The TikTok Bill Could Get a Lot of Apps Banned

[CodeBlaMeVi]

By the same logic heroin adds value

Headshot

 

[ChatGPT-5]

banning apps like the chinese do. showing the world REAL democracy

 

[CodeBlaMeVi]

Should have been taken out of the paint.

 

[GrindtooFilthy]

tiktok does not add value to society.

speak for yourself, it's because of tik tok i was able to scale things in life from career, to hobby, to side ventures

explain to me how tiktok is any more useless than youtube when they do the same thing albeit tik tok makes accessibility even faster

i keep forgetting a lot of you lack creativity and initiative so it can't be helped

 

[shopthatwrecks]

TikTok-famous politician’s vote to ban infuriates 2.5 million followers.

Rep. Jeff Jackson lost more than 100k followers after his vote.

www.theverge.com

Zoomers are turning on the TikTok famous congressman who voted to ban the app​

Rep. Jeff Jackson was TikTok’s favorite congressman. Now some users think he’s a hypocrite.​

By Gaby Del Valle, a policy reporter. Her past work has focused on immigration politics, border surveillance technologies, and the rise of the New Right.

Mar 15, 2024, 1:39 PM EDT

Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

Until relatively recently, Rep. Jeff Jackson, a freshman Democratic congressman from North Carolina, had more than 2.5 million followers on TikTok. Jackson’s follower count dropped by over 100,000 virtually overnight — as did his esteem among some of TikTok’s young users — after he voted to ban the app.

The bill passed with 352 votes, but to the legions of TikTokers who called their representatives to urge them not to ban the app, Jackson’s vote feels like a unique betrayal.







On Wednesday, Jackson posted a video on X laying out the rationale for his vote. “I don’t think TikTok is going to be banned,” he began. If the bill passes in the Senate, Jackson said in the video, he thinks the likeliest scenario is that “TikTok will be sold for billions of dollars and will continue to operate.” His opposition, he continued, is not with TikTok itself but with China’s national security laws and the sway the Chinese government has over TikTok’s algorithms — and, potentially, over American politics. “We got a big example of how that power could be used last week, and it wasn’t subtle,” Jackson said, referring to the pop-up notification TikTok served users that warned Congress is “planning a total ban of TikTok.”

Jackson also acknowledged TikTok users’ concern that Congress is attempting to pass legislation that could potentially ban an app they don’t even understand. “I know a lot of you have seen some members of Congress be deeply uninformed about this because they don’t use TikTok and they don’t care,” he said. “But I do use it, and I think we can solve this problem and keep marching on.”







TikTok users, meanwhile, weren’t happy with Jackson’s explanation. The comments section of his most recent video, posted on Monday, is full of people calling him a hypocrite. Some of the comments suggest that Jackson originally cross-posted his post-vote explanation video on TikTok, and then deleted it after a wave of backlash.

“WITHOUT TIKTOK YOUR NOTHING!!! @Jeff Jackson,” said one irate viewer. “SELLLOUUUUTTTTTTTTTTT,” said another. Jackson’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Jackson grew his following on TikTok by posting explainers on everything from the Russia-Ukraine war to the Silicon Valley Bank collapse.

In interviews with Roll Call and The Washington Post, he’s touted TikTok as a way of educating constituents about the ins and outs of the legislative process. The app, he’s said, is good for transparency. Since the White House has forbidden federal employees, including members of Congress, from having TikTok on their government-issued phones, Jackson has the app installed on a separate personal device.

Last April, Jackson told The Washington Post he’d vote for legislation banning TikTok “as a last resort,” though he’d prefer that ByteDance sell the app so he — and his constituents — can keep using it.

For now, Jackson can still post, although his posts are being brigaded with comments like “ .” And despite his recent drop in followers, he remains the most-followed member of Congress on TikTok.

fukk that catface ass nikka

 

[BeeCityRoller]

Tiktok has its issues but this is essentially Patriot Act 2.0, the kind of stuff Nikki Haley wanted in terms of overreach on the internet. It's cool because its Tiktok now, next its The Coli and it gets sold to another white person because were seeing too many foreign IP's.

I have always disliked Jeff Jackson, he is two-faced but the liberal millennials/Gen-Z love him because he gives them 30 seconds of attention in the Charlotte subreddit. I am personally glad he is getting drawn out of my district.

 

[MajesticLion]

It's pretty standard to use the truth of something to achieve several other somethings. This is the excuse needed to get the door wedged open.

 

[Quiet Magician]

tiktok does not add value to society.

God you are stupid. Tiktok adds value by giving people access to news that are not reported in the mainstream media. Its not just dumb dances but has access to technology, job searching and many other things. The algorithm is set so interests concide with videos you are interested.

You are as dumb as those fossils in congress.

 

[Goat poster]

banning apps like the chinese do. showing the world REAL democracy

Exactly

America and Americans are going BACKWARDS

Welcome to 1984

 

[OneDeep]

What apps

 

[↓R↑LYB]

good

these apps dont add value

That's not true breh. I've done some of my best simping on those apps.

 

[Genos]

good

these apps dont add value

And posting on the coli has value?

 

[IIVI]

Problem is China can tell ByteDance not to sell the app, essentially leading to a ban.

Yeah, that guy's political career is done. This bill passes and so is Biden's Presidential run.

I keep saying it, but this is the Republican checkmate they're fishing for: Optics of Biden smiling and signing the ban bill.


If the Democrats in Congress really believe Republicans are supporting the bill because for once they "care about the American people", then we've elected some really dumb people on the Left who are getting outfoxed by Republicans of all people.

 

[bnew]

https://www.axios.com/2024/03/16/tiktok-ban-divest-ownership-china

6 hours ago - Business

The TikTok sales pitch​

• Kerry Flynn,
• Dan Primack
  

Illustration: Aïda Amer/Axios

If China does the unexpected and allows TikTok to be sold, there are big questions as to who would want to buy it and for how much.

The big picture: TikTok's popularity hasn't translated into profits.

By the numbers: Wedbush analyst Dan Ives puts the value of TikTok's U.S. operations at $100 billion, although he says that plunges to $40 billion if a buyout doesn't include the company's addictive algorithm.

• TikTok's U.S. revenue reportedly was between $16 billion and $20 billion in 2023, but CEO Shou Zi Chew has said the company is in the red. Spending is heavy for moving data to servers and it's also paying out to grow its e-commerce business and a data security project with Oracle.
• The company touts 170 million U.S. monthly active users. That's nearly as many as Facebook, more than Instagram, and far more than either Snapchat or X, according to eMarketer.
• Moreover, it's a heavily engaged audience, with U.S. adults spending nearly an hour per day on the app, per eMarketer.
  

Zoom in: "Growth" would be the key buzzword in any TikTok sale process.

• The app reportedly generated only $200 million to $300 million in 2019, and that was on a global basis. U.S. monthly active users in 2018 were just 11 million.
• Comparing those to current figures, that's an astronomical growth spurt in a relatively short time.

Yes, but: Any TikTok suitor would need a strong stomach. Not only because it's still unprofitable, but also because of the migraine headaches inherent in owning and operating a popular social media company.

Look ahead: The most logical buyers for TikTok are ByteDance's non-Chinese investors, including General Atlantic, Sequoia Capital, and Susquehanna International Group.

• That's because they know the company best, have deep pockets, and can execute the simplest structure via a share swap with some new money sprinkled on top — possibly from an influence-thirsty billionaire.

Still, outside buyers are circling. Former U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and former Activision CEO Bobby Kotick are both working to form investor groups, with Mnuchin saying he'd also welcome current investor participation.

• Do not expect a Big Tech company to bid, because it would be a nonstarter on antitrust grounds. And it's hard to see another Fortune 50 player that would have interest, outside of maybe Walmart.

 

[bnew]