Trump May Kill America’s Performative TikTok Ban For The Benefit Of His Billionaire Buddy

from the you-know,-for-freedom dept

We’ve noted more time than I can count how the U.S. ban of TikTok (yes, yes I know, it’s not a ban, it’s a forced divestment ByteDance was never going to agree with) was pointless fucking performance art.

Not only was it unconstitutional, it did nothing to actually address the privacy and national security issues it professed to fix. We’re a country too corrupt to pass even a baseline privacy law. We’re too corrupt to even regulate data brokers that routinely hoover up oceans of sensitive consumer data and then sell it to any nitwit with two nickels to rub together (including domestic extremists and foreign intelligence).

Hyperventilating about a single Chinese-app in an ocean of dodgy and unregulated consumer surveillance was always more about greed and protecting Facebook and U.S. tech companies from competition than it ever was about seriously addressing U.S. privacy, NatSec, or propaganda concerns.

With that as backdrop, Trump is telling his allies (for whatever that’s ultimately worth) that he wants to reverse the U.S. ban on TikTok. The law, passed last April, gave ByteDance until January 19 to find a U.S. buyer or face getting kicked out of the country.

“The president-elect has not yet announced a decision on if, or how to proceed, but some advisers expect him to intervene on TikTok’s behalf if necessary — including Conway and three others, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations. Trump promised during the campaign to protect the app even though he also signed an executive order in his first term that would have effectively banned it: “I’m gonna save TikTok,” he said in one of his first videos on the app this June.”

Trump of course isn’t operating with any sort of genuine, good faith policy or intellectual curiosity here. He correctly believes TikTok can be useful for Republicans’ massive online propaganda efforts, and, like most feckless U.S. tech companies, ultimately bullied away from competently moderating right wing propaganda and race-baiting bile on the internet if it wants to keep doing business here.

It’s also just about money. In 2020, Trump wanted to ban TikTok when he thought there was a chance he could offload it to his buddies Larry Ellison and Safra Catz at Oracle. In 2024, Trump’s motivation is in cozying up to Jeffrey Yass, a major billionaire Trump donor creator of the conservative Club for Growth, who holds a 15% stake in TikTok’s Chinese parent company ByteDance.

A Trump reversal of a TikTok ban (which the Post explains won’t be easy) will result in all sorts of entertaining chaos among his bobble-headed brigadiers. Kellyanne Conway now works for Yass and Club For Growth defending TikTok in the press. In contrast, Trump’s likely FCC boss Brendan Carr has spent the last four years crying about TikTok to please Trump and get his face on cable TV.

As Conway’s quote to the Post makes clear, Yass and Trump want to frame this self-serving reversal as something profoundly more noble than it actually is, leveraging the fact that this ban was always a giant political turd for Democrats:

“He appreciates the breadth and reach of TikTok, which he used masterfully along with podcasts and new media entrants to win,” said Kellyanne Conway, who ran Trump’s first presidential campaign, served in the White House and remains close to him and now also advocates for TikTok. “There are many ways to hold China to account outside alienating 180 million U.S. users each month. Trump recognized early on that Democrats are the party of bans — gas-powered cars, menthol cigarettes, vapes, plastic straws and TikTok — and to let them own that draconian, anti-personal-choice space.”

Then of course you’ve got Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook, who, ahead of the ban, were caught seeding no limit of bogus moral panics in DC and among press outlets for anticompetitive reasons (which oddly gets omitted from most press coverage of this story).

Anybody who thinks any of these folks care about protecting consumer privacy or national security is deluding themselves. The U.S. refusal to regulate data brokers or pass a privacy law makes it repeatedly, painfully clear that this country has prioritized making money over consumer privacy and public safety. Any pretense we care about fighting propaganda is even more laughable in the wake of this election.

Another major reason the U.S. government doesn’t want to seriously tackle consumer privacy is because the dysfunctional and unaccountable data broker space allows them to spy on Americans without getting a pesky warrant. Banning Tiktok is a performance that distracted the public from our broader widespread failures on propaganda, surveillance, consumer protection, privacy, and national security.

There certainly are privacy, propaganda, and national security concerns related to TikTok. They’ll never be confused for an ethical company. But that’s never really been what any of this was about for this pit of self-serving vipers, who were primarily interested in using those issues (and xenophobia) as cover to prop up their varied and often conflicting financial ambitions.

Filed Under: , , , , , , ,
Companies: bytedance, tiktok

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Trump May Kill America’s Performative TikTok Ban For The Benefit Of His Billionaire Buddy”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
63 Comments
Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution, section3.

Just because our present SCOTUS refuses to enforce the law as written, because they are compromised by foreign assets, does not mean the election was legitimate. Donald is not allowed to run for office, anywhere in the US, as a result of his illegal activities.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:3

This is the fact that the US constitution disallows traitors from running for office.

Not quite. The US Constitution disallows proven traitors from running for office. This means that although Trump is morally and ethically guilty of fomenting an insurrection, because he is not legally guilty of the same (because the Reds in the House and Senate weren’t as ready to impeach him for such an egregious crime as they were to impeach Bill Clinton for having an extramarital affair), there are no Constitutional grounds for barring Trump from running for any governmental position, unfortunately.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

KineticGothic says:

Re: Re: Re:4

It disallows proven insurrectionists who have previously sworn an oath to uphold the constitution from holding office.

That’s not quite the same thing as treason under the constitution.

Insurrection sweeps more broadly and encompasses lesser more offenses, but the clause is also limited to individuals who previously took an oath.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2

“nothing in the Constitution says he can’t run”

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

Yes, but there also is this lack of positive motivation.

When everything in your life consists of negative motivation there is very little creative thought process and therefore no one thinks outside the box resulting a very boring existence where nothing new and exciting is occurring.

Where do you think the new ideas come from? The new wizbang gadgets that everyone relies upon these days would not exist if it were not for thinking outside the box and coming up with creative answers to complex situations.

But to some zombie maga types … it does not matter.
Apparently ignorance is bliss.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Kinetic Gothic says:

that Democrats are the party of bans — gas-powered cars, menthol cigarettes, vapes, plastic straws and TikTok

Here, let me fix that for you…

that Republicans are the party of bans — books, porn, gay marriage, gender affirming care (for trans people), criticism of Trump or Musk,, community broadband, vaccines, teaching “contravesial subjects” like history evolution and climate science

mick says:

Re:

It’s almost like fealty to either party makes you a dumbass rube, and people should vote based on specific policies and their expected outcomes rather than parties, or the personalities involved.

But then Americans would need to learn literally anything about any policy, and that’s very obviously a bridge too far.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

The main problem of the past 5 years hasn’t been that there wasn’t ‘good leadership,’ although there wasn’t.

It’s that the institutions are deranged.

If you don’t like Trump’s cabinet picks or Chris Rufo’s activism or whatever else, fine. But then what’s the plan?

There’s no virtue in disapproval if passive resignation and repeating the failures of the past are the only alternatives on offer.

Kinetic Gothic says:

Re:

Use the derangement of the instiutions against them selves.

Trump wants to open up libel laws?

  • he’s defamed a fuck ton of people.

He wants to eviceratree regulatory authority, and leave things tomthe states?

-Good look getting federal agencies to carry out RFK’s quackery then.

Priscute the “Biden Crime Family”

  • claim presidential immunity, since public corruption per MAGA SCOTUS requires an official act. And presidential acts are immune.

Same on Geetz hold the J6 committie or the FBI acountable for the “set up”

Congressional Imuunity (which is a real thing), and let ALL of the evidence out.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

There is a valid point of view that we should not allow any US company being owned by a company in China. Also, no property should be owned as well.

There are quite a few experts that believe that we will be at war with China in 5 to 10 years. Why would we want anything touching China owning companies or properties here in the US?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

Why would we want anything touching China owning companies or properties here in the US?

Because in the event of an actual war (where lethal force is involved), we can simply nationalize those assets known or believed to be owned by Chinese companies, the CCP itself, or belligerent persons who have no earned US citizenship.

Doing these things during less lethal times requires a lot of paperwork, involves courts (which in turn requires time), and in general does not sit well with the public at large.

Pixelation says:

Trump will use the TikTok ban as another distraction, when he needs one. He does things like installing RFK as health secretary, so everyone is focused on that turd and not on other things he doesn’t want people focused on. It’s called the “Dead Cat Strategy”. Whenever Trump does something like that, it’s time to look a lot closer at what else he’s up to.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

And? What’s he trying to distract you from then? The Trump administration was one of the most transparent administrations ever and I expect this one will be no different. Biden/Harris administration has been extremely opaque. That’s one reason the Dems lost the election, always making stuff up and calling over half the voters nazis

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

The TikTok ban can be bypassed by using a VPN.

And banning VPN services will not work.

As I have said before, rich people who can afford it can buy a home abroad and put a computer there and install VPN software and they make an encrypted connection to their home computer in, say, Mexico, and what they are doing will not be known.

A home computer in Mexico is not subject to U.S. jurisdiction even if the homeowner is a U.S. citizen.

That is why the porn ban, proposed by project 2025, will not be enforceable on the rich. Just make an encrypted connection to your home computer in Mexico and they will not know what you are up to.

Also, use secure wiping software on your hard disk regularly.

I don’t recommend any specific program, just find one that suits you. At lease one manufacturer of such software has had their product name sullied by malware bearing the same name.

No EVIDENCE = No CASE

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

News reel 1945:

“By now, Americans have heard of the horrors of the mass murder camps operated by the Nazis in Poland where Jews, Gypsies, and homosexuals were routinely confined and murdered. When asked for comment, a random anonymous individual in the editorial section responded: “Meh, it’s just Hitler Derangement Syndrome!”

Arianity says:

We’re too corrupt to even regulate data brokers that routinely hoover up oceans of sensitive consumer data and then sell it to any nitwit with two nickels to rub together (including domestic extremists and foreign intelligence).

For what it’s worth, the foreign intelligence part (well, China’s) is regulated/illegal now. By the same law. You’re linking to an article before said law was passed.

It’s not as good as a baseline privacy bill, and we’ll see how it gets enforced ( probably not for the next 4 years, now), but it is now regulated, technically. Albeit with obvious holes/loopholes

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

“It’s also just about money. In 2020, Trump wanted to ban TikTok when he thought there was a chance he could offload it to his buddies Larry Ellison and Safra Catz at Oracle. In 2024, Trump’s motivation is in cozying up to Jeffrey Yass, a major billionaire Trump donor creator of the conservative Club for Growth, who holds a 15% stake in TikTok’s Chinese parent company ByteDance.” | Looks to me like no matter which route Trump takes on this issue isn’t going to be the right one. You’re just going to keep writing hit pieces on him either way

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a BestNetTech Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

BestNetTech community members with BestNetTech Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the BestNetTech Insider Shop »

Follow BestNetTech

BestNetTech Daily Newsletter

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get all our posts in your inbox with the BestNetTech Daily Newsletter!

We don’t spam. Read our privacy policy for more info.

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
BestNetTech needs your support! Get the first BestNetTech Commemorative Coin with donations of $100
BestNetTech Deals
BestNetTech Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the BestNetTech Insider Discord channel...
Loading...