Ahead of SCOTUS Hearing, Study Finds TikTok Is Likely Vehicle For Chinese Propaganda (gizmodo.com) 95
A forthcoming peer-reviewed study (PDF) from Rutgers University's Network Contagion Research Institute argues that TikTok surfaces fewer anti-CCP posts compared to Instagram and YouTube, despite higher user engagement with such content. It also found that heavy TikTok usage correlates with more favorable views of China's human rights record. The findings come a Supreme Court hearing later this week on whether the federal government can ban TikTok. Gizmodo reports: The new peer-reviewed paper, which was first reported by The Free Press, begins by examining whether content on TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube related to the keywords "Tiananmen," "Tibet," "Uyghur," and "Xinjiang" tends to display pro- or anti-CCP sentiment. The researchers found that TikTok's algorithm didn't necessarily surface more pro-CCP content in response to searches for those terms, but it delivered fewer anti-CCP posts than did Instagram or YouTube and significantly more posts that were irrelevant to the subject.
In the second stage of their study, the NCRI team tested whether the lower performance of anti-CCP content was a result of less user engagement (likes and comments) with those posts. They found that TikTok users "liked or commented on anti-CCP content nearly four times as much as they liked or commented on pro-CCP content, yet the search algorithm produced nearly three times as much pro-CCP content" while there was no similar discrepancy on Instagram or YouTube.
Finally, the researchers surveyed 1,214 Americans about their social media usage and their views on China's human rights record. The more time users spent on any social media platform, the more likely they were to have favorable views of China's human rights record, the survey showed. Users were particularly more likely to have favorable views if they spent more than three hours a day using TikTok. The researchers wrote that they could not definitively conclude that spending more time on TikTok resulted in more positive views of China, but "taken together, the findings from these three studies raise the distinct possibility that TikTok is a vehicle for CCP propaganda."
In the second stage of their study, the NCRI team tested whether the lower performance of anti-CCP content was a result of less user engagement (likes and comments) with those posts. They found that TikTok users "liked or commented on anti-CCP content nearly four times as much as they liked or commented on pro-CCP content, yet the search algorithm produced nearly three times as much pro-CCP content" while there was no similar discrepancy on Instagram or YouTube.
Finally, the researchers surveyed 1,214 Americans about their social media usage and their views on China's human rights record. The more time users spent on any social media platform, the more likely they were to have favorable views of China's human rights record, the survey showed. Users were particularly more likely to have favorable views if they spent more than three hours a day using TikTok. The researchers wrote that they could not definitively conclude that spending more time on TikTok resulted in more positive views of China, but "taken together, the findings from these three studies raise the distinct possibility that TikTok is a vehicle for CCP propaganda."
Might be pessimistic... (Score:2)
But I don't think evidence of foreign political influence will play any real part in a the decision the Supreme Court makes on this case. It will just come down to whether enough money is involved for the right people to make stopping the ban worthwhile.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
look at many users who constantly post Chinese and communist rhetoric here knowingly or not and at least ban those users.
Why would we do that? It's a pretty warped sense of free speech if you think it only applies to what your national government deems acceptable; isn't that precisely the issue we take with the CPP?
Re: (Score:1)
"at least look at many users who constantly post Chinese and communist rhetoric here knowingly or not and at least ban those users."
That's really fitting that this is posted as AC. Can't stand posters you disagree with? Ban them! Can't compete with Tiktok? Ban it! It's further proof as to how all the Russophobia and Sinophobia here is pure brainrot.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Might be pessimistic... (Score:5, Insightful)
"They still have to write a legal justification for their opinion that will stand up somewhat at least."
Maybe they can cite a British judge from hundreds of years ago, hopefully one that tried witches. That worked for abortion.
SCOTUS long gave up on "standing up" even somewhat. Presidential immunity is based on literally nothing.
Re: (Score:1)
"They still have to write a legal justification for their opinion that will stand up somewhat at least."
Maybe they can cite a British judge from hundreds of years ago, hopefully one that tried witches. That worked for abortion.
SCOTUS long gave up on "standing up" even somewhat. Presidential immunity is based on literally nothing.
Yep, 100%. When president Musk takes office later this month it’s going to be a massive financial win for him and his vice president orange something. I’m buying futures in motor coach companies (NOT RVs), because I expect a very large order coming soon.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh please....
Even the darling of the left...Ruth Bader Ginsberg had said that the basis for Roe was a shaky ground and would likely be overturned before she passed away.
If even she thought it was based originally on faulty reasoning and bad law...it didn't stand a chance in the l
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Even the darling of the left...Ruth Bader Ginsberg had said that the basis for Roe was a shaky ground and would likely be overturned before she passed away.
Indeed. Roe was a bad ruling, very much a case of ideologically-driven judges seeking a justification for the conclusion they wanted, though it didn't threaten to destroy the constitutional structure of our republic.
The immunity ruling was far, far worse, driven less by specific ideological goals than to protect a specific individual, and very much a clear and present threat to the constitution.
I was afraid SCOTUS would bless the president's authority to self-pardon but they went one better and declare
Re: (Score:2)
I'd disagree on both counts. Roe wasn't narrow, nor limited to women. It was an invented constitutional right to privacy. And subsequent case law was determined using Roe as precedent.
On the immunity ruling, it was narrow in that only official duties are protected. That leaves alot of ground for interpretation. And that decision was made for a reason, as discussed in the "Immunity as necessary" section
Re: (Score:2)
On the immunity ruling, it was narrow in that only official duties are protected.
You have a startlingly-broad definition of "narrow" in this case, and seem to apply an entirely different definition in the Roe case.
There's legitimate reasons why acts of office shouldn't be prosecutable.
Deeply, deeply disagree. And you will, too, when a president you don't like but is willing to ignore precedent and norms takes office.
Re: (Score:2)
"They still have to write a legal justification for their opinion that will stand up somewhat at least."
Maybe they can cite a British judge from hundreds of years ago, hopefully one that tried witches. That worked for abortion.
SCOTUS long gave up on "standing up" even somewhat. Presidential immunity is based on literally nothing.
With the way your government is going, you might need to borrow Oliver Cromwell.
Re: (Score:2)
They still have to write a legal justification for their opinion that will stand up somewhat at least. The court is already losing credibility, with some recent revelations and can hardly effort to lose more. Whether Chinese propaganda is a reason to shut them down is at least legally questionable at least as long as it is not actually posted by the Chinese government. Free speech applies to wrong speech (see Patrick Henry).
No, not really. They are the last word in the matter and since they are there until they leave, what recourse is there? If you want options, don't put it in front of the court and ask for a decision.
Re:Might be pessimistic... (Score:5, Funny)
is propaganda really the reason? (Score:4, Interesting)
If propaganda is the reason, it seems there might be some constitutional problems. If course, SCOTUS doesn't care about the constitution anymore, but they're supposed to.
But if propaganda is a justification, ban Twitter first. Then Fox News.
Re: (Score:2)
If propaganda is the reason, it seems there might be some constitutional problems. If course, SCOTUS doesn't care about the constitution anymore, but they're supposed to.
But if propaganda is a justification, ban Twitter first. Then Fox News.
Then maybe that site using the word "Truth" ironically ...
[ Or as that Putin guy might call it, "Pravda". ]
(Coincidence?)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
But if propaganda is a justification, ban Twitter first. Then Fox News.
The important part is that it's propaganda from a hostile foreign government intended to influence US citizens. Twitter is propaganda from an idiot and Fox News Channel is propaganda for profit but neither have the same input or impact as TikTok. That said, deceiving people for profit as a business model should be illegal and FNC would be an easy target. Twitter is a more complicated situation but I think willfully allowing foreign government propaganda (e.g. Russian propaganda that suits his agenda) should
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Fox News Channel is propaganda for profit but neither have the same input or impact as TikTok.
That's something of a stretch. Fox is the most popular news channel in the US. Despite the whining about the "MSM", it IS the MSM. It is very, very influential and people actually believe the lies it parrots and insinuations made on there.
I'm not disagreeing with your other points, but Murdoch has a long history of huge and malign influence in your country and mine.
Re: (Score:3)
Aaah the downmods come in!
Rather than cowardly downmodding, try addressing the facts...
1. Fox has higher viewership than any other news channel. This is objectively true.
2. Fox had to pay Dominion three quarters of a billion dollars for libeling (i.e. lying about) vote rigging. This is also objectively true.
But then to the kind of people who watch Fox, actual, verifiable facts which they don't like are "trolling" and "flamebait".
Re: (Score:1)
The same could be said for MSNBC...and to a VERY slightly lesser extent, CNN....
Re: (Score:2)
The same could be said for MSNBC...and to a VERY slightly lesser extent, CNN....
BuT tHeY aRe AlL aS bAd As EaCh OtHeR.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't disagree with anything you wrote there, but to suggest that this means it's more influential than Tiktok is to forget that, like all news channels, Fox News has a viewership that, at a peak, is measured in the low millions [foxnews.com] with total viewership probably in the low tens of millions, while TikTok
Re: (Score:2)
Fox News has a viewership that, at a peak, is measured in the low millions with total viewership robably in the low tens of millions, while TikTok has around 113 million US users,
That is true, but Fox focuses exclusively on news and commentary, whereas TikTok is a general purpose platform.
If there's a major advantage to Fox, it's that it's all lies and propaganda 24 hours a day, setting an agenda that's repeated across social media, while Tiktok is user generated content.
That too! The algorithm might be int
Re: (Score:2)
Technically true but what of it? If $MEDIAOUTLET shows every single viewer at least one misleading political comment each day, without presenting a truthful one, does it matter if their content is 99% politics or 1%? Maybe the 1% in many ways is more dangerous, as a 1% political media outlet more likely to have mass appeal.
Most of the whinin
Re: (Score:3)
TikTok is something kids like. That makes it evil and scary to adults for the most part, so any justification to rid us of it is fine and dandy. It's like the Satanic Panic of the 80s. D&D was satanic. Metal music was satanic. Video games were satanic. Now it's the new version of the red menace, and everything scary is Chinese or Russian. Including anything that kids like to do.
Not that there's no reason to look at TikTok with a critical eye, but I hardly think dancing kids and silly short music vids ar
Re: (Score:2)
None of those previous "satanic panics" were ad focused and dynamic. We've seen lots of TikTok trends with a political slant to them. If China wanted, it could suppress any of those trends or push new ones
Re: (Score:2)
None of those previous "satanic panics" were ad focused and dynamic. We've seen lots of TikTok trends with a political slant to them. If China wanted, it could suppress any of those trends or push new ones
If you think Judas Priest wasn't advertising for gay BDSM clubs, you missed a memo somewhere.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ok...what's next after that?
MSNBC?
CNN?
I mean, those are also major propaganda outlets....
Re: (Score:2)
But if you banned CNN, what will people watch in the doctor's office waiting room after their phone dies?
Re: (Score:2)
Chinese propaganda? (Score:2, Informative)
It they would only admit it’s because they can’t control the algorithm to pump narrative and manufacture consent I might respect them slightly more.
Re:Chinese propaganda? (Score:4, Funny)
We've always been at war with Eastasia.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
We've always been at war with Eastasia.
It’s not a manual god damn it!
Twitter has lost half its users (Score:1, Troll)
I'd say about 60% of the content I see online has migrated to Blue sky. A lot of the Japanese retro game stuff that gets covered over on time extension is still on Twitter because they haven't really noticed the shit show that is American politics for obvious reasons.
I think Twitter will carry on if only because companies will use it to funnel bribes into the White House for at least the next 4 years
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
After Elon Musk took over Twitter, he fired all the content moderators and invited Nazis back to the platform - because he's a shithead Nazi at heart.
The only people choosing to hang out with Nazis are people with whom I never want to hang out.
Not surprised that membership fell, because content moderation is required to make a social media site hospitable for PEOPLE and for ADVERTISING.
Re: (Score:1)
Blue Sky has 1.5M users. How many does Twitter have? Even if they're half bots, it's still a lot of users.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
So I think it's safe to say some people can smell what Twitter is cooking.
They must be the ones catching it in wafts that don’t wallow in filth all day, every day.
This is an outrage! (Score:3, Funny)
Re: This is an outrage! (Score:1, Interesting)
You're trying to be funny, but are largely accurate. The issue is tiktok is less subject to American propaganda than the others. Nothing in the article proves anything nefarious from China, quite the opposite. The conclusion is a reflection of a built in bias of those doing the research; nothing more, nothing less.
Re: (Score:1)
US is spending 1.6B to produce anti-China propaganda. Surely lots of it is channeled into youtube, instagram, facebook, etc. "pundits". As well as traditional western media.
Re: (Score:1)
Show me the US concentration camps for slave labor and political prisoner organ harvesting. The US is not perfect but the CCP is another level of evil.
Re: (Score:2)
Show me the US concentration camps for slave labor and political prisoner organ harvesting. The US is not perfect but the CCP is another level of evil.
of course:
https://www.ohchr.org/en/press... [ohchr.org]
https://www.un.org/unispal/doc... [un.org]
https://www.amnesty.org/en/doc... [amnesty.org]
https://www.icj-cij.org/node/2... [icj-cij.org]
https://reliefweb.int/report/o... [reliefweb.int]
if you need more just say, there's plenty. btw ofc you will not document your claims.
"not perfect". moron.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you might have some geography misconceptions. The area known as "Palestine" is actually in the middle east under Israeli occupation. The USA is in the west in North America
Re: (Score:2)
Silly. The US doesn't run organ harvesting or slave labour camps. Not since the 70s at least.
Just torture.
Re: (Score:2)
Basically every prison in the USA is a slave labour camp.
What you think the prisoners are doing all day long?
Playing cards, having hookers as visitors and drinking booze?
Re: (Score:2)
No no, they're not *slaves*. They're paid! The average wage is... 63 cents an hour. Minus fees and expenses.
Okay, Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Texas don't pay their inmates for labour, so they have slaves.
Hey, something about that list sounds familiar....
Re: (Score:1)
Show me the Chinese concentration camps for slave labor and political prisoner organ harvesting. China is not perfect but the USA are (CCP <-- fixing that for you: it is CPC) another level of evil.
I think I fixed that for you.
Political prisoners are a shame, yes. But they are not organ harvested. Only people in the death row, which requires a crime punishable by death, or victims of car accidents - and similar - are "organ harvested".
Typical crimes with death penalty are: murder, rape, high level corrupt
Tiktok is probably gonna lose (Score:4, Insightful)
https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/08... [cnn.com]
It’s absolutely clear that the ccp is using tiktok as a vehicle for both a) spying on the US public and b) influencing their opinion.
So, this isn’t about the free speech of a company. This is about whether a semi-hostile foreign government has constitutional protections to operate a social media site designed to spy and quietly influence our citizens.
Personally, I’m ok with it, as long as tiktok, and probably most of their executives as indivduals, are required to register as agents of the Chinese government. That would be honest disclosure, protect free speech, and also prevents the “we’re just a lil’ ol’ innocent social network” lie. At that point, if US teens want to keep consuming the content, I dont really give a rats ass.
Re: (Score:2)
So, this isn’t about the free speech of a company. This is about whether a semi-hostile foreign government has constitutional protections to operate a social media site designed to spy and quietly influence our citizens.
Foreign propaganda isn't supposed to be banned in a free country. Seems like a major failing of our public education system if China's efforts are actually working.
Re: (Score:2)
Unbelievable (Score:3)
"Ahead of SCOTUS Hearing, Study Finds TikTok Is Likely Vehicle For Chinese Propaganda"
From the "No-Shit-Sherlock" department.
Re: (Score:2)
"Ahead of SCOTUS Hearing, Study Finds TikTok Is Likely Vehicle For Chinese Propaganda"
From the "No-Shit-Sherlock" department.
Yes, but the Fox Telescreen says "Russian propaganda good, Chinese bad".
Censorship, not propaganda (Score:1)
While it's possible that there's also propaganda, the study only demonstrated censorship. It's also entirely unsurprising that a Chinese owned company would censor videos critical of the CCP. More interesting would be if they were t
Examine YouTube again (Score:1)
Great, now search YouTube for "book banning", "anti-abortion", "J6ers" and "personal responsibility" to discover if such propaganda is pro-GOP or anti-GOP.
Why do I think such dishonesty will be pro-GOP?
Go ask social medial about US's "human rights record" regarding blacks and ex-convicts.
It's great that TikTok is being examined for propaganda but it's not because people care about the truth.
Re: (Score:2)
YT search results on first page using anonymous browsing:
- book banning: Wapo, PBS and Trevor Noah top the list
- anti-abortion: Joy Reid MSNBC, CBS News, Students for Life of America, CNN
- J6ers: very random included PBS but a bunch of other sites about pardons
- personal resonsibility: mostly conservative listings (why was this part of your list)
I'm not sure what your actual point is, but was curious enough to look it up
Re: (Score:2)
The study also discovered that pro-China beliefs existed across all platforms but labelled only TikTok as a "vehicle for CCP propaganda". I think this is more important than the 'TikTok hides anti-China articles' claim.
I assumed there would be bias in YouTube and chose to search for GOP ideology. A YouTube search does not calculate how many articles on YouTube are hidden.
My word-list is from GOP talking-points and is expected to reveal one of:
- More pro/anti China articles [unlikely given the US-ma
Would we find the same for the US? (Score:2)
Also the title makes it sound like they're trying to cause foreigners to like them. When the article makes it sound more like damage control.
Though I guess the details are what matters here. Sure they'll have a reason to act this way, but how much do they. And does it matter in the end?
I know the US government uses propaganda too. Might be helpful if we created an objectively defined measure for comparing bad/good propaganda (when viewed without personal bias).
Re: (Score:2)
So long and thanks for the Chess Records (Score:1)
Tiktok, twitter, slashdot, little Greta, all of it (Score:3, Insightful)
Just about any idea, which if taken to it's logical conclusion, will have the effect of lowering our wealth while raising or just plain not affecting, that of our adversaries, is ripe for amplification by the foreign influence operations of those adversaries.
People who knowingly assist these efforts are known as traitors. People who unwittingly assist these efforts are known as useful idiots. I suppose there could be principled luddites and tree huggers in the mix, but their ideas are still poison and they get lost in the noise of enemy propaganda.
A vehicle for news they don't like (Score:1)
and are not able to control the narrative.
Just like Twitter, it was fun as long as the woke-CEO of Twitter kept spreading the holy word of the left.
Basic common sense (Score:1)
Any social media platform that is influenced even by the US government would be blatantly illegitimate. A similar platform that is controlled by a adversarial communist, one party totalitarian regime is much worse and clearly should be dismantled. This is basic common sense.
Re: (Score:1)
So X to be outlawed next? Is that what you are saying?
Re: (Score:1)
To the extent that X or any other social media platform is influenced by government coercion, yes it should unquestionably be eliminated and those involved should be held accountable. The fact that Musk runs X and is advising the government is close enough to make me uncomfortable but not enough for me to conclude that undue influence is being exerted – at this time. But I have my eye on them.
keywords: gaza israel Netanyahu? (Score:1)
Outlaw X then... (Score:2)
Because that one is definitely a propaganda-vessel. Seriously.
Re: (Score:1)
Your choice, you are an antisemite and/or a terrorist sympathizer, your call. There is no genocide, this word is used towards Israel and Jews by antisemites and/or terrorist sympathizers, that's about it. This world is at war, the war is between the civilized world and barbarians. This war is against Israel this war is against Ukraine, this war is against South Korea, this war can only stop when the civilization decides it had enough of the barbarians.
your post is wrong (Score:2)
But while it is clear that Israel has the absolute right to respond militarily against a brutal terrorist attack, it is also clear that the Netanyahu’s right-wing, extremist government is waging that war in a deeply reckless and immoral way. A just cause for war does not excuse atrocities in the conduct of that war.
Israel has the right to go to war against Hamas. It does not have the right to go to war against innocent men, women, and children in Gaza. Israel’s reliance on widespread and indiscriminate bombardment, including with massive explosive ordinance in densely populated urban areas, is unconscionable.
Israel’s military campaign will be remembered among some of the darkest chapters of our modern history. Consider the toll thus far.
As of today, nearly 20,000 people have been killed—seventy percent of whom are women and children—and more than 52,000 wounded since October 7th. More are likely trapped under the rubble. 135 UN workers have been killed, as well as dozens of other aid workers.
M. President, unbelievably, nearly 1.9 million people, more than 85 percent of the population, have been driven from their homes across Gaza. Despite sharing their locations with Israeli forces, more than 100 UN facilities have been hit in the bombardment. The UN reports that over 60 percent of the housing units in Gaza have been damaged or destroyed.
To put this in historical perspective, this means the destruction in Gaza is now equivalent to that of Dresden, where two years of bombing during World War II destroyed half of the homes in that city and killed about 25,000 people. Gaza has matched this in two months.
This massive bombardment has made it impossible for the UN and other aid groups to provide basic necessities to the people of Gaza. As we speak, some 1.4 million people are sheltering in 155 overcrowded UN facilities. There is little electricity, food, water, medicine, or fuel – and hundreds of thousands of children are going hungry. The shortage of clean water and adequate sanitation facilities is leading to disease. And that is not to mention the lasting psychological damage being done. The UN’s senior humanitarian official said that he fears a “breakdown in society” amid this desperation.
This is not just a humanitarian cataclysm, but a mass atrocity.
And it is being done with bombs and equipment provided by the United States and heavily subsidized by American taxpayers. Tragically, we are complicit in this carnage.
The Israeli military has made extensive use of massive explosive munitions in its campaign, including 2,000-pound and 1,000-pound bombs, and 155mm artillery. These bombs and shells are manufactured here in America and supplied to Israel by the United States.
The Wall Street Journal reports that the U.S. has provided at least 15,000 bombs and 57,000 artillery shells to Israel since October 7th, including more than 5,400 of the huge 2,000-pound bombs that can flatten entire neighborhoods.
The Washington Post reports that, in just six weeks after October 7th, Israel dropped more than 22,000 American-supplied bombs on Gaza. And CNN reports that U.S. intelligence believes 40 to 45 percent of the bombs Israel has used in Gaza have been unguided “dumb bombs.”
These munitions were provided with the full knowledge they would likely be used in Gaza, a densely populated urban area with a large civilian presence. Parts of Gaza are more densely populated than New York City.
The press, human rights monitors, and U.S. officials have confirmed that U.S.-provided bombs have been used in attacks that have killed thousands of civilians.
M. President, this campaign very likely violates U.S. law and policy. That is why I have introduced a privileged resolution under Section 502B of the Foreign Assistance Act. https://www.sanders.senate.gov... [senate.gov]
Re: (Score:1)
it is all bullshit. IDF has done more than any army in the world ever to prevent and avoid unnecessary civilian casualties. Israel can literally kill every single Arab living in Gaza by bombing yet instead it chooses to send troops in to surgically remove terroriss. Israel decolonized its territory from the Arab occupiers that took over centuries ago, Jews are the native population of the land.
https://youtu.be/Y2Efkrrz5q0?s... [youtu.be]
https://youtu.be/By6qRjTRvPs?s... [youtu.be]
https://youtu.be/U-OBn4MTyX0?s... [youtu.be]
of course mu
Meh... (Score:1)
So? (Score:2)
Sure, I'm American, and I think the CCP deserves plenty of criticism.
But I'm WAY more worried about the free speech throttling by social media companies led by American billionaires who are cozied up to the far right wing of our own country's politics.
Does not make any sense (Score:1)
Why and how would an American see China relevant content on TikTok?
Unless you follow a Chinese digital creator explicitly: the only Chinese stuff you might get could be advertisement from Alibaba, Temu or Lazada. If they even advert in USA, who knows?
I use TikTok since perhaps a year or two: I never saw anything related to China, or any politics - what ever country.
So if you get haunted by pro CPC, anti CPC, pro red, anti red, pro blue, anti blue, pro lib anti lib, pro gay, anti gay, pro LTGB, anti LTGB pro
China doesn't need to propagandize (Score:2)
The CCP doesn't need to propagandize Americans through TikTok. All they need to do is NOT censor things that the US Government normally does, and then show them to Americans. People's views on how "bad" China is get tempered when they see first hand the destruction that US foreign aid delivers around the world in terms of two thousand pound bombs used against human beings.
Um, what? (Score:2)
Just because the west is doing it... (Score:1)
.... come on.. .anyone paying attention knows we're getting propagandized out the ass on Facebook and were on Twitter before Musk bought it.
'likely' is fare less than ABSOLUTELY.
Also, I am more concerned about propaganda by our own governments used to justify actions they take against the populations they are supposed to represent than the 'maybe' ones of far distant ones that can actually have zero to little effect on me.
This is more about the fact that tik-tok would not 'DEAMPLIFY' evidence of Genocide an