There is always a possibility that he did not intend it to be a Hitler salute, but that possibility is not very plausible, because…he pretty much did a Hitler salute and the odds of him being ignorant of that fact are extremely low.

Exactly! So demoting those videos suggests that China is not using the algorithm to promote anti-american views.

??? You’re trying to have it both ways with this. I’m out.

Amplifying the videos that show America’s response to antiracist movements would make America look like the racist country it is. Demoting them conceals that.

No, that doesn’t make sense. Amplifying shows of division in a country promotes the view that said country is flawed and weak, in this case along racial lines. China has plenty to gain by showing that.

And America is no less racist than China, btw. I would argue far less so.

They were hired to help identify and amplify US state department narratives, same reason CNN and Fox hires them.

That seems entirely speculative. There are plenty of other reasons to hire them. Can you provide evidence for your claim?

That’s not a motivation, but rather an (admittedly astute) comment on the legal context. Appreciated nonetheless.

It’s also fair to treat them differently on account of them not being unfriendly to the U.S. Regardless, I agree data privacy laws need to be improved across the board.

It depends on the manner in which said “politically spicy videos” are being censored. If it’s being done in a manner that promotes Chinese narratives while demoting American narratives, that’s an entirely legitimate concern for the U.S. and I don’t really see why not demoting BLM videos is not in the CCP’s interest; videos that make America seem racist seems entirely in the interest of an Anti-American country.

I also don’t see why hiring former American intelligence operatives demonstrates a pro-American stance, as their motivations for doing so could be to learn about American intelligence-gathering methods while promoting Chinese interests.

Which makes perfect sense. I don’t think this would be a thing if ByteDance was a British or Canadian company either. The issue is it’s Chinese, and China is an enemy of the U.S. right now.

Yeah, I don’t trust corporations to do the right thing either, but at least their motivations are based on greed, not nationalistic concerns.

Finally, someone who seems to be providing an answer based on objective fact rather than their own political perspective.

I’m getting the sense that the issue is simply that ByteDance is a Chinese company and their data farming is suspected of being accessible to the CCP, which may effectively be a means of spying on American citizens and as misinformation tactics. Not really any different the other way around, of course, but at least that makes sense as a rationale for banning it in the U.S.

Good point. Seems like another issue of concern. As usual, the issue seems to be data privacy laws overall.

China blocks much of the internet its citizens can access in order to preserve its ideological grip on their country. I share concerns about data privacy in the U.S., but I would definitely be more concerned about a foreign government (especially an enemy of the U.S.) having access to our private data than our own government or even our own corporations.

Thanks. I’m getting the sense that, while ByteDance doesn’t collect any more information than Meta or Instagram, it’s info is suspected to be accessible by the CCP, which may be used for anti-US programs/policies, etc.

Seems like the most honest answer so far. The U.S. doesn’t trust the CCP with its citizens’ data. No surprise there.

Your link provided me with more proper information than your biased quick take, so thanks for that, I guess.

Seems like you’re not really into the spirit of the forum, mate. Maybe just don’t comment if you have no answer to provide, hm?