6 ms·
Americans are already quite free to seek a broad range of domestic and foreign viewpoints. Chinese citizens, on the other hand, are not. At all. The key point
by next_xibalba 2y ago
Americans are already quite free to seek a broad range of domestic and foreign viewpoints. Chinese citizens, on the other hand, are not. At all.
The key point here is that an algorithm can invisibly nudge those viewpoints, and a foreign adversary controls the algorithm.
Insofar as your claim is that powerful people and institutions care most about power, I agree. It’s very telling that TikTok would shutdown instead of divest. (Meanwhile, U.S. companies have routinely taken the other side of the deal in China: minority stake joint ventures in which “technology transfer” is mandated. AKA intellectual property plundering.)
- fidotron 2y ago> Americans are already quite free to seek a broad range of domestic and foreign viewpoints. The reality is they live in an establishment controlled media bubble, that is itself full of propaganda. Being free does not mean free to live in a lie constructed for the benefit of someone else, it means being free to live in reality, and that freedom is being denied to Americans. At least the Chinese are aware of their reality.
- next_xibalba 2y agoI can navigate my browser to Al Jazeera, RT, or Xinhua without interference. Meanwhile, China has a national firewall imprisoning its netizens. So, while most Americans opt to live inside filter bubbles, they are free to escape if they so choose. Not so for the citizens of China, who live in the iron grip of the CCP. That’s to say nothing of censorship. I can post “f** Joe Biden” on any social platform in the U.S. Meanwhile, a Chinese netizen compares Xi to Winnie the Pooh and gets a visit from the police. And their post never sees the light of day. These aren’t differences of degree. They are differences of category.
- fidotron 2y agoAmericans live in a society lying to them by omission. You have to have learned AlJazeera, RT or Xinhua exist, because they're not going to be shown to you by normal channels, and you almost certainly go on a watchlist if you visit too much. The whole point is to remove anything that may cause a passive media consumer to question what is presented to them.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> You have to have learned AlJazeera, RT or Xinhua exist, because they're not going to be shown to you by normal channels They’ve each run ads on billboards in New York. I distinctly remember Xinhua’s in Time Square.
- fidotron 2y agoRecently? Al Jazeera America closed down some years ago. (2016 apparently).
- JumpCrisscross 2y agoDefinitely after 2016, but before Covid.
- fidotron 2y agoAt the risk of a tangent, were Xinhua seriously fishing for a US audience? Or was it more kudos from the billboard? My parents used to be addicted to Al Jazeera, then some unspecified incident occurred and we were never to speak of it again. All very strange.
- reaperducer 2y agoYou have to have learned AlJazeera, RT or Xinhua exist, because they're not going to be shown to you by normal channels Al Jazeera is widely known across the country, and during the time I had cable television was available in every city in which I lived. RT is available over-the-air on free regular broadcast channels in some American cities. You can't get less restricted than that. You speak like someone who's never even been to the United States.
- fidotron 2y agoAl Jazeera America stopped in 2016. RT America was removed from most services as of 2022 and hasn't been broadcasting since. This is changing in the wrong direction and you are getting less free over time. > You speak like someone who's never even been to the United States. You speak like someone who's never left it.
- throw310822 2y ago> I can navigate my browser to Al Jazeera, RT, or Xinhua without interference The reason you can is that very few people actually do. As the Tik Tok affair shows, the moment the US suspects it might have some real competitor in controlling the narrative, it shuts them down. Maybe it's the right thing to do, but it's worth taking note that it's how things are.
- portaouflop 2y agoYes the categories of “our glorious leader” on one side and “their wretched despot” on the other. The categories of “our objective news” and “their state propaganda”. “Their brutish enforcers” vs “our noble police”. You have to accept that the era of American exceptionalism is over and we’ll all be measured by our actions rather than the dreamy stories told.
- w0m 2y ago> It’s very telling that TikTok would shutdown instead of divest. TBF; The CCP passed laws that likely make it illegal for TikTok to sell/export that kind of information (the algo). They can't divest without also neutering the sticking power of the service.
- next_xibalba 2y agoAnd why did the CCP pass those laws? Perhaps bc they understood it would block divestment, acting as a poison pill to would be acquirers, thereby forcing foreign governments to fight their own public in outright banning TikTok.
- w0m 2y agoDingDingDing. Ignoring actual value of the ban - I fully expect Trump to save US TikTok to avoid the bad PR associated.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> Trump to save us TikTok to avoid the bad PR associated He can just blame it on Biden and use his time productively.
- sumeno 2y ago> The key point here is that an algorithm can invisibly nudge those viewpoints, and a foreign adversary controls the algorithm. Compared to all the other algorithmic social media in which domestic adversaries control the algorithm.
- unethical_ban 2y agoYes, exactly, finally you get it. Because yes, China is worse.