TikTok Editorial Analysis

Comments

Jan Willem • January 2, 2024 8:04 AM

I am not surprises. The opposite, I would have been surprised if no censoring or influence was detected.
We all know that nothing can happen in China without explicit permission of the CP or the central government.

Jan Willem • January 2, 2024 8:06 AM

I am not surprised. The opposite, I would have been surprised if no censoring or influence was detected.
We all know that nothing can happen in China without explicit permission of the CP or the central government.

Winter • January 2, 2024 8:32 AM

It the next step in the decline and fall of TikTok. It is also the next step in the balkanization of the internet.

Clive Robinson • January 2, 2024 8:53 AM

@ Bruce, ALL,

“TikTok seems to be skewing things in the interests of the Chinese Communist Party.”

Is this realy surprising?

Carry out a similar analysis and you will find “political bias” in all media.

Back in the 1800’s a quote arose that some attribute to Mark Twain,

“If you want to read the papers, first you have to read the papers.”

Implying you had to first understand the Proprietor and Editorial bias the newspaper had through which all stories were filttered.

Some have noted that in Australia massive social disheasion and bias is occuring because all the local once independent newspapers have been bought up by Rupert “the bare faced liar” Murdoch and nearly all journalists have been sacked and replaced with “penny a word rip-off artists” cutting and pasting from the Internet.

As many readers here will remember “the bare faced liar” did a deal with “Scotty from Marketing” and other political crooks and thus got extraordinarily preferential legisltation against major US Silicon Valley Corps. Thus he gets payed twice for copy he stole from others.

There was a funny video put out at the time but it appears to have disappeared from search engines…

Which might or might not be related to this line up, with the prune in the middle flanked by a couple of outsiders to what most would consider normal for the human race,

https://theconversation.com/murdoch-v-crikey-highlights-how-australias-defamation-laws-protect-the-rich-and-powerful-189228

K.S. • January 2, 2024 9:09 AM

While I am not surprised TikTok boosting and shadow banning topics to benefit CCP agenda, how does this meddling compares to Western social media? Twitter files showed us that Biden’s administration was very involved in moderation decisions at Twitter. So how does CCP meddling in TikTok compares to DNC meddling in Facebook? More, less, the same?

Winter • January 2, 2024 9:55 AM

@K.S.

So how does CCP meddling in TikTok compares to DNC meddling in Facebook?

Whatsaboutism?

If China is wrong, it is still wrong even if the US is wrong too. Telling us wrong is right if someone else is wrong too, shows a lack of moral and ethical standards.

But both Twitter and Facebook are banned in China. So the only parallel between China and America is of both countries policing their own social media. Given the huge and deadly disturbances social media have caused [1], this policing is a task required of every government.

TikTok’s information offerings in the US being steered by the CCP is China policing social media in a another country. That is something completely different.

[1] E.g., armed rebellions, targeted killings, and genocides.

J. Nathan Matias • January 2, 2024 11:37 AM

Hi Bruce,

Thanks for sharing this!

As an advocate who helped file a lawsuit to protect independent research on TikTok’s role in American democracy, I think it’s very important that researchers like these ones are supported and protected.

As a researcher who studies platform algorithms, I strongly, strongly disagree that the methodology in this particular study is reliable. The use of unreliable methods by TikTok to defend themselves does not justify repeating those unreliable methods and potentially misleading the public.

This study compares the number of posts per hashtag on Instagram versus TikTok and then conclude that TikTok’s algorithm is biased. That’s just not an inference that can be drawn from that kind of analysis. We’ve known since Bakshy, Messing, Adamic 2015 that such methods are notoriously unreliable, and why.

Many other factors could be at play. The two most important are:

We know that the platforms have different user bases and creator bases, so of course we would expect differences, and that those differences would reflect cultural variation between platforms
Content supply is also a huge factor; if people are posting more or less about certain things on Instagram, then we would expect to see differences between platforms.

It’s possible that TikTok is putting their thumbs on the scale— that’s an important question to investigate. But this study doesn’t answer the question.

Mexaly • January 2, 2024 11:48 AM

If content is influencing filtering,
there’s a channel for exploitation.

lurker • January 2, 2024 12:31 PM

This report compares TikTok vs. Instagram. A more meaningful analysis would have placed TT in a ranking vs. several other social media. Problems: too much work, and there would have been colateral damage against any who were worse than TT.

Both Cato Inst. and mediumdotcom criticise this report for
a) using data from different time periods for each subject; and
b) ignoring the age difference in the user base for each.

K.S. • January 2, 2024 2:20 PM

@Winter

You are inconsistent, is it “this policing is a task required of every government” or is it unacceptable censorship of inconvenient narratives by the government? If it is wrong when CCP does it on TickTok, it is also should be wrong when Biden’s administration does it on FB/YouTube.

Paul Rain • January 2, 2024 2:20 PM

On no! One, single, media organ that is not promoting the American empire/international zionism! What a tragedy!

Winter • January 2, 2024 3:20 PM

@K.S.

You are inconsistent, is it “this policing is a task required of every government” or is it unacceptable censorship of inconvenient narratives by the government?

I was thinking about the genocide on the Rohingya (Facebook), murder campaigns in India (WhatsApp), the January 6 armed rebellion (Twitter), the call for mass murders by IS (the Bataclan massacre). Preventing these is not exactly “censorship of inconvenient narratives”.

To me, you seem to side with the like of IS and Hamas and their US White Supremacist counterparts

EvilKiru • January 2, 2024 4:18 PM

@K.S.: The DNC isn’t even an arm of the US government, much less controlling it, whereas the CCP does control the Chinese government.

Cyber Hodza • January 2, 2024 8:59 PM

Just use TikTok to criticise American Politics and Instagram to criticise the Chinese one

ResearcherZero • January 3, 2024 3:01 AM

China formerly recognises itself as a dictatorship in it’s own constitution.

Though China has occasionally claimed it is a democracy at times, that claim is more than a little dubious for a one party authoritarian state to make.

Ensure you have the right religion, right ethnic background, right language, and speak the right words in China. Private mode is not going to assist in any matter, nor your choice of browser or lawyer. Arbitrary detention is common, along with torture and ill-treatment.

Don’t represent the wrong kinds of people either if you are a lawyer. Even then you will face obstacles to the right to a fair trial, restricted access to clients, an often complete lack of judicial transparency, – and face jail time yourself. Few of the legal rights or human rights that traditionally exist in democracies, exist in China.

Speaking up about corruption will also likely invite the police to detain you.

Legal rights in China (or the lack of them)

‘https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1153&context=wilj

ResearcherZero • January 3, 2024 3:26 AM

The approach taken limits information to China’s own scientists, engineers and designers.

China takes a militant and isolationist approach to information control, along with a nationalist approach to industrial policy, especially in the tech sector. It is increasingly extending this approach outside it’s own borders into areas of influence.

VPNs and other anti-censorship tools are blocked and banned…

“the government has complicated the lives of Chinese astronomers seeking the latest scientific data from abroad, graphic designers shopping for clip art on Shutterstock and students submitting online applications to American universities.”

‘https://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/30/world/asia/china-clamps-down-still-harder-on-internet-access.html?_r=0

“Chinese government censorship focuses in large part on stopping people in China from accessing independent reports about events in their own country. But another major goal of the censorship apparatus is to restrict or distort information about the rest of the world”
https://freedomhouse.org/report/china-media-bulletin/2021/chinas-information-isolation-new-censorship-rules-transnational

Popular cartoons and media content from other countries are also censored.

‘https://web.archive.org/web/20200824001733/https://www.today.com/popculture/china-bans-simpsons-prime-time-wbna14343140

ResearcherZero • January 3, 2024 3:41 AM

Due to China’s approach at limiting and influencing information, it tasks it’s intelligence agencies to steal intellectual property and scientific information, while also conducting influence operations abroad. It does this as it restricts it’s own populations’ access to outside information, as well as news and information about the government’s activities.

(paywalled)

“Our purpose is to divide the US-European relationship,” Woo wrote in a text message to Creyelman.

The MSS operation in Europe highlights one of the defining features of Chinese espionage: widespread influence operations aimed at shaping political debate that span Ottawa, London and Canberra.

‘https://www.ft.com/content/601df41f-8393-46ad-9f74-fe64f8ea1a3f

https://www.isdglobal.org/digital_dispatches/pro-ccp-network-spamouflage-weaponizes-gaza-conflict-to-spread-anti-us-sentiment/

MSS is able to use emerging technologies like A.I. to challenge American spymasters in a way the Soviets could not.

‘https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/27/us/politics/china-cia-spy-mss.html

Clive Robinson • January 3, 2024 4:03 AM

@ ResearcherZero, ALL,

Re : Rights to a fair trial.

“Arbitrary detention is common, along with torture and ill-treatment.”

Is a problem in the US and UK as we know –Chicago Black site, Julian Assange– even though both are “democracies”.

“an often complete lack of judicial transparency, – and face jail time yourself.”

I would say “look at the PATRIOT Act” but you can not, and I’m reasonably certain the UK has similar “secret law” the knowledge of which would at the very least be subject to the “Official Secrets Act”(OSA) or similar.

Most Five-Eyes Western Nations have the rather fluid notion of “National Security” which is a rug under which very many undemocratic things are swept and kept out of sight.

Knowing this always makes me feel hypocritical when saying Nation XXX compared to Nation YYY. Because they are all at it one way or another.

At one time Russia with it’s law that says it’s OK to go murder people in another country was thought to be “so different” it was exceprional. But then ask people about the use of an anti-ship mine on a civilian ship in a New Zeland Harbour by the French Government, and you see the corner of the rug get lifted a fraction.

As I’ve said I detest the term “non lethal weapon” because there is actually nothing of the sort. Get a list of people who have died when or shortly after being tasered[1] or had CS or similar chemical agents etc used against them, and you will see very close to pre-scripted “victim blaiming” by manufqcture paid experts[2] being used to justify their murder at the hands of authorities.

It’s a fundemental issue of even the supposadly most democratic of nations when the blind excuse of,

“For the common good”

Gets to be cover for the thugish,

“Might is Right, and we are the Mighty”

Thinking by the “self entitled”.

[1] You used to be able to see Reuters report into 1,005 deaths in U.S. involving Tasers alone at,

https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN1B21AH/

But they have added an adwall or similar that demands you give the the rights not just to force adware down your throat but other nasties for profit as well, which now makes their reputation as scummy as Murdoch and certain US MSM sites.

[2] You can however read about how the Reuters report came about, along with mention of how the manufacture pays “experts” for favourable quotes , without having cookies and javascript enabled,

https://gijn.org/stories/how-they-did-it-reuters-massive-database-of-taser-deaths/

ResearcherZero • January 3, 2024 4:04 AM

The Chinese approach to spying is described as “extremely grim”.

‘https://www.economist.com/china/2023/05/04/a-battle-against-spies-in-china-is-spooking-locals-and-foreigners

Penetrated clandestine communications and used that knowledge to arrest and execute at least 20 CIA informants. China then shared that information with Russia, which employed it to expose, arrest and possibly even kill American spies in that country.

The information allegedly disclosed by Jerry Chun Shing Lee ranged from classified to top secret.

“operational notes from asset meetings, operational meeting locations, operational phone numbers, true names of assets, and covert facilities”

‘https://www.nbcnews.com/news/china/cia-china-turncoat-lee-may-have-compromised-u-s-spies-n839316

A. Nonymous • January 3, 2024 4:44 AM

Methodology in this kind of work is always tricky.

I think there is a real trend here, but comparing only to Instagram is a problem. You could use exactly the same results to say that Meta boosts content against Chinese interests.

I’m also curious about the mechanism. It seems that the hashtags are silenced. It would be interesting to do an automated search of a large sample to check if the ratio for actual posts with these terms that do no appear when searching when compared to other topics is suspicious…

ResearcherZero • January 3, 2024 7:35 AM

There is some evidence from hashtags that censors have controlled what is allowed on TikTok. Content can either be categorized as a ‘violation’ and a user banned or ‘visible to self’ – restricting the content from that of what other users can see.

‘https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/09/15/tiktoks-beijing-roots-fuel-censorship-suspicion-it-builds-huge-us-audience/

“TikTok confirmed to CNBC that the user has been locked out of her account, but said it is not a matter of censorship as the video in question is still on the platform. TikTok reportedly suspended the account of a 17-year-old user in New Jersey after she posted a viral video criticizing the Chinese government’s treatment of the Uighur ethnic minority.”

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/26/tiktok-says-it-doesnt-censor-but-a-user-who-criticized-china-was-locked-out.html

Free Speech Is Not Protected (or a legal defense)

In China anyone who publishes opinions contrary to those of the Communist Party will be deemed subversive. (what is subversive is up to the party)

‘https://www.cecc.gov/silencing-critics-by-exploiting-national-security-and-state-secrets-laws

“Xinjiang local government tenders for operations on Douyin include a 306,000 yuan ($64,000) contract won in July 2021 by a company whose founder is a member of multiple organisations linked to the United Front Work Department, an arm of the CCP that conducts influence operations outside the party.”

Douyin has the same parent company as video-sharing app TikTok – Chinese-owned ByteDance.

https://www.afr.com/technology/how-beijing-uses-tiktok-s-sister-app-to-spread-propaganda-20221102-p5bv2u

economic leverage and transnational repression

‘https://theconversation.com/digital-platforms-like-tiktok-could-help-china-extend-its-censorship-regime-across-borders-204322

Not all citizens are supportive of current government policies, nor do all their views reflect state propaganda. And, despite the risks, they are willing to share their opinions.
https://www.csis.org/analysis/public-opinion-china-liberal-silent-majority

ResearcherZero • January 3, 2024 7:37 AM

It’s not uncommon for Chinese authorities to forcibly “disappear” business executives.

Winter • January 3, 2024 8:38 AM

@ResearcherZero

TikTok reportedly suspended the account of a 17-year-old user in New Jersey after she posted a viral video criticizing the Chinese government’s treatment of the Uighur ethnic minority.

Streisand effect.

‘https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

Mr C • January 3, 2024 8:55 AM

I’ve suspected for quite some time that TikTok has been amplifying content that reflects Chinese stereotypes of Westerners/Americans as vapid, weak, and consumerist. If the Russian propagandists looked at us and saw racial divisions to amplify and exploit, this is what the Chinese propagandists see. Either that or TikTok’s algorithm isn’t rigged and what we’re putting in TikTok proves the Chinese stereotypes about us are right…

@ Everyone engaging with K.S.: Let’s take a giant step back. K.S.’s first claim that’s the premise of the whole discussion, “Twitter files showed us that Biden’s administration was very involved in moderation decisions at Twitter,” is whackadoodle bullshit. The so-called “twitter files” showed no such thing. While the absence of evidence is not (conclusive) evidence of absence, we should start any discussion of the U.S. Gov’t interfering in social media mediation/amplification decisions from the factual reality that there is zero publicly available evidence that it’s happening.

Winter • January 3, 2024 12:03 PM

@Mr C

If the Russian propagandists looked at us and saw racial divisions to amplify and exploit, this is what the Chinese propagandists see.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine was based on falling for that old trap:
Don’t get high on your own supply.

Censorship and propaganda lead to a leadership that believe their own stories. The Russians and Chinese had a very rude awakening seeing Ukraine, NATO, nor EU folding after the invasion.

But those in the West want to believe this propaganda, and that is the important part.

lurker • January 3, 2024 12:23 PM

@ResearcherZero

re: it’s in their constitution …

From the preamble:

The people’s democratic dictatorship led by the working class and based on an alliance of workers and peasants, which in essence is a dictatorship of the proletariat, […]

Article 5:

The [PRC] shall practice law-based governance and build a socialist state under the rule of law.

Article 34:

All citizens of the [PRC] who have reached the age of 18 […] have the right to vote and stand for election;

When a nation has been under the autocratic thumb of hereditary emperors for more than 3000 years, it may take some time to turn around the attitudes of a) the masses of peasants, and b) the massive Confucian bureaucracy. We observe that autocratic imperial rule persisted in Taiwan until the 1990s.

‘http://en.npc.gov.cn.cdurl.cn/constitution.html

ResearcherZero • January 4, 2024 1:40 AM

@lurker

The Party may not believe that is in it’s own interests. Neither for the Sun or The Daily Mail, which are not too far from propaganda outlets themselves at times. Maybe they took a leaf out of each other’s books? Imagine if The Mail or The Sun could not print ‘Red Alert’ stories anymore, they’d have to write actual articles. Fly fishing and tennis stories probably wouldn’t cut the mustard these days, they would have to leave the office.

ResearcherZero • January 4, 2024 2:02 AM

@lurker

Either way, they all made a lot of money out of the approach they have taken.

“In trawling through legal documents which emerged during the week, I found my own name as a target of News of the World investigations in 2006.”

‘https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/ideas/media/64234/murdoch-inc-phone-hacking-chris-huhne-alan-rusbridger

News Corp has now paid out a total of £1.2 billion in settlement of claims of unlawful privacy intrusion.
https://bylinetimes.com/2023/12/08/reckless-to-the-point-of-madness-how-the-murdoch-empire-hacked-british-politics/

In his letter to staffers announcing his exit, Murdoch attempted to portray himself as a gladiator who fought “the battle for the freedom of speech and, ultimately, the freedom of thought.”

Left in his wake is a deeply polarized society squabbling over culture wars and plagued with mistrust and dysfunction…

‘https://edition.cnn.com/2023/09/22/media/rupert-murdoch-reliable-sources/index.html

Clive Robinson • January 4, 2024 2:32 AM

@ ResearcherZero, JonKnowsNothing, lurker,

As you know, I’ve almost always called him,

Rupert “the bare faced lier” Murdoch

For reasons that required no “secret knowledge” just piecing together the jigsaw of publicly available knowledge.

As I’ve indicated before his control over Sky is highly undesirable. During C19 it became clear he was “running a scam” against various entities which enabled certain organisations to siphon off trillions out of various public purses.

It has left us “the people of the commons” considerably bereft of the benifit of our labours.

Whilst I primarily blaim two “blow dry idiots” for the C19 disaster they could not have done the harm they did without support and people running cover for them. For that I point at “the bare faced lier” his desire to be “King Maker to the World” has left the world in a position where we are very very unlikely to be able to defend our selves or be resilient to the comming storms he has created for the most narcissistic puppets to twirl in.

What you have seen with “Scot from Marketing” is just a fraction of similar and worse harms, that we might get to find out about over the next few years.

But these billion dollar payouts the bare faced lier is now making through adverse judgments is just a fraction of a fraction of the butchers bill he has created.

Clive Robinson • January 4, 2024 7:38 AM

@ Winter, ALL,

Re : Hybrids can evolve as the environment changes.

“The “West” has historically always seen described itself as “weak” because it lost it’s original “purity”.”

History shows that the “purity” is always a form of degenerative inbreeding. The most obvious is Royalty and the supposed “pure blood” descendents from a “closed stud book”. Thus all those random genetic failings get not just reinforced but amplified.

One side effect most commonly seen quickly is neurological disorders giving rise to “madness” and thankfully various forms of “sterility”. As evolution attampts to remove the degenerate results.

The West grew over several centuries to eventialy realise only just about a century ago, that “Hybrid vigor” of hetrotic / out -breeding was way more desirable than in-breeding as it responded to any kind of environmental or similar macro change more easily and effectively.

4 certific8 authorities needed • January 4, 2024 1:55 PM

In reality, it seems (to me) that TikTok is the target of scorn only from it’s competitors.
Alphabet/Google/Gmail/YouTube really wants to acquire TikTok and all of it’s massive audiences.

YouTube “shorts” is already an example of YouTube’s wishful thinking.
To be fair, Google is still in it’s own civil war, but YouTube really is a Google product, search engine embedded too.

Really, please abstain from using this place for corporate espionarguiles.

Sincerely, only 4 certific8 authorities needed

Comments

Leave a comment Cancel reply