![]() The primary supposed benefit of a TikTok ban would be to block the Chinese government from obtaining sensitive U.S. Here’s the thing: we’ve noted countless times that banning TikTok doesn’t fix the actual problem: a poorly regulated, largely unaccountable data broker market that hoovers up every last shred of consumer behavior data (including daily movement patterns, sexual orientation data, or sensitive mental health data), then sells it to any idiot with a nickel. “Ultimately, I think some sort of … legislation that imposes a ban or a genuine divestiture is the way forward right now,” he said. Carr last week appeared before the Australian Senate inquiry into foreign influence through social media, once again insisting that a TikTok ban was the only acceptable path forward: for those interested in meaningful privacy:Ĭarr, the most senior Republican member on the FCC, said only an outright ban of the app in the United States or removing all corporate ties to China would be acceptable. That includes the Guardian, the latest outlet to stenograph Carr’s calls for a TikTok ban unskeptically without any of this context. It doesn’t matter that Carr doesn’t have regulatory authority over TikTok, or that his proposed ban wouldn’t actually fix the problems he claims it does, or that Carr (whose generally been a muppet for AT&T) has no credibility on consumer protection or privacy. The great TikTok moral panic of 2023 shows no sign of slowing down.įCC Commissioner Brendan Carr has spent the few years getting oodles of free press attention for hyperventilating about TikTok. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |