[tomder55]

But the bill that the House passed and the Senate will likely pass ;and Quid Pro Joe will likely sign is too broad.

The problem is specific to TikTok . The algorithm allows TikTok to collect user data ;as most social media sites do ,and to distribute the data . For a user of Fakebook that means you get annoying popup ads about subjects that your data shows you have an interest in .
But in the hands of the Chinese ;American personal data is being collected AND they use it as a propaganda tool to influence Americans and shape the domestic debate . Yes it is everything that we opposed about social media being used as a government tool in the US; in the hands of a nation with hostile intent . So the site becomes a national security issue.

Yes TikTok needs to be banned in it's present form in the US . So what is the problem with the bill on the docket ?

The swamp critters got their hands on the bill . So it is not specific to TikTok.

Madam Mimi sounded the warning .
“This is not an attempt to ban TikTok, it’s an attempt to make TikTok better,”
House passes bill that would ban TikTok if its Chinese owners don't sell the popular app - ABC News (go.com)

And if that is all it was then sign me up. But Rep Thomas Massie voiced a counter point that is just as concerning .
"Some of us just don't want the president picking which apps we can put on our phones or which websites we can visit."

GOP Rep. Massie says TikTok bill would not address 'root problems' (nbcnews.com)

So I looked at the bill in more detail.

Text - H.R.7521 - 118th Congress (2023-2024): Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

What is "foreign adversary control ? The bill mentions TikTok but then adds

(B) a covered company that—
(i) is controlled by a foreign adversary; and

(ii) that is determined by the President to present a significant threat to the national security of the United States

Controlled means

(A) a foreign person that is domiciled in, is headquartered in, has its principal place of business in, or is organized under the laws of a foreign adversary country;
(B) an entity with respect to which a foreign person or combination of foreign persons described in subparagraph (A) directly or indirectly own at least a 20 percent stake; or
(C) a person subject to the direction or control of a foreign person or entity described in subparagraph (A) or (B).

So foreign adversary controlled really means anything the President determines is foreign adversary controlled.


As Michael Tracy writes in 'Newsweek'

The bill names TikTok as a "foreign adversary controlled application," with the "adversary" in question being China, but it also goes further and prohibits "applications" associated with the standard litany of official U.S. "adversaries"—Russia, North Korea, and Iran. More additions to the list are always possible, perhaps in the event that Cuba or Venezuela develop a short-form dance video app that becomes suspiciously popular with American teens.
Another provision authorizes the President, who is currently Joe Biden and may soon be Donald Trump, to make unilateral determinations about whether certain applications "present a significant threat to the national security of the United States," and therefore must be banned like TikTok. The criteria for making such a determination is left conspicuously vague.
So if you really want to give Biden or Trump more unilateral power to control the proliferation of content online, this appears to be just the bill for you.

Banning TikTok is a Power Grab for the Deep State | Opinion (newsweek.com)

And of course this will all go down just in time for the fall election campaign .

Homeland security became a real need when we saw the gaps in the system that led to the 9-11 attacks . So bills were swiftly introduced to address it . But the idea of homeland security became abusively broad and morphed into the huge powerful agency it became ..... The rights sacrificed never fully restored .

My advice would be for the Senate to send the bill back to the House with suggestions to considerably narrow the bill to the issue at hand .

[Curlyben]

Odd how they are happy with all of this private user data being gathered by Google, Apple, Facebook, NSA, etc, but when a Chinese based company plays them at the same game it's a problem.

[tomder55]

Not sure who is the "they " you are referring to . My objection has been GOVERMENT data collection and censorship through social media cooperation, in the many comments I have made on the issue.

But in this case a hostile foreign power collecting data on Americans in my view is a much bigger threat than Fakebook knowing I like the NY Yankees.

[jlisenbe]

But in this case a hostile foreign power collecting data on Americans in my view is a much bigger threat than Fakebook knowing I like the NY Yankees.

Accurate assessment. Stores run ads for items they reasonably expect customers would like to purchase based on data they collect from polling and purchasing trends. It's an entirely different matter when a foreign government uses data to influence and direct public opinion.

[tomder55]

Here is the type of US government censorship I oppose.

2021 Baseball legend Hank Aaron passed away. RFK Jr went on Twitter to suggest that his death was due to having the covid vaccine .

The White House went to work pressuring Twitter employees to remove the posting .

gov.uscourts.lawd.189520.174.1.pdf (courtlistener.com)

Twitter complied .Meta went even further ;the suspended Kennedy from Instagram

Instagram bans Robert F Kennedy Jr over Covid vaccine posts (bbc.com)

The administration had a full blown campaign to purge any covid comment they considered to be "misinformation".

The effort made it to the court system . A lower court put a squash on the administration strong arming social media.

From the beginning, the platforms cooperated with the White House. One company made an employee “available on a regular basis,” and another gave the officials access to special tools like a “Partner Support Portal” which “ensure[d]” that their requests were “prioritized automatically.” They all attended regular meetings. But, once White House officials began to demand more from the platforms, they seemingly stepped-up their efforts to appease the officials. When there was confusion, the platforms would call to “clear up” any “misunderstanding[s]” and provide data detailing their moderation activities. When there was doubt, they met with the officials, tried to “partner” with them, and assured them that they were actively trying to “remove the most harmful COVID-19 misleading information.” At times, their responses bordered on capitulation. One platform employee, when pressed about not “level[ing]” with the White House, told an official that he would “continue to do it to the best of [his] ability, and [he will] expect [the official] to hold [him] accountable.” Similarly, that platform told the Surgeon General that “[w]e’re [] committed to addressing the [] misinformation that you’ve called on us to address.” The platforms were apparently eager to stay in the officials’ good graces. For example, in an effort to get ahead of a negative news story, Facebook preemptively reached out to the White House officials to tell them that the story “doesn’t accurately represent the problem or the solutions we have put in place.” The officials were often unsatisfied. They continued to press the platforms on the topic of misinformation throughout 2021, especially when they seemingly veered from the officials’ preferred course. "

23-30445-CV0.pdf (uscourts.gov)

Social media was so intimidated that they began a campaign of proactively deplatforming critics of the administration covid policies.

"They not only continued to take down content the officials flagged, and provided requested data to the White House, but they also changed their moderation policies expressly in accordance with the officials’ wishes,"


Last week SCOTUS reined in the administration somewhat. It was a partial victory for free speech giving people the power to sue if they are wrongfully blocked from an officials social media site when that official is acting in an official government capacity .

US Supreme Court sets test for when officials who block social media critics can be sued | Reuters


But the larger issue is still to be decided. Regardless of your political leaning ;you should be very concerned when the government assumes the power to control public discourse. The 1st Amendment Free Speech clause was adopted specifically to limit that abuse of power.


In the case of TikTok ;it is a hostile foreign power that is assuming that power .

[tomder55]

The Senate held closed door hearings . What came out of it was comments like this

"Their ability to track, their ability to spy is shocking"

"The strong impression is: TikTok is a gun pointed at Americans' heads because of the threat of surveillance and propaganda in collecting data from 170 million Americans," said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn.

Senators are scared of TikTok. But they're in no rush to crack down. (usatoday.com)

They spy using everything from monitoring key strokes to listening in on devices microphones.


But as usual our lawmakers are late to the game . Even after being briefed the Senate will take the bill the House has already passed ;and refer it to the Senate Commerce Committee.

As the snail paced legislative process proceeds ;the Chinese will continue to spy on the platform' s 102.3 million US users . (globally over 1 billion active users )


Tick tock ;tick tock .

[tomder55]

Senate Dems are going to block passage of this bill. They say they have to ponder the possibilities first .

“I want to be certain we are weighing the merits of alternative proposals that would deal with the larger issues at hand in a systematic way . . . rather than singling out one company.” said Senator Pat Murray

Powerful Dems Trying To Pump The Brakes On TikTok Bill Have Former Staffers Lobbying For The App | The Daily Caller

The "one company " she refers to is a company that is owned by Chinese communists who use the platform to spy on ;and influence Americans .

Influencing them like ;oh let's say giving illegals instructions on how to steal homes.

TikTok's top migrant influencer makes a fool of the US (nypost.com)

I'm sure TikTok's bucks have nothing to do with their decision making

The campaign to save TikTok has been years in the making. A POLITICO investigation revealed an effort by TikTok and its parent company, ByteDance, dating back to at least 2018, long before concerns about TikTok’s Chinese ownership reached their current pitch. Interviews with more than two dozen people, including lobbyists and lawmakers, in the United States and Europe illuminated the architecture of a lobbying apparatus that has moved TikTok and its parent company closer to institutions of government, including European lawmakers, leaders of both American political parties and even the White House.

Inside TikTok’s battle to skirt bans and influence governments - POLITICO