EU Opens Investigation Into TikTok Over Election Interference (reuters.com) 69
The European Commission has launched formal proceedings against TikTok over concerns about its failure to limit election interference, particularly in last month's Romanian presidential vote. Reuters reports: The Commission said it will request information and look into TikTok's policy on political advertisements and paid-for political content as well as TikTok's systems to generate recommendations and the risks of them being manipulated. The opening of formal proceedings empowers the Commission to take further enforcement steps and to accept commitments made by TikTok. There is no specific deadline to complete proceedings.
Re:What articles don't ask, or answer. (Score:5, Informative)
The Supreme Court had to annul the election because the people voted for the wrong guy.
Re: (Score:3)
To be correct, people voted for the wrong guys, plural. The government candidate didn't qualify for the second round.
But the situation is more complex than that: the government party fully knew their candidate (call it candidate 3) would lose in the second round with almost anybody else, so they planned to boost an extremist guy (call it candidate 4) in the second run, expecting that is the only scenario candidate 3 can win. They even instructed some of their members to vote for candidate 4 instead of their
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect the bigger picture is even more important here. Romania is one of the nations that has no future under EU. Essentially EU took those Eastern European nations with the idea that large Central European nations will have an influx of actually hard working and capable youths from those nations to prop up their collapsing demographics. They were correct, and drain has been utterly devastating. Romania is one of the worst off countries in this, as youth basically gets their degrees and goes to Germany t
So the wrong guy won? :-) (Score:3, Insightful)
The European Commission has launched formal proceedings against TikTok over concerns about its failure to limit election interference, particularly in last month's Romanian presidential vote.
So the wrong guy won according to the sensibilities of the European Commissioners? :-)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
the wrong guy won according to how elections work moron
The vote was very close to pre-election polling.
I don't understand what voters see in Georgescu (Romania's Trump), but there is no reason to believe the vote wasn't legitimate.
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty sure mines in Pokrovsk haven't been running all that much in recent times anyway, so you can stop melting down on this Russian talking point. Besides it's the nukes that are doing the heavy lifting in Ukraine nowadays, as supplies of coal have been bad for a long time (though coal trade between separatist Donbass miners and pro-government consumers has been an open secret since 2014).
Re: (Score:2)
Actually drones make more of a "Brrrrr" sound. Whoosh is artillery stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
There are a lot of ways to figure things out.
Like we know Trump won, despite close polling in the runup to the election. And Trump won by a landslide.
We don't question it because we know why - the Democratic voters simply never showed up - less people voted for Kamala Harris than Biden. The raw statistics showed it. So unless there wa
Its NOT that Dems in the USA failed to vote ... (Score:2)
And Trump won by a landslide. We don't question it because we know why - the Democratic voters simply never showed up - less people voted for Kamala Harris than Biden.
It's not just that some Dems did not show up. Many Dems also voted for Trump in utter disgust over how the DNC and party elites anointed Harris rather than have an open primary at the convention, and many Dems were disgusted by the Harris campaign - an absolute refusal to get into policy details, just vague statements with little content, and many Dems were disgusted by the absolute mess that Biden made of the economy and Harris couldn't think of anything she would have done different, and many Dems were di
Re: (Score:2)
yeah, people had a lot of fucking weird ideas in their head that had nothing to do with what was actually going on in the country.
Actually the reverse, lots of Dem elites had weird ideas that nothing was going wrong. The blue collar workers were living in that reality where things were going wrong. Hence Dems holding their nose and voting for Trump.
Again, to emphasize how wrong you are, day to day life caused Dems to vote for Trump. How bad did Biden/Harris have to be to make that happen? Very bad.
Re: (Score:3)
" And Trump won by a landslide."
This is false. Trump won by a small majority, not a landslide in any sense. Stop getting your news from biased sources. I don't know which you are listening to, but they are definitely biased.
"US election was valid, and Trump won with a healthy majority."
Trump did not even win by a healthy majority. He won by around 2 million votes, out of 150 million cast. So, no, he doesn't have a "mandate" he doesn't have a "healthy majority" he didn't win "by a landslide".
Quit promoting
Re: (Score:2)
For those wondering about the hilarious difference between this post and the post above it both replying to the same post but with completely opposite takes in spite of being clearly in the same camp. This is a difference between a liberal who is anchored in reality and trying to find reasons there, vs this being a leftist who finds reality utterly irrelevant. To a liberal, language is a means of communicating something related to reality. To a leftist language is a tool of power that conjures reality out o
Re: (Score:2)
The vote was very close to pre-election polling.
Of course. No one here is accusing TikTok of faking election results, they are accusing them of undermining elections. Election laws include a lot about how media is run by parties as well precisely because media can sway an election - which is also why despots attempt to first and foremost control the media.
The votes were legitimate, that doesn't mean the election wasn't interfered with.
Re: (Score:2)
The vote was very close to pre-election polling.
The vote results were anything but close to pre-election polling.
Georgescu was indeed rising in preferences at pre-election polls during the week prior, but nobody expected him to get more than 7 to 8 percent.
The main reason for annulling the elections was the fact that Georgescu, the candidate, declared ZERO campain expenses, which was clearly a blatant lie. A technicality? Maybe, but candidates need to clearly state how much they spend on campaign expenses, as well as where does the money come from.
Re: (Score:2)
So the wrong guy won according to the sensibilities of the European Commissioners? :-)
Nobody won. All candidates failed to gain required majority and second round of voting never occurred due to court annulling the election due to foreign interference.
Can't overrule the locals? Ban social media! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You have to act like Georgia's election was rigged too since it didn't go your way
Georgia's election was most likely rigged as evidenced by the insane 13% discrepancy between exit polling and voting results.
https://www.edisonresearch.com... [edisonresearch.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I dob't disagree that exit polls are reliable, but is 13% insane? Was it insane when Hillary Clinton had the same discrepancy over Sanders with white voters?
https://tdmsresearch.com/2016/... [tdmsresearch.com]
"Using these percentages to estimate the results of this earlier exit poll result [9] yielded a large discrepancy of 13.4% in favor of Clinton when compared with the unverified computer vote count (see Democratic Party table)"
Re: (Score:2)
I dob't disagree that exit polls are reliable, but is 13% insane?
You are talking about statistics for a specific demographic within a single state and are misinterpreting what the 13.4% in your own reference means. It isn't the difference between exit poles and actual vote counts but an estimate based on other polls.
"the first CNN published exit poll comparison with the computerized vote count yielded a small discrepancy of 2% in Sandersâ(TM) favor. A few hours earlier; however, NBC News at 4:24 PM broadcast the percentages of white voters voting for Clinton (32%
Re: (Score:2)
In addition to point below, the discrepancy is actually small by the standard of a totalitarian nation with culture that gave us Stalin himself.
There's a reason why secret vote is the most fundamental principle in liberal democracy. If other people know how they vote, they can pressure and punish you. And so you can vote as you actually believe, and then tell the pollster outside what he expects to hear.
The algorithm did it (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's a childish view.
Algorithms can (and do) sway the vote intentions - and that is fine, as long as it is known who (and how much) paid for those ads, and as long as those ads are marked as political ads.
In the case of Georgescu, neither happened. He declared ZERO expenses, and TikTok ads were not marked as political ads, never mind TikTok's rules prevent using it for political reasons.
Re: The algorithm did it (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not like this, and not to this extent, not illegally, and not with impunity.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's algorithms and there's algorithms.
Business (Score:2)
TikTok's management are profit focussed, as any corporation should be, with a frisson of attention from above, occasionally. That would be the government having a tickle to the private parts to keep things moving smoothly (now that is a euphemism I hope I never have to deal with!)
TT is basically a nationalistic influence movement, par excellence. It's not shy and frankly rather well done. They looked at Google, Facebook and the rest, intercepted the ball and ran with it.
We reap as they sow or perhaps vv
Georgescu = Trump (Score:5, Insightful)
https://www.theguardian.com/co... [theguardian.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Hey elites, your late-capitalist system is failing around the world. Maybe YOU are the problem.
Why would Elites like Trump and Georgescu have a problem with that?
Re: Georgescu = Trump (Score:2)
It is easier to dupe people than explain to them they were duped, they even forget the billionaires are the elites running the country
RTFA (Score:2)
From TFA: "Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the new investigation followed serious indications that foreign actors interfered in the Romanian presidential election."
People of the world need to identify those who maliciously attempt to steer the minds of those who vote in their own elections. This isn't stopping any time soon unless we neutralize it.
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
RTFA basically states that the EU commission believes the wrong person won, without actually trying to verify whether people in Romania WANTED to vote for that guy because they believed in his policies, etc. So as far as anyone can tell all these "investigations" are full of shit. Same with annulling the elections.
Why not have Romanian simply vote again, have Georgescu eligible for election, and see if he wins again now that outside forces have annulled the election. He probably will still win the electi
Re: (Score:3)
RTFA basically states that the EU commission believes the wrong person won, without actually trying to verify whether people in Romania WANTED to vote for that guy because they believed in his policies, etc. So as far as anyone can tell all these "investigations" are full of shit. Same with annulling the elections.
Why not have Romanian simply vote again, have Georgescu eligible for election, and see if he wins again now that outside forces have annulled the election. He probably will still win the elections..
"Outside forces have annulled" is not the case, Romania's highest court took this action. Likewise there was not a winner everyone having failed to received the votes necessary to win. There will be new elections. Investigations are ongoing, nobody has said anything about change in eligibility of Georgescu to run in future elections.
Re: (Score:2)
have Georgescu eligible for election, and see if he wins again
My prediction: He'll win by an even bigger margin.
Georgescu represents the cynical voters who distrust the "deep state". The judicial annulment feeds perfectly into his narrative.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually not. A good part of its voters were tolling: if house burns, then let it burn all the way. Those people fully understood the guy is crazy and and dangerous.
Re: (Score:2)
People didn't really know what they WANTED to vote since their will was influenced by a massive disinformation campaign with roots in Russia
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And who voted for Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen? Nobody!
This is now becoming the script to suppress democracy, namely:
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you talk about stuff you know nothing about?
Re: (Score:2)
User name checks out...
Please tell me who voted for Ursula von der Leyen? Or maybe it's not me who is talking "about stuff you know nothing about"?
Re: (Score:2)
You have no clue because TFS has nothing to do with "a script". You are just full of shit.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you think when I said "script" that I was literally referring to a kind of "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" document rather than employing a simple metaphor?
Seriously?
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know what you actually meant, only what you implied, which is incorrect.
Re: (Score:3)
But you are talking, with conviction even, about things of which you have a very limited understanding.
As for your - both loaded and stupid at the same time, how very efficient of you - question, the European Council and the European Parliament voted for her.
Re: (Score:2)
European aristocracy decided that she will be the sole candidate to head this commission. MEPs were given a "take it or leave it" deal as usual, and aristocratic heads of major parties met with one another to figure out how to whip enough of the rank and file MEPs to get her through.
It is what it is. EU has never been, and likely never will be democratic. It's an aristocratic organization in line with old European aristocratic interests.
A pity the UK has left the EU (Score:1)
Since it looks as though a certain "Elon Musk" is supposedly going to give a small, extreme right "party" (it is registered as a limited company, not a political party) a bung of $100 million [huffingtonpost.co.uk].
Sounds like interference is UK elections to me.
Re: (Score:2)
No, we definitely know that Elon is also allowed to do that after this past election. But the UK case is different; Soros and Musk are both US citizens - so foreigners as far as the UK is concerned.
Re: (Score:2)
Since it looks as though a certain "Elon Musk" is supposedly going to give a small, extreme right "party" (it is registered as a limited company, not a political party) a bung of $100 million [huffingtonpost.co.uk].
Sounds like interference is UK elections to me.
The thing is, Elon is going to be disappointed. All he's doing is making sure the Tories stay out of power, which ironically is a good thing for Britain. Reform UK (LLC) is the reason Labour got an 80 seat majority in the last election, they only took votes away from the conservatives in seats that were contested. I think we've reached peak Farage though, I suspect that even if the Tories can't get their act together by 2029 (yep, UK has 5 year terms) that a lot of Reform voters will go back to the Conserva
girlfriend (Score:2)
My girlfriend keeps watching TikTok when I want sex. I'm going to sue them for erection interference.