←back to thread

423 points empressplay | 8 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
not2b ◴[] No.42071538[source]
Instead of the laser focus on TikTok as a threat, it would be better for the US and Canada to have real data protection laws that would apply equally to TikTok, Meta, Google, Apple, and X. What the EU has done is far from perfect but it bans the worst practices. The Chinese can buy all of the information they want on Americans and Canadians from ad brokers, who will happily sell them everything they need to track individuals' locations.

Perhaps the way to get anti-regulation politicians on board with this is for someone to do what was done to Robert Bork and legally disclose lots of personal info on members of Congress/Parliament, obtained from data brokers and de-anonymized.

replies(8): >>42071557 #>>42071563 #>>42071688 #>>42071710 #>>42072099 #>>42072166 #>>42072254 #>>42072301 #
imgabe ◴[] No.42071557[source]
It is not about the data. It’s about a foreign government controlling the algorithm that decides what millions of people see, and their ability to shape public opinion through that.

Like imagine if China owned CNN and the New York Times and decided what stories they could publish.

replies(16): >>42071596 #>>42071716 #>>42071772 #>>42071817 #>>42071833 #>>42071939 #>>42072002 #>>42072050 #>>42072201 #>>42072215 #>>42072256 #>>42072299 #>>42072351 #>>42072358 #>>42072658 #>>42072956 #
cool_dude85 ◴[] No.42071833[source]
Let's take this one step further, then, and ask why we should allow private media ownership if it's this important. Why should some malevolent billionaire be able to own CNN or NYT and decide what stories they could publish? Does it matter if the billionaire has a US passport or not?
replies(3): >>42071848 #>>42071899 #>>42072157 #
jvanderbot ◴[] No.42071899[source]
I really don't see why there's this cognitive dissonance. Limiting enemy states' government broadcasting power inside your territory is pretty low on the controversial things a gov can do.
replies(3): >>42071911 #>>42071965 #>>42072180 #
1. cool_dude85 ◴[] No.42071911[source]
What's an "enemy state"? We're not at war with China.
replies(2): >>42071941 #>>42072095 #
2. dralley ◴[] No.42071941[source]
They're conducting active cyberattacks on our infrastructure and allying themselves with states (Russia, North Korea) that are actively at war with our friends.

We're not "at war" but that doesn't mean much.

replies(1): >>42072085 #
3. cool_dude85 ◴[] No.42072085[source]
So you want the capacity to ban state-owned, or even partially state-owned, media from any country who has "allied" with a country actively at war with "our friends"? All of BRICS, anyone part of the BRI, just as the tip of the iceberg?
4. dghlsakjg ◴[] No.42072095[source]
China is known to be actively spying and meddling in Canadian domestic politics in ways that are not legal or the normal diplomatic channels.

Describing them as an enemy might be too far, but you certainly wouldn’t describe China as a friend.

replies(2): >>42072224 #>>42072265 #
5. cool_dude85 ◴[] No.42072224[source]
All fair complaints, but are those the standards you want to set for "banning any state-owned media from that country"? We're not enemies but I wouldn't call them our friends?
replies(1): >>42072892 #
6. epolanski ◴[] No.42072265[source]
When I read comments like yours I can't but think that we are being brainwashed.

The biggest foreign meddler and spy in Canada is the southern neighbor.

We know for a fact through leaks that US has put all Canadians under mass surveillance both in communication and movement (like the wifi hacking at airports leaked by Snowden) since more than a decade, or the 2023 Pentagon leaks that were quickly scolded as "but they were trying to find Russian activity in Canada", and don't forget the AT&T whistleblower which also exposed mass surveillance on Canadians by US intelligence.

And yet..nobody cares..even though we know for a fact it happens, we don't care let alone call the US an enemy.

So, what is the difference? The media and politicians calling 24/7 China your enemy (something nobody would've done before 2018/2017), but ignoring or pretending that the real spy of all spies which hacks and spies on all of its allies, even the personal phone of the German chancellor is cool.

I find those double standards not only mind blowing, but dangerous.

We're letting the White House to dictate globally who can play by the rules and who is an exception.

replies(1): >>42072734 #
7. A4ET8a8uTh0 ◴[] No.42072734{3}[source]
<< When I read comments like yours I can't but think that we are being brainwashed.

Sadly, and I think I called that out few years ago, there was a notable turn in US foreign policy. In effect, it means establishment expects actual confrontation with China. This, naturally, means uptick in anti-China propaganda. It is a difficult position to take now in a pragmatic way given events in Ukraine and Israel, but that is clearly the direction. Hence, comments like those of OP.

8. dghlsakjg ◴[] No.42072892{3}[source]
Canada didn’t ban non state-owned media. It didn’t even ban any media. TikTok is still allowed, RT is still accessible, private news sources, foreign annd domestic, exist at all levels through Canada.

We banned a single corporate entity from operating offices inside the country in response to credible intelligence that those offices pose a national security threat. That corporate entity is directly linked with an adversarial government with active election subversion campaigns.

Is there some reason you are twisting the actual circumstances around this?