a thing. How about we ban Geraldo Rivera from reporting news for national security? Where's the House vote on that? :dunno: :lol:


Rivera gets army boot out of Iraq
 
Dipshit News reporters have been doing that from before social media was even a thing. How about we ban Geraldo Rivera from reporting news for national security? Where's the House vote on that? :dunno: :lol:


Rivera gets army boot out of Iraq
I do not know about you but I never considered Rivera a serious reporter. I have no doubt you probably were on the edge of your seat watching him open Al Capone s vault.
But I still felt and still do that any news organization that wants to hire him should be allowed to. Then they can worry about vetting anything he reports on.
Exactly what news organization is vetting what is put up on Tik Tok?
 
I do not know about you but I never considered Rivera a serious reporter. I have no doubt you probably were on the edge of your seat watching him open Al Capone s vault.
But I still felt and still do that any news organization that wants to hire him should be allowed to. Then they can worry about vetting anything he reports on.
Exactly what news organization is vetting what is put up on Tik Tok?
I'm happy to get information from a variety of places, vetted and unvetted. When it comes to determining the veracity of any given story the final vetter is myself. Even articles that I agree with I try to spot the biases. :dunno:
 
The Supreme Court can't force them to sell and this is all this ploy really was. Corporate America wanted tik tok and sent their political lapdogs out to strong arm that into happening but tik tok ain't selling. Or doesn't appear to be. They plan just to put up a message on their site explaining to Americans why they can no longer access it.
Hey moron! The court upheld the law, meaning if they do not sell, so it can be banned. What part of that do you not get?
 
Hey moron! The court upheld the law, meaning if they do not sell, so it can be banned. What part of that do you not get?
Are you illiterate? I acknowledged that they can be banned and said instead of selling they plan to display a message explaining why Americans can't access their site. Learn to read you Dipshit. :lol:
 
I'm happy to get information from a variety of places, vetted and unvetted. When it comes to determining the veracity of any given story the final vetter is myself. Even articles that I agree with I try to spot the biases. :dunno:
I get information from many sources but I do not get them from other peoples opinions. I would prefer if we went back to news organizations simply reporting the news instead of inputting the reporters spin on what is being reported. I think you may be relying on your own bias to as you say spot bias.
Everyone has a built in bias. Which tends to color what they filter out.
 
I get information from many sources but I do not get them from other peoples opinions. I would prefer if we went back to news organizations simply reporting the news instead of inputting the reporters spin on what is being reported. I think you may be relying on your own bias to as you say spot bias.
Everyone has a built in bias. Which tends to color what they filter out.
I don't care what you prefer. Why are you trying to limit sources of information from other people simply because you don't find value in it? :dunno:
 
I don't care what you prefer. Why are you trying to limit sources of information from other people simply because you don't find value in it? :dunno:
I prefer educated and intelligent people. Morons that follow what other morons say is not exactly my idea of a way to have intelligent people.
I know you do not care what others think that is rather obvious.
 
I prefer educated and intelligent people. Morons that follow what other morons say is not exactly my idea of a way to have intelligent people.
I know you do not care what others think that is rather obvious.
And you think politicians, through laws, should decide for us what the intelligent and correct sources of information are? :dunno: Not the people themselves?
 
And you think politicians, through laws, should decide for us what the intelligent and correct sources of information are? :dunno: Not the people themselves?
So you believe that politicians are not supposed to do what the people who voted for them want? So what exactly do you think politicians are expected to do?
I happen to believe that if a politician does not do what those who voted for them want then they should remove them from office.
I do believe that a politician should help to enact laws that make citizens safer. Do you feel that you should be allowed to start a war in the heart of the U.S. or should politicians be allowed to make laws against that? Do you believe that you should be allowed to set a theater on fire or should we allow politicians to write laws against that?
If it were one politician then no they should not be allowed. But a quorum of elected officials should be able to set laws.
But we are talking about the Supreme Court which made a decision based on the law. That was law set by a large number of elected officials.
 

Forum List

Back
Top