5 ms·

I don’t understand where this comment is coming from. There’s not a lot of context around it in the article, it’s just kind of plopped in there and not expanded

I don’t understand where this comment is coming from. There’s not a lot of context around it in the article, it’s just kind of plopped in there and not expanded on. Was this some kind of defense being made on behalf of the teens, or was it solicited by a lawyer from TikTok? Regardless, it’s a silly take and I assume the person saying this doesn’t have children. These “challenges” are pervasive; I’m constantly receiving notifications from my children’s schools that someone has hurt themselves attempting a TikTok challenge and some item or activity is now banned as a result. Right now it’s the “one chip challenge” and a bunch of kids from just one school have made themselves violently ill as a result. I think the last big one was “vandalize the school bathroom”. It’s also silly to call it “a specific video”, as the challenge videos are a trend. They’re very popular on social media and past challenges have a multiplying effect on the likeliness of future videos getting participation.

shaftway 4y ago
I don't understand why the Tik Tok challenge came into the original story at all. From what I understand, these people stole a car using information from a video that dared others to try it. Then, later, they crashed it. The headlines make it seem like the challenge was involved in the crash.
- GauntletWizard 4y ago
  The teens would not have had the knowledge (and probably not motivation) to acquire the stolen car without the TikTok challenge. The challenge was absolutely involved in the crash. Edit: To add on to this a little - The challenge was probably not "Liable"; If I publish an article called "Here's how to rob someone!" I am probably not liable if you go out and rob someone. If I publish and article "Here's how to rob house 123 Main Street" and link you to it, there's probably a case for conspiracy. The tiktok challenge is probably closer to the former, but has some tinge of incitement. Either would be "Involvement".
isk517 4y ago
I'm not going to try and claim that todays kids are dumber than me and my peers when we were the same age because plenty of dumb ideas and trends floated around in my youth, but it is clear social media allows a stupid idea to travel much further and faster than it could when I was young.
tmm84 4y ago
I think the comment is there to serve as a catch can. It comes from a professor at an university in the communications department. Kind of just shoved right in to the article in my opinion. I think today's young people know that if they are under a certain age that the legal ramifications of doing things is low (you're just a juvie). While at the same time things like this give them a high reward and credit for doing it. I believe that this will just give lower bars for tried as an adult in legal courts. Also, monkey see, monkey do.

shaftway 4y ago

I don't understand why the Tik Tok challenge came into the original story at all. From what I understand, these people stole a car using information from a video that dared others to try it. Then, later, they crashed it. The headlines make it seem like the challenge was involved in the crash.

GauntletWizard 4y ago
The teens would not have had the knowledge (and probably not motivation) to acquire the stolen car without the TikTok challenge. The challenge was absolutely involved in the crash. Edit: To add on to this a little - The challenge was probably not "Liable"; If I publish an article called "Here's how to rob someone!" I am probably not liable if you go out and rob someone. If I publish and article "Here's how to rob house 123 Main Street" and link you to it, there's probably a case for conspiracy. The tiktok challenge is probably closer to the former, but has some tinge of incitement. Either would be "Involvement".

isk517 4y ago

I'm not going to try and claim that todays kids are dumber than me and my peers when we were the same age because plenty of dumb ideas and trends floated around in my youth, but it is clear social media allows a stupid idea to travel much further and faster than it could when I was young.

tmm84 4y ago

I think the comment is there to serve as a catch can. It comes from a professor at an university in the communications department. Kind of just shoved right in to the article in my opinion. I think today's young people know that if they are under a certain age that the legal ramifications of doing things is low (you're just a juvie). While at the same time things like this give them a high reward and credit for doing it. I believe that this will just give lower bars for tried as an adult in legal courts. Also, monkey see, monkey do.