11 ms·
Mark Zuckerberg Stoked Washington’s Fears About TikTok
- bluntfang 6y agoyikes
- kenned3 6y agoIsnt Zukerberg also married to a Chinese and speaks Mandarin?
- cyberlurker 6y agoHe’s married to a native born American Chinese person FYI.
- no_no_no_no 6y agoSoo...Chinese person...
- thefounder 6y agoNot so chinese anymore.
- Zafira 6y agos/Chinese/American/
- romanoderoma 6y agoYes, if you also consider Al Pacino, Francis Ford Coppola, Joe Pesci, Sylvester Stallone, Nicholas Cage and Martin Scorsese Italians
- threeseed 6y agoYou can support Chinese culture, language and people whilst not supporting their government or its policies. No different to how the world sees countries like Israel, Russia and even the US.
- whoevercares 6y agoYes, but it need precise definition. For example, policy that goes against CCP VS. CCP members will be received massively different from Chinese people’s point of view
- dang 6y agoPlease don't do this here.
- kevin_thibedeau 6y agoI wouldn't be surprised they paid for PR to put the heat on Cambridge Analytica. CA got burned bad for not breaking any US laws. FB got off mostly scot-free. If you make the competition look bad you will look less bad.
- lalos 6y agoHuh? CA worked with Palantir. Both Facebook and Palantir are connected via board member Peter Thiel. They are in the same boat, no competition at all.
- briandear 6y agoI have no opinion on TikTok (I am an adult with better things to do,) however, fair question: does TikTok pose a threat? There was a report that TikTok users sabotaged a Trump rally. It would seem that that could be considered “election campaign interference sponsored/enabled by a foreign government.” We’ve gotten mad at Facebook for similar things haven’t we? Or, if it’s against Trump, that’s acceptable? Not sure what the rules are anymore or what we are supposed to be outraged about.
- staticassertion 6y agoA group of teens purportedly using TikTok to troll the president's rally is not election campaign interference.
- blfr 6y agoWhy is it not when Facebook ads purchased by foreigners are considered to be?
- jussij 6y agoIn the former case all the teenagers did was send in an RSVP indicating they would attend knowing full well they would not be doing so. In the later case foreign entities were spreading misinformation in an attempt to undermine candidates, in they hope they could change the outcome of an election. The later was a direct attack on the election process, the former was a direct attack on the president's ego.
- blfr 6y agoSending false RSVPs is exactly spreading misinformation to undermine a candidate by making his support seem smaller than it is through crowding out real potential participants. Don't get me wrong. I think it's pretty funny but I don't think this option is available to someone lamenting Facebook ads.
- didibus 6y ago
- chmaynard 6y agoMark Zuckerberg knows that if another platform were sufficiently compelling, his users could turn on a dime (notice I didn't say customers). Zuckerberg is deathly afraid of competition and he is very aggressive about protecting Facebook's stranglehold on the social media advertising market.
- baby 6y agoFacebook is banned in China, it thus cannot even enter the competition.
- bjo590 6y ago> Zuckerberg is deathly afraid of competition and he is very aggressive about protecting Facebook's stranglehold on the social media advertising market. It is incredibly common behavior for large businesses to raise the barrier of entry for new competitors. Almost every established business does this. It's why patents exist. Mark Zuckerberg doesn't participate in this activity to an abnormal amount.
- chmaynard 6y agoAnti-competitive behavior is a federal crime. These practices are common in the USA because the Dept. of Justice has more or less stopped enforcing our anti-trust laws. Patents have nothing to do with it.
- FrozenSynapse 6y agoTikTok and their users are so dumb that it is no competition
- badwolf 6y agoI'm guessing Zuckerberg wasn't able to buy out TikTok, so went with plan b.
- Gibbon1 6y agoZuckerbergs brando is perceived by most people very negatively. People are itching to get away from it.
- hello-world 6y agoHe actually tried to buy the precusor to TikTok in 2017, but did not go through with it because he didn't want to have to give data to the CCP.
- indigodaddy 6y agohttp://archive.md/KMpHm http://archive.md/KMpHm
- executive 6y agoWonder how long he disappears for this time. He is already reeling from the sunscreen fiasco.
- heimatau 6y agoWell, he got to eliminate competition and had a copycat tech ready in the wings. Typical business/cronyism move.
- Firebrand 6y agoSort of a Frankenstein’s monster situation Zuckerberg created for himself. He took Bytedance’s money so they could plaster TikTok ads all over Facebook and Instagram back in 2018. TikTok pays its approved creators around $0.035 per 1,000 views. Maybe compete with that.
- lazzlazzlazz 6y agoSo a video with 100,000,000 views gets around $35,000? That seems low. A few searches suggest YouTube pays at least an order of magnitude more, depending on geo and engagement.
- paxys 6y agoTikTok videos are a few seconds long, compared to YouTube's 10+ minutes (on average). Top creators can post 5-10 videos a day on TikTok and get 30-50 million views in a matter of hours, all with just a smartphone. The ROI easily beats YouTube, no comparison.
- bostonfincs 6y agoFor high engagement and advertiser friendly content it is more like two orders of magnitude more (3.50 per 1,000) or $3.5 M for 100,000,000 views
- tjr225 6y agoI dunno, I was just doing this math and thinking that seems pretty awesome. You only get $35,000 but the hardware you need is in your pocket. Of course, you need to be cool and be good at marketing- but still!
- throWaythxMod 6y agoI have this exact problem. In my niche, I am the best. Most people post their opinions, but I collect data and do math. It makes the content better than competitors. However I don't have a marketing team, and I'm not a hip hot girl. Don't get me wrong, the website is popular and I've been on BBC, but I can tell my lower quality competitors are doing better.
- KKKKkkkk1 6y agoYou know something is broken when the CEO of Facebook chooses to apply himself to lobbying the government to ban his competitors instead of building a better product.
- MengerSponge 6y agoIn fairness, though, the CEO of Facebook hasn't built a better product in almost two decades. Instead, his company's growth has been based on brilliant (and occasionally very shady) acquisitions.
- tmpz22 6y agoThere was nothing brilliant about buying two obviously successful apps: Instagram and WhatsApp.
- 2arrs2ells 6y agoI’m not here to defend Zuck, but those acquisitions only look obvious in hindsight. People thought Facebook was insane for paying a billion for a photo sharing app with a tiny team. And while WhatsApp was ubiquitous, it was very under the radar in the US until Facebook paid what seemed like an ungodly sum ($12bn) at the time. Instagram may go down in history as one of the greatest acquisitions of all time.
- manquer 6y agoWhatsApp was quoted at $19B . You are right that those two were really smart acquisitions . While WhatsApp has not really changed all that much since the acquisition, there is very little that is the same between Instagram pre Facebook and now. Were they worth the 1B and 19B price tag? yes totally, however both could have been done cheaper and earlier. There was lots of discussions with snap before whatsApp. The way occulus($3B) due diligence was handled also does not show give a lot of confidence. Facebook just got their way with sheer amount of money they could spend.
- 6y ago
- babl-yc 6y agoFacebook is banned in China. Is it unreasonable to encourage US gvt to apply pressure for a more even playing field? I know the narrative (and majority of comments) like to hate on Zuck, so just adding another perspective for this particular situation.
- mciancia 6y agoIs it banned just because, or maybe it's not following local laws?
- babl-yc 6y agoChina routinely blocks US websites without explanation. It's generally so that the government can have control over what communication happens over the internet. https://techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/china-blocks-access-to-twitter-facebook-after-riots/ https://techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/china-blocks-access-to-twi...
- baby 6y agoMost US apps are banned in China to allow Chinese competitors to flourish.
- baby 6y agoI actually see this rhetoric a lot, and I'm not completely disagreeing with it, but at the same time I'm scared of the effects of playing the same game with the CCP and the ramifications of such move: it seems to always end up in a "us versus them" scenario which further divides the world. If you see a few people backing the US government's decision of attacking Chinese apps, imagine how the Chinese people are being brainwashed to hate on the US gov for attacking Chinese apps. IMO it is only with leading by example that we can change the situation, and the situation will change when China gets wealthy enough, and we shouldn't be scared of China becoming wealthy and joining our ranks.
- babl-yc 6y agoUS could definitely do a better job of leading by example here while still fighting for a more level playing field. I don't like the idea of trusting the executive branch to arbitrarily ban apps. Would much prefer a clear policy as to when and why actions are taken, and what policy changes could be done to avoid them altogether.
- oxfordmale 6y agoZuckerberg is damaging Facebook reputation. I was approached by Facebook's recruitment team, but decided not to go ahead with it given the recent negative news around this company. I predict a slow decline for Facebook, like IBM, if Zuckerberg stays on as CEO.
- throwawayobyy 6y agoI work at Facebook and we have a bi-yearly satisfaction survey. Trust in zuck's management is probably the highest metric, up there with agreeing with the global mission of the company (which is to connect people). I'd say he's one of the strong reason why people stay in the company even with the non-stopping bad news cycle. Don't think that what you see outside reflects what really happens inside. What I personally see inside: all of the issues that make the news are discussed openly, privacy issues are addressed on day one during bootcamp, and addressed weekly via trainings, zuck answering questions at the Q&A, communications, etc. What people tend to forget is that Facebook is a pretty large company, due to its scale, and it only takes a few fuck ups to end up with a bad news article. While I realize that we need the public scrutiny to keep ourselves honest, it also seems a bit disconnected from what is truly happening internally.
- person_of_color 6y agoPaying top of market also helps
- throwawayobyy 6y agoI hear this often, but honestly even with a low pay people don't leave their job unless they at their core disagree fundamentally with the ethics of the company, and I don't know many people at FB who disagree fundamentally with the company. Sure there are people who are not happy with some of the decisions the company take, and they argue openly or challenge management about that, but a company can't make everyone happy and I'm happy that they at least give us transparency and the opportunity to express ourselves and challenge them when we don't agree. In other companies you would probably get kicked out if you didn't show open support in whatever decision they take, and worse if you start talking politics.
- nimbius 6y agoGoosing elderly senators with another red scare sure was a convenient pivot from having to defend his own social network.
- wombatmobile 6y agoIt’s difficult to know what to make of Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal’s claim about Zuckerberg’s alleged claims about TikTok because I can’t read past the paywall. But there are so many informed comments here on HN,I must be the only non-subscriber, yeah? Can anyone post the article text?
- dredmorbius 6y agohttp://archive.md/KMpHm http://archive.md/KMpHm
- wombatmobile 6y agoZuckerberg's alleged "message hammered behind the scenes in meetings with officials and lawmakers during the October trip and a separate visit to Washington weeks earlier" are sourced to "people familiar with the matter." That's not journalism; it's gossip. Or worse.
- dredmorbius 6y agoAt least one quote acknowledges Zuckerberg's communications and is named: Kelli Ford, a spokeswoman for Sen. Hawley said the senator’s concerns about TikTok predated the meeting with Mr. Zuckerberg. “Facebook has recently been sounding the alarm about China-based tech as a PR tactic to boost its own reputation,” she said.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- spicyramen 6y agoWhy the US should support chinese companies and not US companies, if Facebook did it under the law I'm fine
- winenbug 6y agoAnd they released Reels right when the executive order hits. Business and politics will forever go hand-in-hand.
- holografix 6y agoReality is that while China blocks Facebook, Google, etc and smartly props up their own clones, it’s “aghast” at the American protectionism and xenophobic behaviour. How dare the Americans block a Chinese app?! China is not a democracy. It’s not interested in fairness. China is playing the long game. Just like the wars of the past were fought with little toy armies of a few thousand knights and noblemen marching into each other’s countries until someone decided to conscript their whole nation into battle, the West is fighting allowing China to pilfer its technology, wreak the environment, and compete with state backed organisations. Wanna compete with Huawei? Good luck sending in your company noblemen, China is sending their whole nation behind it.
- Aperocky 6y agoThere's a difference, facebook did not attempt to run its social media business in China, and Google voluntarily quit so it doesn't have to comply to censorship law. Meanwhile Tiktok has a US branch and is complying with laws in the US. China has a restrictive internet where if you want to operate, you have to comply with a certain set of rules that are unsavory to say the least. Facebook, Google decided to not bother instead of complying to those rules, but they very well could have, Bing and Amazon is in China. Tiktok's US branch did not violate any US law and its being prosecuted with administrative action, which is why your equivalence is false - The actual equivalence would be to make laws that enforces ownership for social media companies and make them store their content in location. And enforce those laws, like China did.
- baby 6y agoI don't think you realize how impossible it is to enter the Chinese market... Google wasted a ton of money trying to enter the US market (I recommend watching this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XImsSgdr4fg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XImsSgdr4fg), and Facebook did too. Look at how it went for Uber. If you want to give an example of a US company that is doing much better in China, it's Apple, and the sole reason is that everybody who works for the Chinese government owns an iPhone. BTW I was living in China when Facebook got banned, it was in 2008 when it started becoming popular outside of the US. Nobody saw it coming, and obviously there was no way for Facebook to go back into that market once the CCP decided against that.
- neonate 6y agohttps://archive.is/KMpHm https://archive.is/KMpHm
- abraxas 6y agoSociopath Zuckerberg found out how easy Trump is to manipulate. Things will get interesting from here on out. It might be in Mark's interest to ensure there is a compliant puppet in the White House for the next four years.
- shoulderfake 6y agoThis is horseshit. The last thing fb wants is for nations to start banning each others technology companies. Tik tok being banned in India and USA could start a domino effect that see's fb being kicked out of many countries that follow.
- metamet 6y agoHow exactly is this "horseshit"? In a private dinner at the White House in late October, Mr. Zuckerberg made the case to President Trump that the rise of Chinese internet companies threatens American business, and should be a bigger concern than reining in Facebook, some of the people said. Mr. Zuckerberg discussed TikTok specifically in meetings with several senators, according to people familiar with the meetings. In late October, Sen. Tom Cotton (R., Ark.)—who met with Mr. Zuckerberg in September—and Sen. Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) wrote a letter to intelligence officials demanding an inquiry into TikTok. The government began a national-security review of the company soon after, and by the spring, Mr. Trump began threatening to ban the app entirely. This month he signed an executive order demanding that TikTok’s Chinese owner, ByteDance Ltd., divest itself of its U.S. operations.
- baby 6y agothis doesn't seem to indicate that Zuckeberg said that the reaction should be to ban these apps.
- Fr8TRN 6y agoAgreed. Let the propaganda flow on HN. I hate to say it but I think well be drawing data lines on free trade agreements sooner than we think. The cloud act is an experiment that might be adopted across continents.
- largbae 6y agoThis discussion has been interesting. This article is newer than the top frontpage post with more points and more comments. Why is its ranking sinking so fast?
- Fr8TRN 6y agoI strongly disagree that Zuckerberg is the mastermind behind taking out TikTok. A lot of this discussion was explicitly Chinese propaganda a few years ago egging on past presidents to ban a few foreign companies. In my opinion Trump is driving this particular issue not at the behest of Zuckerberg. I dont think Trump sees eye to eye with other american social media companies. I think Trump just sees sensitive data about americans in foreign hands. This EO action lacks complexity and is a somewhat, extremely messy way to do things. Trump's response does not react with the reality of the industry and that is all of our data is being scooped by everyone and banning a single company will do nothing. Hypothetically if he wanted to promote a culture change there needs to be more pointed discussion on this issue. Additionally if Trump really really wanted to shove some regulation down data miners/brokers throats he would ban the sale of data (like ccpa but with actual teeth), and obliterate S.J.Res.34. GDPR is a farce and is like a cop making everything illegal but selectively enforcing the law. This discussion on HN is somewhat helpful but few comments here are including the necessary complexity of this case.
- darthrupert 6y ago"You know all the data we give you from every person on the planet? TikTok does the same for China." That probably scared them a bit.