TikTok is 'Digital Nicotine' Meant To Hook Kids, AGs Fume in New Suits (courthousenews.com) 66
The District of Columbia and 13 states sued social media giant TikTok on Tuesday, accusing the company of knowingly creating an addictive product and getting children hooked with "digital nicotine." From a report: D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb brought Washington's suit in the Superior Court for the District of Columbia, asserting that the app's design -- including its algorithm, "infinite scroll," push notifications, filters and in-app currency -- boost the company's profits at the expense of children's health. "TikTok's platform, designed to be dangerously addictive, inflicts immense damage on an entire generation of young people," Schwalb said in a statement announcing the suit. "In addition to prioritizing its profits over the health of children, TikTok's unregulated and illegal virtual economy allows the darkest, most depraved corners of society to prey upon vulnerable victims." More than a dozen states brought similar suits against TikTok in their courts Tuesday, including New York, California, Kentucky and New Jersey. Each stems from a national investigation into the company that a bipartisan coalition of attorneys general launched in March 2022.
quit thechand wringing already (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Step by step, we're building a crummy, low effort great firewall of the USA.
Re:quit thechand wringing already (Score:4, Insightful)
Step by step, we're building a crummy, low effort great firewall of the USA.
Indeed.
Nicotine is legal. So is alcohol. So it THC in many jurisdictions.
Why is TikTok such a fucking obsession? Because it upsets The Powers That Be; there is a frictionless, uncontrolled place for people say stuff. Hillary committed some candor the the other day: She's concerned that "we close total control" without content moderation (Oct 5, CNN.) Telling. These fucking people are losing sleep every night because there is a place you can put shit that they can't just disappear when it upsets them.
Re: (Score:3)
Nicotine and alcohol are highly regulated and taxed, and children aren't allowed either.
Why should Tiktok be any different then, if that's what you're comparing it to.
Re: (Score:1)
Primarily because:
A. that's an obviously overextended metaphor and not accurate to the true nature of online addiction
B. cigarettes aren't protected free speech, but rather dried plant wrapped in paper.
Re: (Score:2)
C: Tiktok isn't free speech either
Re: (Score:1)
B. cigarettes aren't protected free speech, but rather dried plant wrapped in paper.
Indeed. However....... the advertising of cigarettes (free speech) is heavily regulated.... And, in fact, prohibited in many situations... Under federal law you may not advertise cigarettes on TV or Radio. You cannot hand out free samples (even to people "of age"). Tobacco companies may not use their logo, name, likeness, etc in the sponsorship of just about anything.. (sports games, movies, concerts, art exhibits, cultural events, etc).
You conveniently left all of that out...
Skeptical, waiting for TikToc ban (Score:2)
Examples of state attorney generals backing down to get a revenue boosting fine instead of actual bans:
https://www.attorneygeneral.go... [attorneygeneral.gov]
Wells Fargo committed identity theft and fraud and got a fine in many US states instead of being banned from doing business and losing its banking license
Equifax credit union letting 147 million US person's credit records get stolen getting only a fine and is still in business. Federal settlement. The FTC, SEC and other federal agencies, plus state attorney generals could
Re: (Score:1)
Examples of state attorney generals backing down to get a revenue boosting fine instead of actual bans:
https://www.attorneygeneral.go... [attorneygeneral.gov] Wells Fargo committed identity theft and fraud and got a fine in many US states instead of being banned from doing business and losing its banking license
Banks with a Federal charter can operate in any state they so desire without needing to obtain a State charter. The National Banking Act prohibits states from interfering with nationally chartered banks.
This is what happens when people don't know what they're talking about.
Fed charter, maybe, but lots of other laws violate (Score:2)
The state AG could go after Wells Fargo on multiple other legal areas and shut them down.
Wells Fargo paid $140+ million to California to avoid being closed down.
https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-... [ca.gov]
Attorney General Becerra Recovers $148.7 Million for California in Settlement with Wells Fargo Over Deceiving Consumers
Friday, December 28, 2018
Contact: (916) 210-6000, agpressoffice@doj.ca.gov
Part of nationwide $575 million settlement with bank for dishonest practices
SACRAMENTO – California Attorney General Xa
Re: (Score:1)
Problem is government going for the fine first (Score:2)
The government going for a monetary fine first is the problem.
If you get fined by the government, no court precedents are set, so you and others can continue in business.
State attorney generals need to take these to court and try to win and set legal precedents which prevent this type of illegal behavior by corporations.
Otherwise, this is like giving a $100 speeding ticket to a person making $500,000 a year. It is a nuisance, not a deterrent and won't stop habitual violations of the law.
More generally arbitration clauses (Score:2)
Read that the main reason why there are arbitration clauses in many legal contracts is to
- avoid costly court battles
- much more importantly, prevent a legal precedent being set by a court which then thousands of other persons who entered into similar contracts could sue the corporation on the other side of the contract.
Amazon got into this with using arbitration as a way to settle disputes with third party vendors using Amazon's site.
Re: Skeptical, waiting for TikToc ban (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is about information control not the children. Plenty of people offer short form video and they are not all being attacked. This is about TikTok having the Bin Laden letter catch wind.
Re: (Score:3)
Because it upsets The Powers That Be; there is a frictionless, uncontrolled place for people say stuff.
Oh, what a load of horse shit. That's the internet. That's the web. On a much, much, greater scale.
Get your head out of your ass.
If you must have a stupid conspiracy, I know how you freaks love your conspiracies, try this: TikTok is a Chinese controlled app designed to be addict children so that they can funnel propaganda directly to the next generation! Oh No!
Re: (Score:3)
And this is different than Farcebook how? Or any of a gazillion video games? Oh, that's right, the PTB in the US can't control TikTok, we have to eliminate it immediately!
Re: (Score:2)
I see that you're illiterate. I'm so, so, sorry.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
TikTok isn't the problem there. It's the genocide. No amount of pro-Israel propaganda is going get anyone of normal intelligence to believe otherwise.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Because if you don't stand up for the stuff you don't like, when they come for the stuff you do like, you've already lost." -Neil Gaiman
Re: (Score:2)
"To suppress free speech is a double wrong. It violates the rights of the hearer as well as those of the speaker." -Frederick Douglass
"Because if you don't stand up for the stuff you don't like, when they come for the stuff you do like, you've already lost." -Neil Gaiman
Like Twitter?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
and just outright block tiktok, you know you want to, just block tiktok, tell Apple & Google to remove tiktok from everyone's phone & tablets, other nations block undesired apps & social media when they perceive a problem/threat to the public
Are you looking to eliminate the addiction problem, or the competition problem? Asking for a friend named “Yu Toob”..
Re: (Score:2)
Or the US could recognize that freedom of speech allows for us to read hear and discuss the bin laden letter.
No cancer? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:No cancer? (Score:4, Interesting)
I agree with your sentiment. I'm not about to defend tiktok, but I'm not a fan of *how* some of these people are attacking tiktok.
Schwalb said, "TikTok's unregulated and illegal virtual economy allows ..."
Yeah, that sounds more like what's under their skin than any of the ambiguous hyperbole like "digital nicotine". There's money flowing, and the big capitalist companies aren't getting a cut. Can't have that.
Also, "knowingly creating an addictive product?" Isn't that kind of the goal? Especially given that this has zero chance of being physically addictive. IE: it's not like they're spiking their product with cocaine, or even alcohol, nicotine, or caffeine, all of which are knowingly addictive (physically and mentally) with multinational, multibillion dollar industries.
Meanwhile, Musk buys Twitter, doubles down on its issues, and continues to ramp up the partisan attacks.
Stop making bills targeting specific companies; Target the bad behavior and apply it likewise to all, or not at all.
AFAIK, the main proposed solution has been to have TikTok sell off their USA division to a US owned company. How does that change any of the "wHaT aBoUt ThE cHiLdReN" issues?
Re: (Score:2)
"Also, "knowingly creating an addictive product?" Isn't that kind of the goal? Especially given that this has zero chance of being physically addictive. IE: it's not like they're spiking their product with cocaine, or even alcohol, nicotine, or caffeine, all of which are knowingly addictive (physically and mentally)"
Mental addictions can be *just* as damaging as physical addictions, including leading to suicide and death.
Please read up more on mental health before spouting off like it's no big deal.
Re: (Score:2)
Mental addictions can be *just* as damaging as physical addictions, including leading to suicide and death.
But they're not the same. One is much much easier to quantify, and thus to codify into law if and as needed. And meanwhile, we have a lot of well established, physically and mentally addictive substances still being sold to all. And we have very similar apps that aren't being covered by this discussion. Though they're playing the "think of the children" card, they're talking about banning it for all, and I'm fairly certain the real goal has more to do with money (which was my point, btw).
Please read up more on mental health before spouting off like it's no big deal.
Sorry, but you're o
Same methodology (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the main problem people have with these complaints is that TikTok uses exactly same fundamental mechanisms to addict people (including children) that all Western social media platforms also use. Instagram and Youtube come to mind as almost directly analogous in both what they offer and how they addict people.
And we have inherent problem with hypocrisy when we experience it as unfairness (i.e. when hypocrisy doesn't directly benefit us). Expression of this is almost certainly biologically encoded, as it's observed in animals.
So I suspect that these AGs went after Western companies even marginally as hard as they're currently going against TikTok, there would be a lot less complaints. Instead you have maybe one-two lame lawsuits against those that get minimal publicity, while these get widely publicized.
So I think they're right to go after social media for this specific feature and frankly there should be legislation to protect children from it as their developing minds are far more susceptible to being addicted and being addicted in childhood affects personality formulation in much more dramatic way than in adults. But they should go for all who do it, not just the sole foreign agent in the market.
How is YouTube harrmful (Score:2)
The Algorithm detects I have right-wing sympathies and keeps serving up Jesse Watters and Greg Gutfeld?
People here will tell me I need to check myself into Cyber Rehab.
And Greg's Airplanes (Score:2)
Oooh.
Honey, I need to take in one more turbocharged engine power curve before I turn in tonight.
And here comes the analogies (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Does that mean cigarettes are analog TikTok?
Re: (Score:2)
They can kind of do what they want here, since the first amendment doesn't protect foreign companies, and the government is the one that makes the laws.
Bytedance should have sold Tiktok and gone public when the US government was telling them to, and then open an alternate headquarters in USA. Then they'd be able to get on the same lobbying bandwagon as the western social media companies.
But the CCP wouldn't let that happen, and have final say in anything Bytedance does.
Re:Sorry, 1A comes into play here... (Score:4, Insightful)
TikTok Inc is incorporated in the US, plus the courts have recognized that the 1A forbids the government from "silencing" foreign entities operating within the US for the simple reason that the 1A doesn't care if you are a citizen or not - it just cares that the government isn't allowed to suppress people's speech, free association, free press or religion.
I have to ask, have you even read the Constitution? Let me quote the 1A and you can then decide if the government can make any law they want:
First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Re: (Score:2)
The content posted to Tiktok is protected speech.
Tiktok being made available for download or use in USA is not.
Banning Tiktok from app stores has nothing to do with the first amendment.
Why would I need to have read the Constitution? I can just read slashdot posts and get many, differing, incorrect interpretations. I don't need to make my own incorrect interpretation.
Accordiong to https://www.oyez.org/cases/199... [oyez.org] , the government can make restrictions on speech is if does so without regard to the content. T
Re: (Score:2)
Tiktok being made available for download or use in USA is not.
Banning Tiktok from app stores has nothing to do with the first amendment.
I'm sure there are a lot of lawyers specializing in 1A questions that don't agree with that assessment. Can you explain the legal rationale for your argument?
Accordiong to Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, the government can make restrictions on speech is if does so without regard to the content.
No, that's not really how it works and not really what the case was about. The TBS v. FCC case was about "must carry provisions" and if those regulations restricted the free speech rights of TBC. The court held that the government "has an independent interest in preserving a multiplicity of broadcasters" and that the regulations didn't actually stop TB
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't the premise of this ban based on the mental health of the users? Posing a health hazard.
I got that case law from https://constitutioncenter.org... [constitutioncenter.org]
It states
3. The government can also restrict speech under a less demanding standard when it does so without regard to the content or message of the speech. Content-neutral restrictions, such as restrictions on noise, blocking traffic, and large signs (which can distract drivers and clutter the landscape), are generally constitutional as long as they are “reasonable.” Because such laws apply neutrally to all speakers without regard to their message, they are less threatening to the core First Amendment concern that government should not be permitted to favor some ideas over others. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. v. FCC (1994). But not all content-neutral restrictions are viewed as reasonable; for example, a law prohibiting all demonstrations in public parks or all leafleting on public streets would violate the First Amendment. Schneider v. State (1939).
Re: (Score:1)
This is bullshit.
TikTok's US incorporation is a facade, a thin veneer, over an otherwise corrupt CCP. To the extent that TikTok, through its control of what users see, can influence elections, it is a political player, and should be subject to the Foreign Agents Registration Act. The only reason it isn't explicitly yet is because the full extent of its influence is not widely understood among the general public.
TikTok's danger has never been the more widely publicized privacy issues, but rather, the algo
Just ignore the parent company (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
The issue for the PTB is that they don't control the message like they can with western social media. Biden's popularity among young voters plummeted when videos of the atrocities being committed in Gaza with US taxpayer-funded weapons showed up in their feeds, no politician can tolerate that.
Don't single out tic-toc (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Interesting legal theory (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Parents can't discipline or control their children, therefore we need a nanny state?
Adults can’t drink responsibly, therefore we need DUI checkpoints?
Oh, I could find another two dozen examples of age being no indicator of fucking smarts..
Re: (Score:2)
DUI checkpoints is to stop drunk drivers from being a danger to the rest of society.
Gosh, that idea sounds oddly familiar. Almost as if the concept of good parenting and actually raising a child with personal accountability goes hand in hand with creating a responsible adult that knows their own limits and respects the power of addiction and the laws in place that try and prevent a irresponsible idiot from killing innocent people.
If we had that, maybe we wouldn’t have addict kids growing up into addict adults that justify punishing every other sober responsible driver with a Rights-
Much better metaphor (Score:1)
Share-holders love platforms that get 'em hooked young, just like Nick O'Teen! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Ok (Score:2)
Seems like an apt description to me... (Score:2)
I have plenty of friends who used to post actual thoughts and other things, now I mostly see tik-tok and other short form dopa-shit non stop. The moment there's any talk of stemming it, the REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE begins.
Fuck it, the people have spoken, and ignorance wins. That's the bliss they want I guess.
they all are (Score:2)
All social media is constructed like "digital nicotine", from YouTube to Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. TikTok is no different from the other except being the currently popular one
Re: (Score:2)
All true except TikTok is also different from the others by virtue of not being American.
Hypocrit (Score:1)
And ... (Score:1)
... the sky is blue.
How is it any more "digital nicotine" than any of the other social networking sites?