73 Comments

Incredible how Trump continues to get worse over time. Every time you think he’s reached the nadir, it gets worse.

Expand full comment

It's going to get worse. I think he may even dangle the possiblity of a world leaders' summit involving him, KJU, Putin and Xi Jinping promising an end to global conflict by giving dictators what they want. Whatever gets him maximum publicity is what he craves. We're in for a hellish time when he returns.

Expand full comment

The current polling--even among Republican voters--is still strongly in favor of Ukraine aid. If Speaker Johnson held a vote this week, it would easily pass; and be on Biden's desk in days.

Once the primary season is well and truly over, Johnson can put Ukraine aid to a vote without fearing GOP defections due to fear of Trump endorsing their rivals.

Expand full comment

This bill seems like a great opportunity for America to have a hard conversation with itself about the balance of individual rights in the form of freedom of speech and the collective good in the form of a strong democracy.

Expand full comment

Speech is good. Tiktok is bad. Solution: ban the phones.

Expand full comment

I’m not sure this was legal to begin with. The push notifications etc might fall under FARA. Not a lawyer though.

Expand full comment

Another good call, Noah. Trump doing a 180' on China--or at least on a key instrument of CCP soft power--is pretty significant.

It's simply further confirmation that Trump is indeed a KGB (or FSB if you prefer) asset, doing what he thinks Moscow Centre wants. Which isn't hard for him to figure out, as Tik Tok is Chinese, the new BFF of Putin's Russia--for whom he bent over backwards for, from Helsinki onwards as '45. That there's maybe a little money in it for him--from Yass or others invested in Tik Tok--is just gravy.

The natsec GOP have already fully prostituted themselves to the Trump anti-NATO/pro-Putin agenda. For no other reason than to hold onto power. They may "style" themselves natsec hawks--especially those with military bases and factories in their districts--but the overarching purpose of their party is tax breaks for the very rich and corporations. They've no doubt rationalized that defending American National Security is indeed a noble cause; but that at the present time it's simply not worth losing their seats over.

If FOX News suddenly reversed their anti-Ukraine/pro-Russia output--or even just toned it down a bit--might signal that the natsec business and political establishment is something that Republicans on the Hill still stand behind. But RW media is now solidly MAGA.

Without American aid, Ukraine will not last for long. Which is exactly what Putin and therefore Trump wants. Wherever the armistice that will come draws the new Russian-Ukraine border, will be the new Bamboo Curtain. A dividing line between the West, and China's newest acquisition: Putin's Russia. Let's hope that due to GOP cowardice that line is the Dnipr; not the Polish border.

Expand full comment

He is doing it for the cash in the short term. In the longer term nobody knows what Trump is thinking. He is as likely to ban tik tok again once he is in power and screw this billionaire.

Expand full comment

I feel like I was ahead of the curve on "why do people keep saying Trump will be tough on China" so I will go ahead and take my victory lap.

How did I know? Because Trump did nothing about Hong Kong.

Consistently Trump's interest in China has been in unwinding globalism (going all the way back to mercantilism actually), not about promoting human rights, free speech, or territorial integrity in either region.

Expand full comment

The fact that children are threatening to kill themselves if TikTok is banned is precisely why I'm ambivalent about this bill.

ALL these damn apps should be banned for minors. And for apps used by adults, there should be a ban on personal data collection and some kind of algorithmic transparency mandate that allows us to see if the owners are promoting a specific editorial line (on China, Israel, whatever).

I think all those restrictions would survive a First Amendment challenge. But a targeted forced divestment of TikTok alone might not, and I'm not convinced it should.

Expand full comment

So, nothing should be done, because we can't fix everything in one bill? Not sure what you're saying here.

Expand full comment

Dunno whether a law could be formulated to force a Chinese divestment of Tik Tok. But it should. Noah's earlier piece convinced me that this is not just 'business as usual', but rather a ham-fisted exertion of CCP soft power. Considering any and all American/EU social media companies operating in China must fully comply with CCP-crafted regulations (mainly to maintain the Great Firewall), and Tik Tok in America insists on only using CCP-compliant search code in their news feed, it's time to force a sale.

Under non-CCP-compliant ownership, American kids can still have their dance videos; but be free of Chinese disinformation. And Byte Dance can make a pile of money.

Expand full comment

I just doubt that the state ownership/private ownership distinction Noah is relying on can be made to work. More than anywhere else in the world, that distinction is very blurry in China. If the Communist Party needs to, they can certainly find private individuals (including US citizens) who will run TikTok the way they want it to be run.

Of course the US government can try to make sure that TikTok is controlled by the right sort of people, not the wrong sort of people. But that's very problematic from a First Amendment perspective.

My prediction would be that if the bill passes, the company will probably be sold to some hedge fund that allows people to talk about Tiananmen Square but shadowbans criticism of Israel. That might be less bad than the status quo but it wouldn't solve the underlying problem, which is that algorithms are being used to manipulate public opinion in an opaque way.

Expand full comment

I'm biased regarding China. Spent time there finishing a doctorate. Was a practitioner of Traditional Chines Medicine for 25 years; and still practice T'Ai Chi. Most of their culture is simply, amazingly, wonderfully brilliant. But they are NOT a democracy. And they aim to dominate the world--much as the Pax Americana has done. Just without the 'Rule of Law', 'Free Speech' and 'Free Market' parts. Our system is flawed. Where powerful corporations and the ultra-rich have outsize influence. But I'll take it any day over what's on offer in China.

Expand full comment

Eh, from the perspective of people outside the USA this is "meet the new boss, same as the old boss". Trump is correct that Facebook and other Californian social networks constantly manipulate people at a horrific scale and do so almost exclusively to illegitimately harm the right and bolster left-wing establishment power. How many of us were faced with deluges of extremists yelling at us over totally false COVID or Russia-related claims in the last few years, driven by Facebook, YouTube and Twitter amplifying the left's agenda?

It's all swings and roundabouts when you're the government doing the manipulation. Now the establishment is getting a taste of its own medicine, and doesn't like it! Awww diddums.

> a change of ownership might as well be the same as a ban .... This is absolutely false

It's true for the people who currently run it. They will be banned and go en masse from senior executives of a wildly popular and successful company - an opportunity they will likely never get again in their lives - to nothing, nobody, unemployed. And good luck getting another job outside of China when you were literally just fired by Congress for being some sort of "traitor". Easy to see why they are desperate.

Here's the thing. TikTok hasn't done anything that US firms haven't also done, but more aggressively. Establishing this precedent is dangerous. The EU can't build its own competitors to Facebook and YouTube domestically, but it looooooooves aggressive regulation. What happens if the EU decides to force a sale of US firms to local European partners (friends of the Commission), on the grounds that US social networks manipulate European political opinion (i.e. allow criticism of the EU)? Do you think Congress will just sit back and tolerate that?

Expand full comment

Mmm, so if China sets up police stations in New York City and starts arresting New Yorkers for breaking Chinese laws, we should say "Here's the thing. The Chinese police in NYC haven't done anything that the U.S. police haven't done, but more aggressively. Establishing this precedent is dangerous."???

No.

Expand full comment

Have the US police set up stations in other countries and arrested people for breaking US laws? I don't particularly like the practice, but as far as I know, the US gets people in foreign countries who break US laws by roping in the local authorities as proxies and doing extraditions.

If they have, then yeah, I guess there wouldn't be much of a leg to stand on (outside of an embrace of pure power politics).

Don't get me wrong, I think it's fine to object to social networks and their power to censor news or otherwise restrict conversation. It's just that the time for Congress to object to that was ten years ago. If this was a "neutrality in social networking" law and not a "sell TikTok" law then it'd be much more understandable. Otherwise what exactly is the expected outcome of selling to US operators: it's definitely not less propaganda or manipulation. The only expected outcome is who benefits (mostly, the Democrats).

Expand full comment

The point is, there are certain things we should allow private actors to do but that we should not allow the Chinese government to do.

Expand full comment

Well, that's certainly a reasonable position in the abstract. 10 years ago I would have been fully behind that.

These days, eh, well ... the problem is the modern fusion of the state with business. TikTok is not technically the CCP, it's a standalone business. We understand it and other Chinese firms to be arms of the CCP because they have a lot of people whose loyalty is first and foremost to the party embedded in key positions. And yet, is this not also true for US social media firms? It certainly looks that way from the outside; like these firms are controlled by people who are loyal primarily to the Democrat party first, and their users second, such that they don't hesitate to do China-style things like disappearing news stories if it'd hurt the American left despite that it causes end-user anger and blowback.

In recent years there's even documentary evidence of this process in action, with federal institutions directly sending instructions to allies inside Twitter with specific accounts to take down. Certainly the same things happens with other firms too, we just don't know about it.

So given the tactics are similar this boils down to whether there's a strong moral argument for CCP vs the Democrats/America (because Trump's party won't get a look-in no matter what, as TikTok would certainly never be "sold" to his allies). And I think there certainly is even though both seem to be heading in the same direction, but then such an argument can be made directly rather than as if TikTok is special. Because what happens if ByteDance retreat, lick their wounds, then launch yet another popular new social network? These things come and go. There must be some kind of firmer legal and philosophical foundation for this stance beyond just one specific app being popular in one specific geopolitical situation.

Expand full comment

People keep thinking that Chinese firms are like Western firms except they are based in China.

The Chinese system is not like that. There is no rule of law in China and there is no separation between government and corporate sphere.

ByteDance isn't loyal to the CCP, it is controlled by the CCP. If someone part of ByteDance doesn't do what China says, they could go to jail forever no trial. They could have their family threatened. All of the assets of the company could be seized and managed directly. Chinese firms bow down proactively to the government under these circumstances, especially because the CCP installs minders to helpfully remind everyone of CCP priorities.

In the US you have to charge someone with a crime and you have a right to a trial. You can't pass a law targeting a specific person. You can't be prosecuted for things that weren't illegal when you did them. You don't do life in prison for corporate decisions making. Your family will not be threatened to ensure your compliance. You have an open press you can go to to communicate your plight.

Expand full comment

Well then shouldn't the rule of law be applied to ByteDance here? If they are flagrantly doing illegal things with customer data, they can be prosecuted, no? Why this extrajudicial attempt to force a sale?

Expand full comment

IF American/EU businesses in China faced a level playing field, I might agree with you. Because they don't. China is very much an authoritarian Communist-run country that is militarily bulking up to attempt--and most likely succeed--in an invasion of Taiwan. Which we will contest; beginning WWIII. They are not our friend, but a proud rival who demands their place in the sun. We can admire them and their amazing culture; but always understand their CCP rulers believes they should rule the world. Or at least most of it. Despite what you see on FOX.

Expand full comment

The Twitter files were a nothingburger, do you have any better evidence re Dem gov thumb on the scale? If you think that's somehow equivalent to the firehose of disinformation of the Internet Research Agency and whatever came after it, you're missing the forest for the trees.

The predictable old carp about liberal media bias. It's clear social media doesn't care about the political content of the message when amplifying foreign disinformation is making them money hand over fist, and apparently managing the bots is "very hard" and "what about free speech"? Seeming intractable problems when quarterlies dependent on them not being solved.

I forgot how the right was being censored when all I ever read about on social media is about how much they're all being censored. They should reach out to Hannity and Tucker, the most watched shows in the nation to tell everyone about this travesty.

Would the US react badly if the EU decided US social were and agent for ill and should be banned or locally disinvested? Not sure, feels hypothetical when the US isn't really the source of the resurgence of right wing populism, which is the current problem in the EU, right?

Expand full comment

I was thinking about the Hunter Biden laptop story, but will disagree that the Twitter Files were a "nothingburger". They directly confirmed what some had been dismissing for years as either a conspiracy theory, or just the totally independent opinions of fully private sector actors. It turned out to be neither.

Expand full comment

As an avid TikTok using adult who has pretty good conversations on the app and much better than the interactions I’ve had on other social platforms I really think the TikTok sale is going to be pretty bad. Everytime one of these sales happen it has been terrible for its users and the communities they’ve constructed. It’s just so much better as a product than its competitors especially at not having politics being a hydra eating all conversations and not being tied to a real identity and I’m really not convinced that won’t get killed in a transfer.

I genuinely don’t get why there’s no public evidence or any kind of process here. Like if it is as you say I’d probably bite the bullet knowing I would lose a lot of my contacts but it’s all on a trust us we know for sure what’s best for you kind of racket.

Expand full comment

" As long as this conflict continues, every international issue will tend to be polarized into a pro-China/pro-Russia camp and a pro-liberal-democracy camp."

The obvious counterexamples are India and Israel. Modi backs Russia and is probably the most popular leader in the anti-democratic camp, but has strong traditional and geopolitical reasons for opposing China. Netanyahu is a war criminal and aspiring dictator, and even the moderate members of his government want to maintain rule over all of Israel/Palestine, while denying Palestinians the vote.

As long as the US is allied to these states, most people non-aligned countries will maintain the view they had in Cold War I, that this is just great power politics, and that the US is happy to back dictatorships as long as they are useful

Jimmy Carter got this right, towards the end of the Cold War, but he got no thanks for it.

Expand full comment

These natsec conservatives that are surprised to see MAGA align with the CCP really shouldn't be. There has been a slow slide of defection in this direction for years. The North Star of the MAGA movement is to convince the public that the real enemies are domestic, not foreign, and the real war to fight is the culture war. I first noticed this in the context of MAGA and the CCP when the MAGA right was hypercritical of Nancy Pelosi's visit to Taiwan in 2022. Trump baselessly accused Nancy Pelosi of somehow personally profiting from the trip via "insider trading" and Tucker led with a segment on "World War Nancy." Marjorie Taylor Greene said "Americans have had enough with a women obsessed with her own power she’s held for decades while our ENTIRE COUNTRY CRUMBLES."

Well after this Taiwan trip, the MAGA slide continued. Six months later, Tucker got retweeted by a CCP spokesperson (华春莹), pulling out this revealing quote from a recent show: "Your enemy is not China ... Your enemy is the military industrial complex...". Later, when Trump was interviewed by Tucker, Trump spelled this out perfectly: "One of your fellow journalists said, who is the biggest problem, sir? Is it China? Could it be Russia? Could it be North Korea? No, I said the biggest problem is from within."

The natsec conservatives either weren't listening or chose to imagine a different reality.

Expand full comment

Ugh. China was always the one issue that Trump was right about. FFS.

Expand full comment

Another thing Trump was right about was calling out Germany for allowing itself to become dependent on Russian fossil fuels. He called them out at a speech in at the UN General Assembly in September 2018:

"Germany will become totally dependent on Russian energy if it does not immediately change course. Here in the Western Hemisphere, we are committed to maintaining our independence from the encroachment of expansionist foreign powers."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2018/09/25/trump-accused-germany-becoming-totally-dependent-russian-energy-un-germans-just-smirked/

Expand full comment

I don't remember him saying that; although given his dovish stance on Russia (to put it extremely charitably), I'm guessing he was mainly annoyed that they weren't buying from America instead. In other words, right for the wrong reasons.

Expand full comment

Good point, especially given Trump's more general mercantilist inclinations!

(I've also added a link above to the relevant speech.)

Expand full comment

Trump is totally untrustworthy. I believe he owes Putin oligarchs a lot of money and has to dance to Putin's tune. The word "traitor" comes to mind. Billionaires who think he will deliver for them will be disappointed.

Expand full comment

What Noah is really saying here is that he believes that the US should really get its information from a few “trusted” - that is controlled sources. I mean most countries have to deal with their information being massaged by American technology firms, companies that have definitely controlled the narrative on Israel recently, for instance.

Expand full comment

TikTok is controlled by the Chinese government. Our private media is not controlled by any government.

Expand full comment

The private media is not formally controlled by your government but largely sticks to a script. Anytime the US needs a war, like the Iraq war, the fourth estate acts like cheerleaders not as investigators.

Expand full comment

I think the "manufacturing consent" thesis is twenty years out of date. The mainstream media has plenty of faults but excessive deference to US foreign policy is no longer one of them.

Except on Palestine, of course. You do have a point there.

Expand full comment

If Gaza war coverage is indeed an example of the Manufacturing Consent concept, then how is it also 20 years out of date? The media has also fragmented into MSM and RW media. The latter supports a "Ukraine is bad, Putin's Russia is anti-Woke good" foreign policy narrative that most RW news consumers fully agree with.

When I read WaPo and NYT--which I do daily for 1-3 hours--pretty much every piece in both papers is either parsed by specific special interests--liike the Israel Lobby with 50-75% of Gaza coverage--or to reinforce confirmation bias while generating outrage. Nolan, above, is right that the 4th Estate is still commandable by special interests. As Big Oil and natsec Republicans did manufacturing consent for the 2nd Iraq War.

The business of America is still Business; and our media reflects it. But if you get unfairly slandered you can still sue. Unlike in China, where the rule of law is pretty spotty at best.

Expand full comment

I don’t know what you’re reading but both the NYT and WaPo have been pretty critical of Israel’s policy so much that the Israeli government rages at them quite frequently

Expand full comment

I've been reading every NYT & WaPo article on the Gaza war since Oct. 7th, and can assure you that both papers started with a solidly pro-Israeli position; albeit with coverage of the horrors suffered by civilians killed by bombing.

As the war has continued, and the condition of the 2.3 million civilians cut off from food, water and medical care has deteriorated dramatically, world outrage has grown, and both papers have covered that. Israel may not be committing genocide--like the industrial-scale mass-murder committed by the Nazis--but if they continue the food blockade, it soon will be.

Of course Netanyahu rages against any criticism of current policies; styling anyone who disagrees as Jew-haters, or self-hating Jews. Bibi and the Israeli Right live in a fantasy bubble created by decades of reliable American diplomatic shielding in the UN Security Council that has greenlit their ethnic cleansing project in the W. Bank and their otherwise deplorable treatment of the 5 million Palestinians under their control. But Israel needs global trade and investment to survive and thrive, and turning her into a pariah state will damage if not destroy the Israeli economy.

Expand full comment

Are you saying that extensive coverage of suffering Palestinians is what US foreign policy wants?

Expand full comment

Do you think you cannot find any views of Twitter skeptical of US foreign policy?

What about views on TikTok supportive of Taiwanese independence.

Expand full comment

I have plenty of criticisms of the US media but it's so weird when people try to extrapolate the industry's issues into "they are as bad as the Chinese government". Such a leap and so out of touch.

Expand full comment

I think there are a *lot* of possibilities other than "trusted" or "controlled" by the US government or the Chinese government. In fact, most world media is like that, and most world media is thus just fine in the US.

Expand full comment

I spend too much time [giving the CCP my personal data] on TikTok, and I'd like to note that I did NOT receive the push notification to call my representative. I don't let the app have access to my location, so maybe that is it, but the conspiracist in me thinks TikTok only sent the notification to people they think are low information or already agree with them based on their algorithm data.

Expand full comment

Hi Noah. Have you considered throwing a Happy Hour for subscribers in the Bay (Like Matt Yglesias does for Slow Boring)?

I’m a young SV researcher/SWE, and would love to get the chance to meet you. Your writings have been very impactful and I would love to buy you a drink/bunny food.

Expand full comment

I understand why we are concerned that TikTok's data is shared with the CCP and also that the CCP can use the app for propaganda purposes. But Donald Trump, Elon Musk, and Mark Zuckerberg are private individuals with access to the same data and who use their social media apps for the same propaganda purposes. Forcing the sale is probably a good thing but the concentration of power given to social media owners is a real problem!

Expand full comment

Also, Trump is basically the Capital in the Hunger Games.

Expand full comment

I'd have thought the real world's closest analog to the Hunger Games Capitol would be Moscow?

Expand full comment

Following the same playbook? 😆

Expand full comment

Trump was likely kompromized at Jeffrey Epstein's island.

Epstein wasn't working for Russia himself, but the foreign power he was actually working for (most likely Saudi Arabia) traded the kompromat to Putin because they had little use for a bankrupt real estate mogul.

Expand full comment

I think this article fails to deal with the paradox of TikTok - it really is a great place for freedom of expression as long as you're not talking about China. For example, queer content on TikTok is flourishing. That sounds a lot more like a company with an internal power struggle between people who want the app to be open to self-expression and other people who want to stay on the good side of the CCP. But obviously, the only thing both sides can agree on is that they want TikTok to succeed as a company, and it seems hard to imagine that a congressionally mandated sale would be good for business.

Expand full comment