TikTok had more freedom of speech when it was owned by communists.
Posted by ENVYisEVIL@reddit | Libertarian | View on Reddit | 43 comments
Posted by ENVYisEVIL@reddit | Libertarian | View on Reddit | 43 comments
vbvahunter@reddit
Day 74916858 of nobody knowing what freedom of speech actually is
arnoldlayne98@reddit
Freedom of speech is a myth. Nobody actually has complete freedom of speech at any place in the world. There are so many exceptions even in the US that it makes the 1st amendment completely meaningless.
PopBitter3926@reddit
Freedom of speech would just be the ability to say it without prosecution personal consequences will follow so true absolute freedom of consequence from speech is yeah not possible.
not_today_thank@reddit
There is freedom of speech which is an idea or an ethos and there is the first amendment to the US constitution. They are different things, but people often treat them like they are the same.
GeorgePapadopoulos@reddit
In this case it most certainly applies. The US government didn't like the "algorithm" (meaning the content Americans were consuming) and they forced the sale of TikTok in part to Oracle.
uuid-already-exists@reddit
The free speech part of the algorithm wasn’t the issue. Otherwise all the other social media platforms would have the same issue. It was the ability to be weaponized by China. We’re currently on a collision course with war with China very soon and this would be a powerful tool in their hands. We’ve seen already how social media can be utilized by adversarial foreign nations already, just imagine how powerful it would be if they also owned the algorithm targeting specific groups of like minded people with the purpose of disrupting peace and order. China is already doing that by suppling fentanyl precursors to the cartels with the intention of going to the US and Canada.
GeorgePapadopoulos@reddit
"“We really do need to ban TikTok once and for all, and let me tell you why. For every 30 minutes that someone watches TikTok every day they become 17 percent more antisemitic, more pro-Hamas based on doing that."
That's a quote from Nikki Haley during the Republican primary debate in December of 2023. I can provide similar statements from other Israeli and American politicians. So it has everything to do with the content of that speech.
Says every authoritarian that goes after the free press & speech.
You mean like how it was used for the Arab Spring? Aren't you more concerned with how the US government used influence to silence critics regarding Covid and other topics, just in the past few years?
If you think censorship is the way to go, whether that's TikTok or Russia Today, you're an authoritarian.
Even if what you claim is true (and it isn't), that has shit-all to do with the 1st amendment. This action is not aimed at China, it's aimed at Americans ability to access content that doesn't push a government narrative.
uuid-already-exists@reddit
The us government doesn’t own TikTok after the sale. It’s still a private company. It’s going to be the same as any other social media company. Not sure how the US is going to silence free speech with a company they don’t control.
GeorgePapadopoulos@reddit
It just hand-picked the new owners with a handshake and wink about what the algorithm should be doing. We have actual evidence of at least the previous administration forcing censorship via social media companies.
Controlled by the US government. You're not making any compelling arguments against anything I said, besides "well it's private company". It has always been a private company, and the US government wants to control what is presented on the platform.
Social media executives, sworn in before Congress, have admitted to being pressured my the previous administration. Oracle (the worst cloud provider), has billion dollar deals with the US government on the line, besides their own political agenda. But sure, you are "Not sure how the US is going to silence free speech"!
guitarjob@reddit
it’s an ideal all companies should have, freedom of speech is not just a law.
GunsNSnuff@reddit
Hopefully once the lunatics on both sides get fatigued enough, you can go back to being a n a$$hole on the internet.
Mead_and_You@reddit
Why did you censor the word "ass"? Are you 9 years old?
GunsNSnuff@reddit
I’m an adult, why does it bother u so much is the better question?
Mead_and_You@reddit
Because it makes you look like a fucking retard...
GunsNSnuff@reddit
OK little guy, u seem real bothered. U just wrote a book.
Mead_and_You@reddit
They, this got needlessly hostile and rude, and I'd like to apologize to you for that. That isn't the sort of person I'd like to be.
GunsNSnuff@reddit
All good
Mead_and_You@reddit
How slow do you type, boomer? That took like 10 seconds. It sounds like I could legitimately write a book in the time it takes you to write two sentences.
av2706@reddit
U should keep ur personal beliefs to yourself and do what u are hired to do and take money and go home… its employers will if they want to fire u for ur “beliefs” non aligning with them.
UnitedSlayer03@reddit
Do you think if you were to attend an event that wasn't aligning with the company, outside of work hours, and they fired you, that it would be within the company's position to do?
Mountain-Papaya-492@reddit
Isn't that what drug tests essentially are? Keeping track of what employees do in their free time.
UnitedSlayer03@reddit
Never was pro drug test. Personally I feel there shouldn't be unless the person is using at work or during working hours.
If their performance is lacking due to the drugs, fire them. If not, let them enjoy their personal freedom.
Mountain-Papaya-492@reddit
Yeah performance tests make much more sense in sensitive jobs like being a pilot, or a railroad conductor... But a random drug test on a pilot 2 weeks ago isnt going be all that helpful if the pilot shoots up before takeoff today
Probably something I disagree with most Libertarians about is that im not anymore excited to have private companies invading my privacy/stripping away liberties on my time off than the government.
And the old adage is well go work/shop at a different company but that doesn't work in alot of cases. I believe there are such things as a policy monopoly. For example the terms of service agreements for every insurance company is practically the same.
So where do I go in the market to find a non invasive insurer if nobody is doing it? Same problem in a ton of other industries.
You get drug tested at entry level minimum wage jobs but the person with the power to kill 50 million people in an afternoon via nukes doesn't.
Makes you think... doubly ironic now with background checks and the whole felon thing.
UnitedSlayer03@reddit
I am in complete agreement
AlphaTangoFoxtrt@reddit
Yes, freedom of association.
Just as you are free to quit working for a company whose values do not align with your own
UnitedSlayer03@reddit
Any critique to my other comments? This doesnt really add anything except assert and idea that was stated by OP
AlphaTangoFoxtrt@reddit
What other comments? I'm not hunting the thread for every comment youve made, youre not that important. If youve sonething to say, say it.
UnitedSlayer03@reddit
It's legit the one that was connected to this parent comment. But you are under no obligation to respond 5o any of my things. I was just seeing if you had a different perspective
jericho1618@reddit
Depends. Are you publicly posting about it and making a spectacle about your beliefs online? If the company feels like you are actively undermining their values in a public medium, they are your employer, you are likely under some contractual obligation to represent them in a positive light even outside of work, and they have the right to reprimand or fire you. That is also free speech.
UnitedSlayer03@reddit
Yes but do you believe that a company should have the right to dictate the ideas and expression of individuals moreover than the government?
jericho1618@reddit
Companies do not have the right to dictate ideas or expression of individuals. But as a private entity, they do have the right to protect their brand and reputation by choosing not to associate with speech they disagree with. In the U.S. the employee and employer are both free to act according to their own values. The employee isn’t forced to work at the company, and the company isn’t forced to keep paying someone who they don’t align with or who is actively damaging their brand. That’s called at-will employment and it goes both ways. If you don’t like the values of a certain company, you have liberty to work anywhere else you want.
UnitedSlayer03@reddit
Do you believe though that anyone has the ability to move jobs at will? What if the salary compensation isnt comparable and they have a mortgage, kids, etc. Or a recession is hitting the job.market freezes up, so your income is not longer garrunteed.
I believe it should be at will and that the employee or.employer have the right to cut ties. But shouldn't it be based on work?
Every person has free will to tune in and out of media. If we took a professor for example, someone with the power to influence. I dont believe that they should be able, while teaching, to teach or advocate in class for something that is in direct opposition to the universities goals and motives. As their work, or product in other cases, is being diminished in the institutions standards. I understand if you.would like to launch an investigation to see if their beliefs are effecting work. But if they post online what they say, shouldnt that be okay and unrestricted as a form of expression, since they can still be reprimanded by their peers such as social rejection. Is their opinion online, not in the workplace, not something to protect as a individual liberty?
FilmEnjoyer_@reddit
YEAH SLAVE, JUST SHUT UP AND WORK!!!
longroadtohappyness@reddit
The employees at Byte Dance presumably in China absolutely do not have freedom of speech. Don't be obtuse just because you hate Trump.
ricochet48@reddit
Freedom of speech =/ freedom from consequences. Simple as that.
Notworld@reddit
Freedom of religion =/ freedom from consequences. Simple as that.
/s
ricochet48@reddit
Errr why the /s.
It applies the same.
Tacoshortage@reddit
Not true. You just had different people you couldn't bash and different things you weren't allowed to say.
Dollar_Bills@reddit
The government forced a business to sell to someone that supports a foreign country and will censor US citizens at the behest of that foreign country.
Facebook posts from Russian accounts was "election interference" but this is good?
Lol, fucking Nanny state can't completely destroy the Internet, got a force it into the hands of foreign actors and morons will claim it's "private businesses making decisions"
pmljb@reddit
mayone3@reddit
You can have freedom of speech but not freedom of nondiscrimination. Simple as that.
lackasleep@reddit
Because it’s good business practice to have your employees bickering over a war because it’s proven way to improve productivity and quality. It’s selfish of employees to do their debating on their own time and not as representative of the company. They should share it with the company and with the rest of the world representing the company. I mean where’s the company spirit and team work if your colleague doesn’t call you out for sucking on Israel’s dick?
No_Opposite3504@reddit
Stupid post