• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    148 months ago

    How is this itself not a fake argument?

    The arguments in support of tick-tock are a bizarre amalgamation of just about every category of bad faith argument. I haven’t seen one that suggests tick-tock it’s actually a net benefit.

    • @redempt
      link
      228 months ago

      it’s not that tiktok is good, it’s that banning it sets a bad precedent and will be used to justify further control and censorship of the internet

      • @zovits
        link
        68 months ago

        I’m all for setting a precedent if it’s about banning chinese spyware and propaganda weapons.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          68 months ago

          They don’t want to ban it, they want to seize controll of it and let it operate as is, just with different propaganda now.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        58 months ago

        That’s a much better argument than what’s presented in this meme. There’s at least an argument to claim that the difference is about curtailing foreign interest through ownership. Ownership does heavily influence a platform. Unfortunately that hasn’t prevented Murdock from owning more formal messaging platforms.

        On a side note, how do you feel about a handful of corporations controlling and censoring the Internet?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        18 months ago

        Whataboutism means nothing at this point. Risk analysis? Whataboutism. Considering consequences? Whataboutism.

        “Informal” means it’s not actually a fallacy. Prooooobably because people use it way outside of its definition to dismiss arguments they don’t like because they have not thought through whatever they are arguing about.