A ridiculous bill, on it's face. It does nothing to address the dangers of Tik-Tok, it only changes who owns and directs those dangers. If folks think that the CCP won't still be behind the scenes, collecting data and directing propaganda assaults, they are dreaming. Simply changing ownership on paper doesn't change directorship in the shadows.
The only way to combat the dangers of Tik-Tok is to educate people on those dangers. Simply banning it or changing "ownership" only serves to make more people want to know WHY, and to find out, more people will flock to the Tik-Tok platform. Instead of truncating usership, this bill will only serve to drive an increase in usership.
And, as has been observed above, the devil is always in the details - what hidden pork has been constructed in the shadows of it that would cause so many to vote in favor of so obviously flawed a bill?
Tik=Tok only served to feed the propaganda wing of the Short-Attention-Span theater, and it only serves as a CCP outlet to weaken America. Simply changing ownership and he HQ location will change none of that. This is an example of congress doing something useless just to be seen to be "doing something".
.
The only way to combat the dangers of Tik-Tok is to educate people on those dangers. Simply banning it or changing "ownership" only serves to make more people want to know WHY, and to find out, more people will flock to the Tik-Tok platform. Instead of truncating usership, this bill will only serve to drive an increase in usership.
And, as has been observed above, the devil is always in the details - what hidden pork has been constructed in the shadows of it that would cause so many to vote in favor of so obviously flawed a bill?
Tik=Tok only served to feed the propaganda wing of the Short-Attention-Span theater, and it only serves as a CCP outlet to weaken America. Simply changing ownership and he HQ location will change none of that. This is an example of congress doing something useless just to be seen to be "doing something".
.