US TikTok investors in limbo as deal set to be delayed again

12/15/2025 at 8:18:00 PM

It is true and documented that the reason TikTok was challenged and censored was because it was exposing too many people to Israeli crimes in the genocide in Gaza. This was stated by high level officials. Of course, it also provides grist for accusing China of interfering in American politics, but of course, doing so would be a voice of morality, and you can't have that.

https://forward.com/culture/688840/tiktok-ban-gaza-palestine...

Edit: As a Jew, I also want to note that there is at least one dead comment mixing this with actual antisemitism, which has been apparently increasingly promoted by the right-wing media. My presumption is this is an attempt to create an actual anti-semitism crisis Israel can point to in order to shut down criticism from the left.

by tehjoker

12/15/2025 at 10:02:08 PM

No, it’s not true. The bill which banned TikTok (H.R. 7521 Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act)[1] was introduced by Mike Gallagher and Raja Krishnamoorthi in 2024, but a near identical bill, the ANTI-SOCIAL CCP Act (H.R.1081)[2] was introduced by those same lawmakers in February of 2023, long before the Gaza War began, though it did not make it out of committee at that time. It’s conceivable that the bill’s passage was prioritized by house leadership due to concerns about content on TikTok, but the text of the bill contains no reference to the Israel-Palestine conflict and its very obvious from public statements by both co-sponsors that the primary motivation for this bill was concern with Chinese influence.

[1] https://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20240311/HR%207521%20Up...

[2] https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/hr1081/BILLS-118hr1081ih....

by derektank

12/15/2025 at 10:24:24 PM

The bill had no traction, "until Oct. 7. The attack that day in Israel by Hamas and the ensuing conflict in Gaza became a turning point in the push against TikTok, Helberg said. People who historically hadn’t taken a position on TikTok became concerned with how Israel was portrayed in the videos and what they saw as an increase in antisemitic content posted to the app."

"How TikTok Was Blindsided by U.S. Bill That Could Ban It" (https://www.wsj.com/tech/how-tiktok-was-blindsided-by-a-u-s-...)

> its very obvious from public statements by both co-sponsors that the primary motivation for this bill was concern with Chinese influence.

Here's an op-ed authored by bill sponsor Mike Gallagher entitled, "Why Do Young Americans Support Hamas? Look at TikTok.": https://www.thefp.com/p/tik-tok-young-americans-hamas-mike-g...

by user982

12/15/2025 at 11:00:18 PM

Around the time the second bill was passed, banning TikTok was polling at 50%. Why make this complicated? Banning TikTok is popular. People don’t like it because it’s brain rot. Many vice bans poll highly.

by doctorpangloss

12/15/2025 at 11:10:20 PM

Completely disagree. Look around, mass protests start and governments fall when banning social media. There are 80 million daily active users of TikTok in the US, Trump would never, ever be so stupid as to piss off 80 million people by suddenly blocking their favourite app. That's the whole reason of this standoff.

by throw310822

12/18/2025 at 3:15:20 AM

Netanyahu is on record saying TikTok is the most important purchase for Is-ael. Ellison is Jewish and recently has turned more religious, holding well documented meetings with Is-eli officials. You should listen to both of them. They are saying the quiet part out loud, while their slavish defenders like you have not yet received the script. Wait for AIPAC to send you the script weak little boy, before the Adelsons reprimand you as they do our congress.

by MPSFounder

12/15/2025 at 8:57:45 PM

Both can be true, no? TikTok can be a tool that China uses to aid its geopolitical goals. TikTok has lots of criticism of Israel. Both can be true.

by Seattle3503

12/15/2025 at 11:19:07 PM

TikTok is a social media the US don't control. TikTok has content the US don't want the American public to see. It's the same problem.

by throw310822

12/15/2025 at 11:25:59 PM

Would we be having this conversation if TikTok was EU based?

by Seattle3503

12/15/2025 at 11:39:52 PM

Probably not, because the EU is politically subservient both to the US and to Israel.

by throw310822

12/15/2025 at 9:37:32 PM

Remember how the USSR used Jim Crow to criticize America and degrade the US's international standing? That Soviet messaging was clearly self-serving, but it doesn't make America's behavior that creating the opening any less reprehensible.

Same deal here.

by MengerSponge

12/15/2025 at 11:51:38 PM

And it's not like there aren't dozens of equally brain-rot apps made my US and EU based companies that people would love to see banned. The only one, out of SHEER COINCIDENCE I'M SUUUURE, actually on the chopping block is the one that promotes a lot of pro-Gaza content.

Like I'm sorry, there is just no debate to be had here. Israel is committing a genocide, confirmed by the UN, recognized by anyone who looks at what's going on there with an even remotely objective eye, and the only social platform on which that message is getting out is facing legal scrutiny in the entire West is TikTok. This doesn't even require a conspiracy board, it's literally three red strings between TikTok, Israel, and the US. Despite worldwide propaganda efforts on the part of every corporate media in existence all screaming that the genocide isn't a genocide, a full 25% of people according to a poll I saw are fully convinced the genocide Israel is committing is in fact a genocide.

This would be fucking pathetic if not for the fact that every organized world entity involved in this utter sham was so incredibly powerful and their influence wasn't borderline inescapable.

by ToucanLoucan

12/16/2025 at 12:25:15 AM

The initial TikTok ban bill was introduced in January 25, 2023, before the Oct 7 attacks.

I don't think we can trust TikTok to be a defender of global human rights. China doesn't have a great record on this, with Muslim minorities in particular. The furor over Uyghurs in China has died down due to China's strong international influence but that doesn't mean China is respecting Uyghurs human rights.

by Seattle3503

12/16/2025 at 3:12:00 AM

I don't know if TikTok is algorithmically pushing anti-Israel content/genocide-witnessing content. Although if you told me Zuck and Musk were suppressing genocide-witnessing content I'd buy it.

Of course it's opportunistic of China to criticize the West's supply of bombs to drop on civilians that enable said genocide. But how can the West claim to be upholding the values that say "Uyghur genocide is wrong" while being quiet about the Gazan genocide...

Feel free to argue about semantics and meaning of the G word instead of addressing the death of the rules-based International order.

by netsharc

12/16/2025 at 7:12:56 AM

The west is not quiet about Gaza by any measure. I live in the west and hear about it a lot. You practically can't escape reports. At this point I'd say it reflects your media diet if you aren't hearing about it.

In 2023 Azerbaijan ethnically cleansed Nagorno-Karabakh of ethnic Armenians[1]. IMO that is a better example of human rights violations that the west has been silent about. But that happened at the end of September 2023, and folks were more interested in talking about IP.

But my point is you will not hear about Uyghurs on TikTok, and that is a part of why a Chinese controlled media company should not be trusted. To say that you don't have to accept anything about the US or its media companies.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_of_Nagorno-Karabakh_...

by Seattle3503

12/16/2025 at 10:26:05 AM

> The west is not quiet

Ah, a semantic misunderstanding. By "The West" I mean the governments. Biden had red lines that Netanyahu walked all over. Germany still have their 80 years old guilt and this got exploited by Netanyahu. Etc, etc. There are pockets of protests by governments, but on the whole the Western bureaucracy kept supporting the genocide...

by netsharc

12/16/2025 at 5:28:14 PM

That might matter more if the the proposal was to hand over TikTok to the US government, but that's not what people are asking. People are asking for media not controlled by the CCP.

by Seattle3503

12/16/2025 at 6:17:25 PM

Maybe TikTok is controlled by people who are close to CCP leadership... oh that's bad, so now the US government wants to force its sale so it's controlled by people like Larry Ellison, known to be close to Trump.

Wowwww, what a world of difference. /S

Funny you keep picking on nits as if these assholes aren't 2 sides of the same coin. At least admit that you prefer your fascism Trump-branded, at least the alphabet is still legible compared to Chinese Communist fascism.

by netsharc

12/16/2025 at 9:42:44 PM

China is not fascist, communism ands fascism are opposed concepts and mortal enemies. Please do some reading.

by tehjoker

12/16/2025 at 3:24:32 AM

What does China have to do with Israel? Israel killed so many children in Ghaza. And Journalists. It is the greatest enemy of the west, for its values (stealing land, no respect for human life or property) is alien to what Voltaire described as western traits (and voltaire by the way regarded both China and Jews in Europe as antithetical to the west, though more out of sinophobia and antisemitism). No impartial observer can look at Israel and see a western nation. I do not know of any country (Russia and Iran included) who has starved a population and committed rape while defending it. Vile people.

by MPSFounder

12/16/2025 at 1:54:36 AM

You can stop believing in conspiracy theories and that the Jews are behind it all anytime. It will vastly improve your mood.

by zappb

12/16/2025 at 12:58:26 PM

It is neither a conspiracy nor about any Jews, beyond those at the seats of power in Israel. It is the Global North once again fucking with the Global South, for some combination of resources, money, power, or simply because they can and starting forever wars about nothing is a great way to shovel cash into the military industrial complex. That's no conspiracy theory it's simply neo-Colonialism as a concept and it's been at work for longer than my parents have been alive.

I don't speculate on their motivations, I'm not interested. I rarely use the word evil, but I think this qualifies.

by ToucanLoucan

12/15/2025 at 9:02:06 PM

Should American owned or controlled companies be banned in other countries? Should Israel be banned from interfering in American politics? If yes, then I am more open to this concept.

For what it's worth, I am not aware of any evidence that TikTok did anything intentional to promote anti-US narratives. To be honest, I think they accomplished that goal by simply promoting what people wanted to see, which is in large part, simply the truth. The so-called enemies of America do not have to work very hard or lie, they just need to expose our propaganda in a very straightforward fashion.

Since the COVID crisis at least, US owned social media companies have become very censorious and we know they tamper with the algorithms. It may be that simply having a less biased algorithm is too clarifying for American elites.

by tehjoker

12/15/2025 at 9:32:04 PM

>Should American owned or controlled companies be banned in other countries?

I don't understand why that's your response to a question about them both being true. It seems like a perfectly legitimate observation: China can and probably is leveraging social media to shape global discussion of political topics that they deem sensitive. And it's also the case that at least for some voting block of conservative Republicans in the US Senate, it's an opportunity to potentially shut down communication on Israel's actions in Gaza. It's a classic both can be true situation.

I actually think you're right that Tiktok isn't necessarily intentionally promoting Gaza but that it has organically emerged simply because it legitimately is an issue that is an issue that has provoked moral outrage of the western world. To the extent that China is shaping anything, I think it's more about suppressing disapproved narratives than amplifying approved ones, as well as surveillance of Western opinion that can be channeled into soft power infrastructure outside the bounds of the internet.

by glenstein

12/15/2025 at 9:47:22 PM

I don’t disagree that there is a soft power component, but it is strange in my opinion to narrowly focus on China when there are demonstrable harms from american allies and none so far as I can tell from China.

In my view, people getting exposed to China and seeing them as human will help prevent the war our capitalists are cooking up.

by tehjoker

12/15/2025 at 9:55:51 PM

How are you scoping harms this context? Are we setting aside Chinas actions inside of China or Hong Kong?

by Seattle3503

12/15/2025 at 10:31:39 PM

It is true that China controls the conversation around e.g. Tienanmen square (an event that is not accurately portrayed in U.S. media), nor the Xianjiang "genocide" that Biden concocted for which there was zero proof (we know what a genocide looks like in Gaza, the most tightly controlled, censored, and surveilled territory in the world, it is also laughable that the U.S. would pretend to be the champion of muslims while enacting a genocide of a population that is predominantly muslim and putting a self-proclaimed crusader in charge of the department of war).

However, the "harms" of exposing the U.S. population to Chinese influence would be to tamp down the population's aggression towards China. I cannot see a single problem with that.

China is a democracy, but it is not a liberal democracy. It represses the right wing and allows democracy within a window defined by the communist party. I think we would be hard pressed to call America a democracy at this point. We repress left wing viewpoints that gain traction and allow "democracy" within a right wing capitalist framework. Funnily enough, this is not a symmetric mirror. Right wing viewpoints are oppressive and minoritarian. Left wing viewpoints at least purport to represent the majority of workers and China does in fact increase the material well-being of its population by leaps and bounds year-over-year.

by tehjoker

12/15/2025 at 10:47:20 PM

If you are more ready to call China a democracy than the United States, there's too much ground to cover in this conversation. There's a lot to unpack there.

by Seattle3503

12/16/2025 at 12:37:53 AM

>China is a democracy, but it is not a liberal democracy.

This is a specular redefining of fundamental terms that prevents meaningful discussion in this context.

by glenstein

12/17/2025 at 1:32:29 PM

It’s been shown years ago that the Chinese government does what the people want much more often and closely than the US government. CCP inside the party is very democratic too, much more rigid, but it is bottom up.

by kelipso

12/16/2025 at 1:15:55 AM

In America, democracy is defined as liberal democracy to preclude other forms as legitimate. Liberal democracy means theoretically that anyone can contest for political power regardless of political viewpoint. This means that anyone from a monarchist, to a fascist, to religious fundamentalist, to a liberal, to a communist and anything in-between may run in elections. In practice, various devices are used to ensure there is a window of acceptability, and that fire is primarily directed at the left. I used to think at least fascists and monarchists would also be precluded, but I have been shown to be wrong. In this sense, outside of tight parameters, liberal democracy has inherent contradictions that can easily destroy itself and transition to a different point of (usually temporary) stability, such as has been seen in France when the 1st republic became the French Empire under Napoleon, became a republic again, then switched back to monarchy, and so on and so forth.

I'm not sure what the phrase used for what China is doing is (well, there is "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics"), but as an outsider, my understanding is the idea is that a very broad portion of the population should be involved in the communist party and that democracy should be encouraged within a framework of marxism. Nonetheless, several opposition parties are allowed to run in elections though parties too far to the right are excluded. Still, these opposition parties can be fairly critical and given that China is using a significant capitalist mode of production, some elements of capitalist ideology are allowed. It is a little confusing to be sure.

by tehjoker

12/16/2025 at 3:15:32 AM

> several opposition parties are allowed to run in elections though parties too far to the right are excluded.

Just today, China sentenced Jimmy Lai, after preventing such left-wing democratic figures from running for office, because they opposed China's right-wing authoritarianism. Not a great time to make this claim.

by ImPostingOnHN

12/16/2025 at 9:11:38 PM

I don’t know enough about Jimmy Lai to call him left wing. He seemed like a rich capitalist pro west guy to me, but that’s a very surface level read.

by tehjoker

12/15/2025 at 10:27:51 PM

If people actually went to the Chinese language social media as it is instead of algorithimically curated media they would have alot worse opinion.

by corimaith

12/15/2025 at 11:05:57 PM

China already bans American media companies from operating in China.

by loeg

12/15/2025 at 9:14:49 PM

Try using American social media and offerings in China, and lately, Russia.

by ronnier

12/15/2025 at 11:31:21 PM

To be fair, in some Russian regions you cannot access even most Russian sites from mobile (we have whitelist mode). Also, not everyone, but some people started using VPN after Instagram ban, and even more after Youtube ban. Like drug addicts who cannot drop their habits.

by codedokode

12/15/2025 at 9:33:10 PM

But it's not about reciprocity if you're truly committed to free speech right?

by Daishiman

12/15/2025 at 11:07:20 PM

The first amendment isn't a suicide pact, and foreign corporations were never covered by it.

by loeg

12/15/2025 at 11:49:19 PM

It's not a 'suicide pact', it's a clear commitment that the government will not ban speech it finds inconvenient.

It's not done a great job of living up to that promise.

by vkou

12/15/2025 at 9:42:43 PM

Americans still have free speech. There are many other platforms to use. Foreign governments never have had free speech rights and I doubt most people support them having those rights.

by zeroonetwothree

12/16/2025 at 7:57:30 AM

> There are many other platforms to use.

That will promptly proceed to bury whatever the government tells them to bury.

by LtWorf

12/15/2025 at 9:55:04 PM

> Should American owned or controlled companies be banned in other countries?

This is hardly the "gotcha" you're framing it as. Building sovereign capability has shot to the top of a lot nations priority lists.

In a lot of industries this is also just standard even amongst allies: national security related contracts have extensive clauses about ownership, structure and access.

by XorNot

12/15/2025 at 9:19:42 PM

> Should American owned or controlled companies be banned in other countries? Should Israel be banned from interfering in American politics? If yes, then I am more open to this concept.

I think there are important differences between China any democracy. In China, each company needs a internal party cell or party commitee to police and control that companies actions. If you don't find differences between China and open democracies compelling, we won't find much common ground.

Nonetheless, we are seeing US tech companies facing scrutiny in Europe.

Something else I'll say is I think some of the big tech companies should be broken up, which I see achieving similar goals by similar means. Reduce centralized control by a change in ownership. If China were a corporation instead of a country, old likewise advocating divesting control of TikTok

by Seattle3503

12/15/2025 at 9:24:24 PM

I mean, having local government and employees represented on the board seems to be an increasingly good idea.

by orwin

12/15/2025 at 9:58:25 PM

Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, outright said that it was important for this deal to go through and that is part of the "eighth front" in their war.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/gPKw3cM3DUI

Larry Ellison is a vocal Zionist, leaked emails show that he vetted Marco Rubio for "fealty to Israel". In one email he outright said "Great meeting with Marco Rubio. I set him up to meet with Tony Blair. Marco will be a great friend for Israel".

https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/larry-ellison-vetted-marco-ru...

This is the man who would be given control of Tik Tok and its algorithm.

by Dig1t

12/15/2025 at 9:36:28 PM

It was bad until General Bone Spur found a way to profit from it. Now it's ok. As usual the deal was just some verbal agreement that was not binding in anyway. How many times will people keep falling for this?

by strangattractor

12/15/2025 at 9:43:49 PM

It's been clear to me since the very beginning of this TikTok drama, even before the war in Gaza, that it was never about TikTok being naughty; it is about TikTok not being owned by the wealthiest people in America. These people have no problem with Facebook, Instagram, et al. being naughty because they profit from it.

That's why the every proposed TikTok ban is so specific to TikTok, and never does anything to actually regulate the naughty things TikTok does, because that would mean hurting American social media companies.

by babypuncher

12/15/2025 at 11:25:50 PM

> These people have no problem with Facebook, Instagram, et al. being naughty because they profit from it.

Facebook, Instagram are not naughty. They're well embedded in the political economic ruling elite of the country. They amplify or mute whatever messages that elite wants amplified or muted. The US can't make rules for TikTok to do the same because that would be illegal, besides being too obviously partisan.

by throw310822

12/16/2025 at 12:36:46 AM

The idea that TikTok is somehow less corruptible than Facebook or Instagram is laughable as American investors were largest investors of ByteDance to begin with. If it was only about Israel, they can be pressured into censorship the same way Meta supposedly is*. The difference is that TikTok can also be pressured by China, where its parent company resides.

*What is more likely is that TikTok isn't actually more pro-Palestinian than Meta, but the demographics that use it actually are which affects the algorithm and user reports.

by Aunche

12/15/2025 at 10:14:59 PM

I have less cynical view on essentially the same thing - US lawmakers saw how effective TikTok was at spreading a pro- Palestine/anti-Israel story, and became afraid that China would weaponise it (more?) against the US population on a separate topic.

This is essentially the same thing though I guess

by madeofpalk

12/15/2025 at 8:37:26 PM

You're being downvoted but Greenblatt has stated it plainly.

Also the reason behind the 60 minutes fiasco and the CBS acquisition which had Bari Weiss installed there.

by propagandist

12/15/2025 at 10:33:33 PM

You're being downvoted but Greenblatt has stated it plainly.

Maybe he's being downvoted for taking the discussion off-topic.

by reaperducer

12/15/2025 at 11:43:11 PM

How is the reason for the TikTok sale off topic for a post about the TikTok sale?

by an0malous

12/16/2025 at 6:45:00 AM

[flagged]

by 879565375987587

12/15/2025 at 11:56:10 PM

As a Jew, when’s the last time you kept Shabbat?

by zappb

12/16/2025 at 3:22:19 AM

as a jew, I ask, why do you care about somebody else's religious life, and how does that tie into the discussion?

by ImPostingOnHN

12/16/2025 at 8:38:12 AM

As a jew, it is obvious he asked because GP somehow brought the topic of being jewish up in his edit for some weird authority reason? Hence the reply I would assume.

by mobtrain

12/16/2025 at 1:24:13 PM

maybe gp did, maybe gp didn't, but that still wouldn't explain the weird, non-sequitur reply about shabbat, hence the question.

by ImPostingOnHN

12/15/2025 at 9:47:05 PM

This is brainrot conspiracy garbage. Preventing a geopolitical rival which we have no democratic control over from exerting algorithmic influence over our country is a no-brainer. Efforts to remove TikTok from PRC control predate the Oct 7, 2024 attacks.

Additionally, information about what was going on in Gaza was widely available and widely discussed on all social media platforms and in the mainstream media.

Additionally, if you're defending TikTok because it allowed them to amplify support for the Palestinian cause, it's interesting that TikTok themselves claim that you are wrong, as they said to the US Supreme court that "allegations that TikTok has amplified support for either side of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are unfounded". Are they lying here? If so, why should we trust them with control over mass social media? If they're not lying, you are wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restrictions_on_TikTok_in_the_...

by wilg

12/15/2025 at 9:56:42 PM

TikTok allowed the algorithm to amplify what people wanted to see while palestine content was suppressed on other platforms. What they said was true and they also allowed this content to be amplified, which was a good thing.

by tehjoker

12/15/2025 at 10:00:18 PM

So, in your opinion the TikTok algorithm is politically neutral?

by wilg

12/16/2025 at 12:07:11 AM

having it made the overall landscape more politically neutral.

with it changed to peddle the american propaganda line, the overall media is more biased than it was

by 8note

12/15/2025 at 10:03:46 PM

Is there any evidence it's not?

All the worries are about what TikTok could do. Not about anything they've done so far. If you like progressive stuff, you get progressive stuff. If you like right-wing stuff, you get right-wing stuff.

by crazygringo

12/15/2025 at 10:08:33 PM

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_by_TikTok

by wilg

12/15/2025 at 10:55:54 PM

Is Facebook's, or Twitter's? This is about the US federal government wanting to exert control over a popular information portal, nothing more, nothing less.

I don't think the CCP should be in control of it either. Of course, I don't think the UK should be able to backdoor services and devices, and I don't think the EU has any business hurling Chat Control around year after year. I also know that age verification is a similar tactic being employed globally to ensure the same degradation of rights.

That doesn't mean that amplification can't sometimes be a good thing, or that it wasn't a good thing that TikTok allowed so much anti-Israel content even though Instagram and other platforms routinely manipulated discoverability of anti-Israel content. Even if it was part of a plan by China to destabilize the US-Israeli imperial regime; If the US wasn't busy funding and encouraging genocide, we wouldn't have all this rope laying around with which to hang ourselves.

The truth is, the current state of international foreign affairs is so complicated, so messy, that we are not going to be able to have a nuanced yet condensed discussion which fully accounts for everything currently in motion.

So it can be true that TikTok is a tool of China meant to best America in a culture war and destabilize it from within, and that the US Corpgov is still totally in the wrong here and leveraging the usual excuses in a bid to continue the mass consolidation of media distribution under oligarchical control. Everyone is in the wrong here, and you and I are paying for it.

by soulofmischief

12/16/2025 at 3:39:02 AM

Whether the US government is in the wrong in this issue is immaterial, the issue is there is a system for the US people to exert control over the issue democratically, as opposed to that control being exerted by a geopolitical adversary!

by wilg

12/16/2025 at 4:51:38 AM

TikTok is used globally. Right now, the app being under US control is arguably worse for the rest of the world than it even being under control of the CCP, which is saying a lot. Especially once you look into the media consolidation happening under the Ellisons.

by soulofmischief

12/16/2025 at 7:51:18 AM

The democracy issue really does matter more than that.

by wilg

12/15/2025 at 10:01:57 PM

Sitting congresspeople said that this was one of the motivations.

by UncleMeat

12/15/2025 at 10:12:28 PM

I agree some Republicans (a dumb and bad group of people) support it for this reason, but divestiture (ideally to someone other than Larry Ellison) is still highly desirable.

by wilg

12/16/2025 at 1:18:17 AM

Maybe "brainrot conspiracy garbage" isn't the way to describe it, then?

by UncleMeat

12/16/2025 at 3:36:35 AM

It is at least brainrot garbage to think that this mostly imaginary Gaza drama is worth allowing the PRC to operate an uncontrolled propaganda tool directly influencing millions of Americans! The millions of Americans in a position to be influenced by it should have clear assurances that it is being operated in accordance with the laws and systems that they control via democratic methods, not a geopolitical adversary working in opposition to them!

by wilg

12/15/2025 at 11:26:41 PM

Why should it matter to the average citizen if the algorithmic control is coming from Ellison, Zuckerberg, or Shou Zi Chew?

by ribosometronome

12/16/2025 at 3:37:28 AM

Because Shou Zi Chew answers to the PRC which is a geopolitical adversary of the country the average citizen is able to democratically determine the direction of.

by wilg

12/17/2025 at 12:00:27 AM

Do you think EU should ban facebook?

by LtWorf

12/16/2025 at 12:21:14 AM

Ellison, Zuckerberg, and Shou Zi Chew (who to be clear is only the CEO of TikTok, not ByteDance) may be willing to brainrot Americans, but it's for the sake of profit, so they can be pressured to change. Facebook and Twitter cooperated with American intelligence to uncover to Russia's disinformation campaign and they have no incentivize to fake compliance.

From those investigations, it was revealed that Russia and likely other foreign adversaries do simply want to brainrot Americans for the sake of destabilizing the country. If TikTok gets investigated for Chinese intererfence, China can pressure Bytedance into sabotaging these investigations.

by Aunche

12/16/2025 at 10:34:09 PM

Ellison, Zuckerberg, and moreover Elon Musk have all contributed to Trump's rise, which has seemed fairly destabilizing for the United States. Their profit motive comes at our expense as well.

by ribosometronome

12/16/2025 at 7:57:32 AM

in short: freedom of speech, unless you say something I don't like?

by LtWorf

12/15/2025 at 10:10:48 PM

> This is brainrot conspiracy garbage.

Here's Mitt Romney explaining that "the number of mentions of Palestinians" was the reason why "there was such overwhelming support for us to shut down (potentially) TikTok": https://x.com/wideofthepost/status/1787104142982283587

> Additionally, if you're defending TikTok because it allowed them to amplify support for the Palestinian cause, it's interesting that TikTok themselves claim that you are wrong, as they said to the US Supreme court that "allegations that TikTok has amplified support for either side of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are unfounded". Are they lying here? If so, why should we trust them with control over mass social media? If they're not lying, you are wrong.

The sentence that you quoted from that Wikipedia page came at the end of this paragraph:

  Several officials subsequently cited alleged pro-Palestinian bias on the app. While advocating for a ban, Representative Mike Gallagher alleged "rampant pro-Hamas propaganda on the app". Senators Mitt Romney, Josh Hawley, Representative Mike Lawler, and other Republicans have also alleged that TikTok had a pro-Palestine bias, with Lawler even alleging that TikTok was being manipulated during pro-Palestinian protests at colleges. In a filing to the Supreme Court, TikTok's attorneys said, "Allegations that TikTok has amplified support for either side of the Israeli- Palestinian conflict are unfounded."

There's no contradiction if TikTok was telling the truth about its neutrality: not amplifying support for Israel was reason enough to get banned by the United States government, and immediately after Trump's first reprieve a year ago TikTok began flagging and removing "Free Palestine" posts as hate speech (https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/tiktok-labels-free-pal...).

by user982

12/16/2025 at 1:07:29 AM

The conspiracy here is the idea that the only reason someone might want TikTok in the US to be under US control is to suppress information about Gaza. The best reason is to have the media that people in the US consume not be controlled by geopolitical rivals through opaque algorithms!

by wilg

12/13/2025 at 3:06:38 AM

Whoa, it should be bigger news. I too was under the impression that it was a done deal, with Larry Ellison coming in to mop the floor.

It would be so funny if ByteDance and China continued to successfully mock the US in this silly posturing.

by vdupras

12/13/2025 at 11:46:31 AM

Russia and China have been pretty successful at making these fools look like what they are - gullible suckers.

by renegade-otter

12/15/2025 at 11:48:29 PM

I think the truth is TikTok/ByteDance have all the leverage. A ban of the app is political suicide for whatever administration implements it.

by dangus

12/16/2025 at 12:22:16 AM

If there's one thing I've taken away from Trump's successes, it's that there's no such thing as "political suicide".

A massive tax hike on imported goods, making loads of things more expensive? Political suicide! Constant flip-flopping and backtracking on deals? Political suicide! Doing mocking impersonations of disabled people? Political suicide! Accepting donations from neo-nazi groups? Political suicide! Cheating on your pregnant wife with a porn star? Political suicide! Repeatedly visiting a billionaire pedophile's private island? Political suicide!

Except it turns out actually none of that is political suicide.

by michaelt

12/16/2025 at 12:23:49 AM

this is exactly right. he could ban all social media and 1/2 the country would be “yes, visionary looking out for us and our children” :)

by bdangubic

12/16/2025 at 10:39:39 AM

1/2 the country would be right. Do you not think if social media was disappeared society would be in a better place?

by phatfish

12/16/2025 at 1:08:39 PM

I am not the op, but I do. He would not be banning it for social reasons - he would be banning it as a racketeering operation, and the 1/2 would support it because of that.

by renegade-otter

12/16/2025 at 5:22:44 PM

I think this is a lot different than a lot of wedge issues that tend to affect people mostly in theory. Wedge issues are often chosen by the political elite because there isn’t a risk of the dog catching the car effect becoming a major political liability.

E.g., overturning roe v wade made a bunch of republican evangelical republican voters grey happy while restricting the lives of a relatively small amount of people. And I know this statement sounds crazy but hear me out and do the math: You have to be a woman (~50% probability), get an abortion (~25% of women in their lifetime) and reside in a state that restricts abortion (about 20% of the population). Multiply those together and you end up with a 2.5% probability that overturning roe v wade has a tangible impact on your life.

You can apply this same concept to a lot of today’s hot button topics.

In contrast, 1/3 of all adults use TikTok. About 60% of people under 30 use it.

Like I said in my other comments, this is comparable to a government shutting down the NFL. It would be a major optics disaster to implement a TikTok ban.

by dangus

12/16/2025 at 10:31:19 PM

bigger optics disaster than being a rapist of young girls?!

by bdangubic

12/17/2025 at 6:39:32 PM

Do you not comprehend what I’m saying? Can you try to read back to me what the substance of my argument is?

I’m not debating whether the guy is morally reprehensible.

People can ignore that because that doesn’t affect them. Chris Brown is still selling out stadiums because he didn’t personally assault his fans.

What does affect people are everyday things like whether their favorite app got banned or whether eggs are affordable.

by dangus

12/16/2025 at 1:26:51 AM

All of those things affect the everyperson far less than losing TikTok.

Losing TikTok would be like if the government shut down the NFL. This isn’t hyperbole.

I never claimed all those other irrelevant things you brought up were political suicide. In that sense they are unrelated topics. Dare I say you’re making a strawman argument.

by dangus

12/16/2025 at 1:09:49 PM

Really? It seems that even banning Roe vs Wade did not get young people out en masse to vote, and this would be the last straw?

by renegade-otter

12/16/2025 at 5:09:48 PM

Unironically, yes.

Again, focus on thinking about direct and noticeable impact to the lives of the masses, who are largely entirely disconnected or very casually attached to the political discourse. As you pointed out by implication, activists are a small portion of the overall population.

Roe v. Wade is an issue that has theoretical impact to most women from a statistical standpoint. Yes, the destruction of those rights is infuriating, but only if you’re actively paying attention to politics and/or actively trying to get an abortion. And even then, if you live in a large collection of high population blue states, the ruling being reversed didn’t actually change anything for you. Californians, New Yorkers, and Illinoisans didn’t lose any abortion rights.

Most women will never get an abortion. It’s an important political issue but also one that doesn’t impact most people.

59% of adults under the age of 30 use TikTok. 1/3 of all adults use it. Losing that app is a wildly noticeable negative to people’s lives.

The unwashed masses of idiots would see this as “Trump banned TikTok” and wouldn’t know or care that the law comes from congress or any of the other political details.

by dangus

12/16/2025 at 12:04:30 AM

My theory is the Trump Mafia doesn't care if people think they are idiots.

This admin is so transparently corrupt, and they're making out like bandits.

Trump and his family have made billions of dollars on the crypto rug pull. Everyone knew it was a shitcoin from the start.

Trump has pardoned violent criminals and felony fraudsters for business deals and "donations".

His family's net worth has estimated to have risen billions this year alone.

Elon Musk essentially bought his way into the control of the government and tried to buy off votes.

Kristi Noem funneled at least one sole source contract worth $220 million dollars to a firm closely tied to her and her previous political campaigns.

Ron DeSantis spent $250 million dollars of no-bid contracts for essentially a tent interment camp, many of questionable value and to politically tied companies

They don't care if you don't like them and I don't think they care if they accomplish what they ran on. They have done a bang up job enriching themselves and their donor class, however.

by dashundchen

12/16/2025 at 3:00:53 AM

It should worry us that they're not worried about what happens when they're no longer in power and the naked corruption gets looked at. They're not worried because their plan is to stay in power...

Losing voter confidence in droves? Not a problem if you're confident about establishing the next 1000 year reich.

by netsharc

12/16/2025 at 12:52:07 PM

bingo. said something similar before - you don't go on white house renovations if you plan on leaving. & these folks are not the type to plan on leaving.

in 2021 they already showed their colors. now i'm sure they've mastered the game of staying.

by dzonga

12/15/2025 at 9:22:04 PM

[flagged]

by MangoToupe

12/15/2025 at 10:17:54 PM

Hey, it did become bigger news. Good. It's the first time I see this on HN. An old 2 days thread being "bumped" by changing the timestamp?

by vdupras

12/15/2025 at 9:56:37 PM

[dead]

by donebefore

12/15/2025 at 7:54:14 PM

You think we are going to get to a whole year of Byte Dance operating illegally in the United States?

by kemotep

12/15/2025 at 8:21:21 PM

I don't see why not, I'd expect four years of illegal operation.

by pjc50

12/15/2025 at 8:23:37 PM

I haven’t really followed things in great detail, but something that has stood out to be is the apparent linchpin that was pulled in this whole affair. Like it or not, TikTok is an American company with American employees and even running on American infrastructure and oversight that was established years ago now; not somehow the cabal in our government has simply eschewed rule of law and their own ideals, to basically strong-arm this deal because there was too much free speech, a fundamental right of Americans, which the government is legally prohibited from violating and doing so is as much of a capitol offense as it can get, violating not only the law of the Constitution, but also the rights enshrined in the Declaration of Independence.

I don’t see how a competent legal team could not shred this whole effort at disowning TikTok and at the very least make it extremely expensive politically and even to the core foundation of legitimacy of the current government in what is for some reason still called the USA in spite of gross patterns of consistent material violations of all the terms.

by hopelite

12/15/2025 at 9:07:56 PM

> an American company with American employees

While technically true, these articles give context about the level of decision-making control and data access from ByteDance, as of the time of their publication.

https://restofworld.org/2024/tiktok-chinese-us-ban/ (2024)

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/emilybakerwhite/tiktok-... (2022)

by btown

12/15/2025 at 8:27:59 PM

I don't get it, did you miss that this went all the way to the Supreme Court already? It's not "anti free speech", it's "anti Chinese platform".

by stefan_

12/15/2025 at 8:41:08 PM

What's changed in 2025 is that the Trump administration has illegally postponed the ban passed by Congress four times, despite the fact that the law does not allow the President to extend the ban. And, naturally, the fact that this is to facilitate purchase by a coalition of political allies.

by matthewdgreen

12/15/2025 at 8:53:48 PM

This has less to do with anti china hawks and more to do with anti Israel content on TikTok. And information control in the US. They are openly buying out all US mainstream media and from the looks of it will probably take Warner brothers from Netflix as well.

by xbmcuser

12/15/2025 at 11:23:07 PM

I'm the first to say they should have been shut down the day the original deadline ran out, and if new leadership comes to the WH they should aggressively prosecute all the platforms that broke the law under promises of the corrupt DOJ (Google, Apple et al). But that's between your joke of a constitution and political leadership, it hardly sways the case one way or another.

by stefan_

12/15/2025 at 8:50:47 PM

> TikTok is an American company with American employees

Those American employees are required to basically uphold the interests of the CCP. This is done as part of an agreement around their stock grants apparently. From https://dailycallernewsfoundation.org/2025/01/14/exclusive-d... there are details on what executives of TikTok have to agree to in writing:

> “You shall comply with applicable laws and guidelines and abide by public order and good customs, the socialist system, national interests, legal rights of other citizens, and information authenticity requirements,” the purported Douyin agreement reviewed by the DCNF states.

> The document also lists a number of prohibited activities for employees, including “overthrowing the socialist system,” “inciting secession,” “undermining national religious policies, or promoting cults and superstitions,” as well as injunctions against “meaningless information or deliberate use of character combinations to avoid technical censorship.”

And in fact, they’re required to report to a ByteDance management team in China, and acknowledge that they’re employees of ByteDance (and therefore NOT the American company):

> TikTok executives also sign agreements with ByteDance consenting to digital surveillance and report to China-based leadership, according to other documents and audio recordings supporting Puris’ lawsuit.

> Other documents also seem to indicate TikTok ultimately considered Puris to be a ByteDance employee.

> While onboarding in 2019, Puris was allegedly required to sign one hiring document reviewed by the DCNF affirming: “I am a director, executive officer or general partner of ByteDance LTD.”

by SilverElfin

12/15/2025 at 8:28:18 PM

> TikTok is an American company with American employees

All tiktok code is written by ByteDance engineers in china.

Context for the non-beleivers. I work on the TikTok USDS team.

by big_youth

12/15/2025 at 8:56:44 PM

This isn't true. You should ask friends who work at TikTok before you write comments like this.

by usui

12/15/2025 at 10:16:09 PM

ZXCZXCZXCZXCZXC

by big_youth

12/15/2025 at 10:29:49 PM

You wrote "All tiktok code is written by ByteDance engineers in china." While historically that might have been true in the old codebase, it isn't anymore. There is a significant TikTok office presence in South Bay, with many job listings open.

https://lifeattiktok.com/search

by usui

12/16/2025 at 8:00:43 PM

I find all this very interesting from a historical perspective because we are ramming into the control matrix that has been constructed around America for around 150 years now at minimum, the notion of universal equality; and it is causing the inevitable and predictable collapses that are caused by its inherent contradictions.

We wanted diversity and equality because it served a narcissistic ethnic group, and now that they’ve started realizing that their whole short sighted, self-serving system is turning on them, they’re blowing huge holes in it and getting ever more draconian… as is typical of narcissists, especially malicious and grandiose types of extreme narcissists.

You will not be able to convince these toes of people with things like facts, because what they promote or support is an emotional level conviction similar to a religious one. The whole China ruse itself is just a lie and the ones who used and deployed that lie for strategic ends know this. All those who promote it are just the worthless foot soldiers on a battlefield of and over the mind.

by hopelite

12/16/2025 at 3:09:23 PM

dunno what will happen when ai generated videos from invideo.ai, vivideo.ai conquer tiktok feeds, like those valuations will stay there or get halved... let's see together

by mevlut

12/15/2025 at 11:00:03 PM

This whole situations is such a sad clown show.

There was a legitimate debate to be had about the dangers of TikTok and the importance of free speech. Do we ban TikTok and squash free speech, or is free speech of supreme importance, even if it means allowing a dangerous foreign app--these were the questions of a few years ago.

So what happened? Let's recap:

Congress passed a law banning TikTok. Free speech was trampled.

The Supreme Court upheld the ban. Free speech was trampled again.

Then, the law just doesn't get enforced. The dangers of TikTok remain.

Everyone loses and the entire political process around this has been a joke.

We've learned that Congress can just ban apps by name, effectively, and yet the great danger that made us cross this line in the first place remains in use under the control of China.

by Buttons840

12/15/2025 at 11:19:25 PM

Free speech by foreign governments (or controlled by foreign governments) has never been protected by the US constitution, right?

I do agree that Trump, in both his administrations, has made it starkly clear that its checks and balances are quite impotent against a person or party that doesn’t care to follow the rules, so long as they have enough supporters that also don’t care, or are misled

by StackRanker3000

12/16/2025 at 1:23:13 AM

I mean free speech the ideal, not free speech the law.

Obviously the law can be contrary to free speech the ideal, in this case.

by Buttons840

12/15/2025 at 8:48:09 PM

Given that Trump and Hegseth seem to now be friendly with China and talking about a “G2” (as opposed to G7), I feel the TikTok ban that should have happened months ago is just going to not happen, as long as (my speculation) someone in the Trump family is able to profit off business dealings with China. It makes no sense not to enact the ban that Congress passed.

by SilverElfin

12/16/2025 at 10:58:52 AM

Shut it down already. You have permission from the rest of government this time Mr Trump so Just Do It, make your dreams come true.

by Am4TIfIsER0ppos

12/15/2025 at 8:51:24 PM

As a reminder of the timeline:

- November 2023: audio leaked of Apartheid Defense League CEO Jonathon Greenblatt saying they had a Tiktok problem [1] because Tiktok didn't sufficiently censor live broadcast of the genocide, unlike, say, Meta [2]

- 5 March 2024: the bill to ban Tiktok was introduced to the Senate [3];

- 7 March 2024: the bill passes the Senate;

- 13 March 2024: the bill passes the House;

- 24 April 2024: Biden signs the bill into law.

So yes the Tiktok "ban" was about a foreign government, just not the one usually stated.

Larry Ellison is the world's second richest man. His son, David Ellison, now heads Paramount Skydance and are key players in the Tiktok acquisition. David Ellison acquired CBS News and put Bari Weiss in charge of it. Why was CBS News for sale? Because 60 Minutes said one slightly negative thing about Israel's involvement in Gaza so Shari Redstone sold it to Paramount [4].

What I find both funny and depressing is that the US government is doing exactly what they accuse China of doing. It's not even a partisan issue. On foreign policy, America is uniparty, just like China.

For anyone who follows legislative affairs, this rocketed through.

[1]: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/inside-adl-anti-defa...

[2]: https://www.hrw.org/report/2023/12/21/metas-broken-promises/...

[3]: https://nolabels.org/the-latest/tiktok-ban-timeline-how-trum...

[4]: https://www.cjr.org/feature/cbs-news-redstone-ellison-60-min...

by jmyeet

12/15/2025 at 9:01:42 PM

I’m confused. Why are you alleging a link between the first few bullet points? I'm not saying there's no link, but it certainly doesn't seem obvious without some substantiation.

by seizethecheese

12/16/2025 at 2:34:01 AM

The pro Israel lobby in America is very powerful. Once they saw a threat to their interests (Netanyahu’s 8th front) they exercised this power to quickly achieve a major goal.

by skdhshdd

12/17/2025 at 6:04:15 AM

Hopefully not for long. America will be freed from this vermin. Those that starve and rape children like the Israel-is do, hide it by banning journalists from ghaza, and censor our citizens do not deserve to be part of the west.

by MPSFounder

12/15/2025 at 9:07:02 PM

[dead]

by boredpeter

12/15/2025 at 8:57:52 PM

> On foreign policy, America is uniparty, just like China.

Oh, do tell of the countries that aren’t uniparties when talking about national security.

Oh, none of them? So just making a bullshit false equivalence?

by irishcoffee

12/15/2025 at 9:56:59 PM

Post hoc non es propter hoc

by zeroonetwothree

12/15/2025 at 9:04:22 PM

This is just trying to fit different data points to confirm a conspiratorial narrative around Israel. The reality is that China has a tool to manipulate and influence American politics in TikTok, where there is no transparency around what their algorithm does or what censorship/amplification they perform manually. On top of that, TikTok lied about data collection on kids (https://www.npr.org/2024/08/02/nx-s1-5061604/doj-sues-tiktok...), lied about where data is sent (https://www.techspot.com/news/104032-us-claims-tiktok-collec...), and their CEO literally lied under oath (https://walberg.house.gov/media/press-releases/walberg-urges...). The executives of TikTok should be in jail.

The US government has considered TikTok a national security issue for a long time, and considered banning it even back in 2020 - a full 3 years before October 7th. So it has nothing to do with Israel, or Jews, or Gaza, and everything to do with not following American laws, defending against asymmetric warfare from the Chinese government, and national security.

by SilverElfin

12/16/2025 at 3:22:18 AM

I think you are wrong. Anyone who is not blind sees this is about Ghaza. I would feel much better if someone besides Ellison (a religious jewish man who is pro Israel) did not control TikTok. Israel is losing support in the West (and rightfully so) at an alarming rate. Netanyahu himself said controlling social media (and singled out Tiktok) is imperative for Israel to continue its genocide. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/3tdrO8bA7rs

by MPSFounder

12/16/2025 at 8:43:53 AM

Man this place used to be for intelligent conversation once… absolutely tragic.

by mobtrain

12/17/2025 at 5:53:16 AM

It is easy to be weak, and watch war criminals like Netanyahu with support from rich American je-uwry like the Adelsons from afar get away with evil. We are dealing with a tribe that starves children, which the Nazis themselves did not dare to do. We are dealing with a tribe that bans journalists from Ghaza (western journalists) so they can rape women and children. But then again, an intelligent conversation here while children are starved is not possible buddy. I saw your other comments. What intelligent conversation do you speak of? They are all lacking in intelligence, charisma, and wit. You are as much a stranger to intelligence as those oil barrons of Israel are to kindness and humanity. Maybe instead of leaving dumb comments, try to go after those war crimes in Israel. Get sanctions against Israelis and American Je-ws that are supporting this apartheid, and the theft of property. It is always disappointing when a Je-w like you wants to benefit from the west, but decouples from our values the moment their darling Israel is a bully.

by MPSFounder

12/15/2025 at 9:11:15 PM

[dead]

by boredpeter

12/15/2025 at 11:46:32 PM

well come on people, tik tok

by effnorwood

12/13/2025 at 7:33:24 PM

[dead]

by nine_zeros

12/15/2025 at 8:29:53 PM

Honestly. The last people I'm going to feel sorry for is TikTok investors.

by amelius

12/15/2025 at 9:17:45 PM

why is that? do you stand any other moral ground for investing? apple? google? amazon?

by bdangubic

12/15/2025 at 9:30:39 PM

True. They're all absolute leeches.

by MangoToupe

12/15/2025 at 10:17:05 PM

Fuck em all.

by madeofpalk

12/15/2025 at 10:24:03 PM

[flagged]

by ecommerceguy

12/15/2025 at 8:00:28 PM

[flagged]

by MPSFounder

12/13/2025 at 1:23:50 PM

[flagged]

by songodongo

12/13/2025 at 3:29:32 PM

[dead]

by cboyardee

12/13/2025 at 7:47:31 AM

Are they claiming that the US president lied? Say it ain't so!

by amanaplanacanal

12/13/2025 at 8:54:39 AM

They are reporting that the US investors set to make the purchase are still waiting on China to finalize a deal.

The thing about Trump saying it was a done deal*, like most other things he says, was true in the sense that the deal to find the US investors to buy the app is done. And having the "blessing" or any other uttering of China's President Xi Jinping is not the same as having the official action of China finalizing the sale. It did allow him to sign an executive order allowing tiktok to continue operating while the deal is being finalized -- and additional executive order 90 day extensions in the mean time.

With the sale going to the usual suspects, Larry Ellison, Abu Dhabi MGX, it makes this look more like Trump is being played at his own game. Or, like the other comment says about ByteDance and China mocking the US in this silly posturing. Maybe they get it done on Monday, or give it another 90 days.

*See paltering.[0][1]. It's the reason you get people saying he lied and others saying he's unfairly being called a liar. A more accurate way to describe what he says is: manipulation. Even news outlets are capable of being manipulated (and some may encourage it), which in turn causes all of them to be called "partisan hacks" and the populace loses trust -- but in the wrong things/people.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paltering

[1] https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20171114-the-disturbing-a...

by 1659447091

12/13/2025 at 9:03:33 AM

President Xi and Putin aren’t just seasoned politicians, they are experienced and know the rules of the game very well. Trump is not just naive, but he’s utterly stupid as well. Not sure why voters can’t see through his BS.

by mandeepj

12/13/2025 at 7:55:25 PM

> President Xi and Putin aren’t just seasoned politicians,

True for Xi but Putin hasn't a clue about what he's doing, calling him a politician is a stretch.

by bigbadfeline

12/13/2025 at 3:12:18 PM

Social conservatism is disgust. They don't want to see through simple explanations that let them feel less disgust for themselves.

by BaconVonPork

12/15/2025 at 7:58:32 PM

[flagged]

by bsndjdkd

12/15/2025 at 7:48:08 PM

The law is quite clear the 90 day extension is a one-time thing and the Trump admin had already violated said law prior to actually invoking that clause.

The thing about Trump saying it’s a done deal is that, like on many other topics, he’s simply lying.

by estearum

12/15/2025 at 8:38:08 PM

The thing about breaking the law is that when you don't suffer any consequences, the strictly optimal thing to do is to keep breaking the law.

by yifanl

12/15/2025 at 9:21:32 PM

Eh, sounds clever but not really.

People can and do think they're "getting away with" a lot more than they come to realize once they're indicted.

Your point remains, of course, that no law is actually self-executing.

by estearum

12/15/2025 at 10:45:37 PM

People seem to forget that China is a fully authoritarian state. The fact is that China is an adversary and blocks virtually every western social network, including YouTube, Instagram, and Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_websites_blocked_in_ma...

The CCP has absolute authority over internal companies to bend them to their will, and regularly disappears political dissidents including tech leaders like Jack Ma.

TikTok has over 150 million users in the United States, skewing young. We have seen the massive misinformation campaigns from other adversaries like Russia, with the goal of sowing dissent and malcontent.

All it takes is leaning on the algorithmic levers. Today the controversy may be over the issue you are passionate about, tomorrow it will a different issue, the only thing that matters is that TikTok is an open door to unduly influence public opinion in America.

The immense scale of data collection, from personal information to location tracking data, is also a clear concern.

Anyone that thinks it is reasonable for a geopolitical rival to control this company, especially a country known to reach its hand deep into company policy, is incredibly naive and self-sabotaging.

TikTok must be banned or fully controlled by a US based company.

by hughlomas

12/15/2025 at 10:53:11 PM

> the only thing that matters is that TikTok is an open door to unduly influence public opinion in America. The immense scale of data collection, from personal information to location tracking data, is also a clear concern.

I understand where you’re coming from - “they ban us so we’ll ban you” is a valid sentiment. But this grandstanding is like slapping a bandaid on a leaky tub and calling it “Job done”. I’m almost being transported to the 1940s with this McCarthy-lite take.

Everything that TikTok is doing is being done by Meta, Snap, Instagram, etc. If it’s not done through TikTok it’ll be done somewhere else. But sure, instead of passing real privacy laws let’s just also be authoritarian - I’m sure that’ll solve the problem.

by pixelatedindex

12/15/2025 at 11:02:25 PM

> Everything that TikTok is doing is being done by Meta, Snap, Instagram, etc. If it’s not done through TikTok it’ll be done somewhere else.

Meta, Snap, Instagram (i.e. Meta), are US-based media companies and subject to US regulation and jurisprudence.

TikTok operates under the jurisdiction of authoritarian adversary. This undue foreign influence is the sticking point, not merely the massive media sway.

by mistersquid

12/16/2025 at 12:51:58 AM

> Meta, Snap, Instagram (i.e. Meta), are US-based media companies and subject to US regulation and jurisprudence

Increasingly, this is an argument for the EU banning them. Especially Twitter.

by pjc50

12/15/2025 at 11:42:12 PM

TikTok operates in the US, so they are operating under US jurisdiction and subject to the same regulations as US companies.

The main difference is political pressure, not legal. US companies will bend the knee to Trump, Chinese companies will do so to Xi. Both of these leaders are authoritarian, but Trump's government is also fascist. However Xi's government is more experienced and successful.

I don't know which is worse, honestly. I mean, at this exact second, China is obviously a more authoritarian state, but the US is riding a bullet train into fascism. So who knows what things will look like in a few years?

by esperent

12/15/2025 at 11:19:31 PM

Everything that is being done on TikTok is not being done on the other socials. Some of the actions are more or less the same. The difference is in consequences.

Yes, they are all manipulating feeds. Yes, they are are using psychological sabotage and attention hacks to steal as much attention as they possibly can from every pair of eyeballs they encounter.

If Meta, Youtube, Snap, et al do something that is illegal, or violates social norms, or commits any of a thousand different offenses, legal or cultural or otherwise, they can be held to account. They have. Facebook and Instagram and Youtube and all US platforms have been sued, settle out of court, have been subpoenaed and forced to account for themselves in front of congress, etc.

China can use TikTok for many purposes, whether it's purely disruptive, or in pursuit of nation-state agendas, or any sort of nefarious deliberate action they might take. You can hold Zuck accountable. You cannot, with China, and because all Chinese companies are under state control, they are by definition not operating in good faith. They do not follow trade agreements, norms, or deal in good faith. They will steal IP, ignore sanctions, and do whatever benefits them most regardless of any agreements to the contrary, and will actively seek to undermine opposition to their greatest advantage. And they're more or less immune to accountability for anything they do outside of China, except and unless they make the state look bad, or costs them money or reputation in the market.

China chose to deliberately manipulate and abuse their platform by using it to cause all sorts of users to flood their representatives with calls - that one move, by itself, the choice of a paltform to deliberately intervene at scale and advocate for political action, should be sufficient to have seized the platform outright, and then tell China to go pound sand. Imagine how they'd respond to us broadcasting American Freedom TV across their whole country from Starlink satellites, with free satellite 5G compatible with their carriers, bypassing all their great firewall and censorship? As much as I loathe the authoritarianism, we ostensibly have to respect state sovereignty - China deliberately and specifically violated US sovereignty by manipulating a bunch of useful idiots to their own purposes, flexing on the US, threatening them with manipulating the electorate unless they played ball on TikTok control.

We should just seize it and tell them to pound sand, then auction the assets. You can't trust the code, so sell off the name, domain, the network to other platforms if they want to rebuild it, then scour the content and software and hardware, burn it, and salt the earth over it.

by observationist

12/16/2025 at 12:19:12 AM

> China can use TikTok for many purposes, whether it's purely disruptive, or in pursuit of nation-state agendas, or any sort of nefarious deliberate action they might take. You can hold Zuck accountable.

Yeah they can in theory but so can Facebook. Remember Cambridge Analytica? They held Zuck accountable in the sense that there was a slap on the wrist and he went on his merry way. You can similarly hold the ByteDance US CEO accountable and they operate as a US business.

It’s all political theatrics and has nothing do with keeping our personal data safe or protect the American people. These companies might run in the US but corporations are beholden to no nation.

by pixelatedindex

12/15/2025 at 11:57:06 PM

This isn't china, we don't need to engage in this race to the bottom. Banning foreign websites violates the 1st amendment.

by beeflet

12/15/2025 at 10:48:24 PM

It’s funny because as a European when you wrote “Anyone that thinks it is reasonable for a geopolitical rival to control this company, especially a country known to reach its hand deep into company policy, is incredibly naive and self-sabotaging.” I thought “yeah, when you put it like that it would be AWFUL for the Trump administration to own it.

And then I read the next line and realised you meant China.

by saaaaaam

12/15/2025 at 10:52:31 PM

Its a valid concern. I wish a viable European bidder had stepped forward. It would be nice if at least on major social network was EU based.

by Seattle3503

12/15/2025 at 11:23:56 PM

My power company (I'm located in New England) is owned by some Spanish company, but not many people see any problems with that, either.

by brewtide