Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Think this headline actually burying the lede. Trump wants the government to own 50%? Was not aware government ownership of private companies was a well known conservative principle here in the US.

Conservatives have principles?

Everything with this man is about money, power, and stoking his ego. Putting the benefit of the country or its denizens as a priority has always been about 13th on the list of his "to-do" action items. Unfortunately, he's never made it past the first 3.
 
This entire sad story speaks volumes. Front row seat to the social and governmental freak show.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arkitect
If TikTok gets sold to Elon, just about every single major social media company is then controlled by billionaire tech bros who are all kissing Trump's ring and have proven willing to do just about anything he asks (i.e. demands).

The goal seems to be to have power to control speech and amplify/suppress whatever they want to amplify/suppress.

Not concerning at all. Nothing to worry about. What could possibly go wrong.

Ok but is this really the final straw? TikTok is already controlled by the CCP which is a rich organization, so no difference.

The real problem is everyone is hooked on “social media” brainwashing. We could solve this tomorrow by not voluntarily giving them the power and money. But no, we need our short videos. Because somehow all of American small business depends on it? That’s the argument I heard.
 
If TikTok gets sold to Elon, just about every single major social media company is then controlled by billionaire tech bros who are all kissing Trump's ring and have proven willing to do just about anything he asks (i.e. demands).

The goal seems to be to have power to control speech and amplify/suppress whatever they want to amplify/suppress.

Not concerning at all. Nothing to worry about. What could possibly go wrong.
Silly question. Pre-Elon Twitter, the owners had booted many with conservative viewpoints. They kicked out the NY Post and White House for revealing Hunters Laptop. They controlled left leaning narrative. Musk purchased it, and gave everyone the right to speak.
Fakebook had Facebook jail for many conservative members posting conservative posts. Zuckerberg openly admitted to the government demanding Fakebook suppress free speech. He got so fed up, he exposed it, the government never denied it, and allowed free speech.

May I ask how allowing free speech without government control is controlling speech and suppressing when that’s exactly what they both stopped?
 
I sure wish people today had some grasp of US history. Go back to the 1890's, and you will find what passed for the MSM was owned by just a handful of rich businessmen. These same business people also owned Standard Oil; the Oil monopoly, The RR monopoly, the Beef monopoly, etc. I will not waste my time trying to educate you on this period one of the results of what came to be called "Yellow Journalism" was the Spanish-American War. Randolph Hurst turned a coal dust explosion in the USS Maine into a war with Spain. If you study this period in our history, you will see the similarity between the current President and President Theodore Roosevelt, who was viewed as a political grandstander. There was no social media at the time, except in saloons and coffee shops, but the major newspapers made up for it.

I am having a blast watching this national correction. It is like a combination of Troop Anubis Baboons, circus clowns, the WWE, Roller Derby, and the UFC duking it out in a maximum no-rules cage match. Thanks to social media, I can watch it all. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
 
Last edited:
If the government ends up having a stake and Elon does what he does on Twitter where he starts banning accounts that he disagrees with him, wouldn't that count as a literal violation of free speech?
Not to reply to myself, but if the government owns a stake in it doesn't that mean that technically they can't ban anyone?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ender78
Ok but is this really the final straw? TikTok is already controlled by the CCP which is a rich organization, so no difference.

The real problem is everyone is hooked on “social media” brainwashing. We could solve this tomorrow by not voluntarily giving them the power and money. But no, we need our short videos. Because somehow all of American small business depends on it? That’s the argument I heard.

I get what you are saying but good luck putting that genie back in the bottle. Didn’t even work with alcohol back in the day, won’t work with social media.

Do what’s right for you. I’m pretty done with social media myself.
 
Yeah, for now. We'll see how long that lasts now that Mr. X is in government and he/the government might be sharing TikTok. Wouldn't be surprised if Bluesky starts falling under some heavy regulatory scrutiny...

Bluesky can be regulated, but the protocol underneath it can't - by design.

If Bluesky turns to 💩, users are able to move their accounts (including their followers) to other apps running on the same open protocol.
 
I'm still trying to wrap my head around the 170 million U.S. users number. The population is about 335 million, so roughly half the population uses TikTok? I find that hard to believe. There must be a healthy percentage of users with multiple accounts.

“Users” meaning someone created an account at some point in their life. Probably so they could watch that one video that their friend/relative sent them, and then never use it again.

You are probably right about the multiple accounts part too though.
 
Silly question. Pre-Elon Twitter, the owners had booted many with conservative viewpoints. They kicked out the NY Post and White House for revealing Hunters Laptop. They controlled left leaning narrative. Musk purchased it, and gave everyone the right to speak.
Fakebook had Facebook jail for many conservative members posting conservative posts. Zuckerberg openly admitted to the government demanding Fakebook suppress free speech. He got so fed up, he exposed it, the government never denied it, and allowed free speech.

May I ask how allowing free speech without government control is controlling speech and suppressing when that’s exactly what they both stopped?

They were booted from the service for "conservative viewpoints" is a pretty hilarious straw man argument.

Were they booted off for comments about fiscal policy? 🤣

When you say "conservative viewpoints", you are purposefully muddying the waters by lumping everything from christian values to hate speech.

99% of instances of a "conservative" getting booted off a service I've seen has been because the person has been advocating violence or otherwise speaking in an inflammatory manner toward another group.
 
If TikTok gets sold to Elon, just about every single major social media company is then controlled by billionaire tech bros who are all kissing Trump's ring and have proven willing to do just about anything he asks (i.e. demands).

The goal seems to be to have power to control speech and amplify/suppress whatever they want to amplify/suppress.

Not concerning at all. Nothing to worry about. What could possibly go wrong.
Umm you understand the last 4 years of the administration started this no?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Timpetus
Government ownership of the media is a historical hallmark of socialist, communist, and fascist regimes. It is antithetical to democracy. This is quite unAmerican. It raises all sorts of red flags from violating the first amendment, to destroying the traditional separation between the government and the fourth estate, to it's conflict with free-market principles, to risks to democracy as it could normalize authoritarian control over information.
 
“Users” meaning someone created an account at some point in their life. Probably so they could watch that one video that their friend/relative sent them, and then never use it again.

You are probably right about the multiple accounts part too though.
Good point. There's definitely a distinction to be made between users and active users.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chuckeee
During the White House event, where Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison was also present, Trump floated the idea of a 50-50 ownership split between any acquiring company and the US government. "They'll have something that's actually more valuable because they have the ultimate partner," Trump explained.
This move won’t fly with CCP. They will block the sale outright. This move will escalate the trade war to China to whole new level we have never seen.
Right? It sounds like Trump has the final say on who gets to buy it. But from what I understand, a U.S.-based company needs to express interest first, and then it should be a deal between that company and TikTok, not Trump or the government dictating, "Company X should buy it."
No, final final say would be the CCP since ByteDance is still a Chinese company. They would never approve the sale at all. This is why POTUS is delaying the inevitable by executive action: it’s going to be forced to be banned again.
 
Personally I'm against any government entity having a stake in any media platform, or anything outside of what is expressly mention in the Constitution. I wish there were a way to see how many people who had there panties all in a bundle over the end of net neutrality and are now concerned that the government might become invested in TikTok? Both are bad. Be consistent.

If TikTok gets sold to Elon, just about every single major social media company is then controlled by billionaire tech bros who are all kissing Trump's ring and have proven willing to do just about anything he asks (i.e. demands).

The goal seems to be to have power to control speech and amplify/suppress whatever they want to amplify/suppress.

Not concerning at all. Nothing to worry about. What could possibly go wrong.
You should have said, "just about every single major social media company is then controlled by billionaire tech bros or communist dictatorships"

He is a conservative like the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is democratic.
Or better yet, like Democrats are for the blue collar worker.

The problem is not social media but the fact that they can be so easily bought and manipulated by billionaires.

Fortunately, there is bluesky which is at least built to be billionaire resistant (although not billionaire proof). I suggest everyone that wants to connect with decent, intelligent, and interest human beings to head over there.
Bluesky, that's something I haven't heard in a long time. That service hasn't eaten itself yet in political correctness?

Is this really so?

Right wing owned media:

Fox News - owned by billionaire Murdoch

WaPo - owned by billionaire Bezos

Wall Street Journal - owned by billionaire Murdoch

New York Post - owned by Murdoch


Centrist media (i.e. not left or right):

AP

Reuters

USA Today

NPR

PBS

Politico

The Hill


I don't know about you, but based on the above, it sure doesn't seem that media in the US is "primarily controlled by left wing organization" as you assert
Are you serious? Bezos is right wing now? WaPo, the same media company conservative calls the Washington Compost? Murdoch no longer controls those media outlets, his kids do. Any they aren't "right wing".

All "centrist media" you listed is an absolute joke. While they aren't as bad as MSNBC or CNN, they aren't far off. Speaking of which, you left them off your list.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.