
“We would like to apologize to the user for the error on our part this morning” - tosh
https://newsroom.tiktok.com/en-us/an-update-on-recent-content-and-account-questions
======
slimsag
You've gotta love the PR bullshit of it all. Someone intentionally chose to
write the headline as:

> TikTok: An update on recent content and account questions

And not something more honest like:

> TikTok: An apology about a content moderation mishap

This is done to imply they did nothing wrong at the first glance, and then
concede they did something wrong but will do better later on in the article.

It is also convenient that they first draw attention to the author of the
video being associated with:

> (1) Terrorism or terrorist imagery, (2) Child exploitation, (3) Spam or
> similar malicious content.

And then immediately after concede that the video was removed because they
messed up:

> Due to a human moderation error, the viral video from November 23 was
> removed. [...] it should not have been removed.

If companies want to know why they can't regain trust and aren't given the
benefit of the doubt, it's because they cannot be honest in situations like
this. PR in the 21st century is about communicating how you have in fact
messed up because you are humans, not trying to gloss over it and distract
from it like some corporate overlord.

~~~
ninth_ant
I don’t think this certainty about this being “PR bullshit” is warranted at
all, and feels a bit like knee-jerk cynicism.

The actions as described in the press release seem to me both plausible and
reasonable. Banning multiaccounts for severe infractions makes sense, and it
also makes sense that this account could have been caught up in that.

As for the video takedown... you may underestimate the consistency of human
moderators. They are often under intense time pressures and mistakes are made
all the time. There is also the potential for individual moderators to apply
their own bias to the report outside of company policy. With a 50 mins
reversal of the takedown, that seems plausible.

If they are not outright lying, it does seem like the title is accurate and
not at all misleading. It does sound like a moderation mishap.

~~~
ioerstets
If I recall, the video was not taken down. Her account was still active so
people could see the video, but her access to the account was blocked for a
month.

It’s ironic because TikTok was getting a lot of flak in the news recently
because they were too slow to remove actual terrorist propaganda. So they
probably went overboard and it resulted in this situation.

Damned if they do, and damned if they don’t.

~~~
baybal2
Want to add to this. Tiktok blatantly violates Google's device ID policy, and
actually admits it in writing.

> We share your device ID with measurement companies so that we can link your
> activity on the Platform with your activity on other websites;

My contact at google said a year ago when I asked if they know about Alibaba's
device ID abuse for advertising targeting, it's their policy to not to touch
Chinese companies' device ID abuse.

------
sdan
Was taking a look at what pings this website was sending (this is probably the
first time I've ever been on tiktok.com)

Sent some pings to:

[http://byteoversea.com/](http://byteoversea.com/)
[http://ibytedtos.com/](http://ibytedtos.com/)

Not sure what either of them are for sure, but from first look it seems like
both are monitoring scripts (see [https://sf16-muse-va.ibytedtos.com/obj/ttfe-
maliva/slardar/p...](https://sf16-muse-va.ibytedtos.com/obj/ttfe-
maliva/slardar/plugins/behavior.a77dd6d7.js)) , but will do a deep dive soon.
Interesting they need this just for a simple press release.

Also notice the person posting is explicitly from "TikTok US" and not just
"TikTok". Interesting decision.

~~~
avocado4
Also if you root your Android phone, wireshark their app, trace the traffic,
and check the Manifest you'll see they are sending user's personal identifiers
(non-resettable hardware IDs) to servers in China. There's absolutely no way
why uploading this data (or reading it in the first place) would be in any way
necessary to provide the app's functionality.

And they dump/read files in shared storage spaces to cross-tracking with other
Chinese apps. If you try to install it into Secure Folder on Samsung it gets
disabled.

~~~
Avery3R
To do exactly what they say in the post. Associate alt accounts with a main
account that has been banned.

~~~
avocado4
No, it's still not ok to track hardware IDs even (especially) for that reason:
[https://developer.android.com/training/articles/user-data-
id...](https://developer.android.com/training/articles/user-data-ids)

~~~
hombre_fatal
The most damning thing your link says is that it's not a best practice.

~~~
yorwba
The best fit is probably the "Anti-fraud: Enforcing free content limits and
detecting Sybil attacks" use case, since that is about preventing a single
user from creating multiple accounts. (Although the content limit for a banned
account is to stop it from _producing_ more content, not consuming it.)

The official recommendation:

 _Use: Instance ID or GUID. On Android 8.0 (API level 26) and higher, SSAID is
also an option, as it 's scoped to the app-signing key._

 _Why this recommendation?_

 _Using a GUID or Instance ID forces the user to reinstall the app in order to
circumvent the content limits, which is a sufficient burden to deter most
people. If this isn 't sufficient protection, Android provides a DRM API,
which can be used to limit access to content, includes a per-APK identifier,
the Widevine ID._

So I guess best practice in this case means they should use DRM instead.

------
ALittleLight
Ah, so the Chinese company banning the person critical of Chinese brutality
was entirely coincidental.

~~~
Thorrez
The article doesn't seem to say it's coincidental. The person previously made
a video containing a picture of Osama bin Laden. There's probably a positive
correlation between people who make videos containing pictures of Osama bin
Laden and people who make videos critical of Chinese brutality. So if you ban
everyone in the first group, you're likley to ban some people in the second
group also.

~~~
rumanator
> The person previously made a video containing a picture of Osama bin Laden.

Does this mean it would be ok to ban all evening news programs?

~~~
Thorrez
I didn't say that at all. I never said it's ok to ban people who show a
picture of Osama bin Laden, nor that evening news shows should be prevented
from showing pictures of Osama bin Laden.

------
etaioinshrdlu
It doesn't even mention the possibility of political motivations. Nor does it
mention the concept of freedom of speech. I think it says all we need to know
about the lack of values from this company.

~~~
Barrin92
>I think it says all we need to know about the lack of values from this
company.

that it lacks the same values 90% of all other tech companies lack, but they
don't put free speech into the PR article?

~~~
CountSessine
I can’t even imagine what kind of “values declaration” a Chinese company,
under the scrutiny of the CCP, could possibly hope to make. Free speech?
Transparency? Privacy protection? Honesty and integrity? Any one of these is
clearly a lie given the country that they’re based in.

I don’t know what the excuse of those other tech companies outside China could
be. I guess when you move fast and break things, some of the things being
broken are promises.

~~~
sukilot
Values declarations are easy, if there is no one to enforce them Let's look at
the Chinese constitution:

[https://www.usconstitution.net/china.html#Article35](https://www.usconstitution.net/china.html#Article35)

> Article 1. Socialist state

> The People's Republic of China is a socialist state under the people's
> democratic dictatorship led by the working class and based on the alliance
> of workers and peasants.

> Article 2. Power belongs to the people

> All power in the People's Republic of China belongs to the people.

> Article 35. Freedom of speech, press, assembly

> Citizens of the People's Republic of China enjoy freedom of speech, of the
> press, of assembly, of association, of procession and of demonstration.

> Article 37. Freedom of person

> Unlawful detention or deprivation or restriction of citizens' freedom of the
> person by other means is prohibited, and unlawful search of the person of
> citizens is prohibited.

> Article 39. Inviolability of the home

The residences of citizens of the People's Republic of China are inviolable.
Unlawful search of, or intrusion into, a citizen's residence is prohibited.

~~~
XMPPwocky
Is "unlawful" there translated from a word with similar connotations in
Chinese? Because "unlawful [search, etc] is prohibited" is...a bit
tautological.

~~~
martin__
I don't read a lot of legal documents, but maybe it could also be translated
as "unwarranted" or "not legally sanctioned".

------
kryogen1c
Post seems above board, but as soon as i learned tiktok is chinese moderated,
i deleted my account. Not interested.

~~~
uncoder0
Yeah... The CCP aren't really known for their tolerance.

------
znpy
Uhm... So they're tracking individual devices instead of accounts?

~~~
tim--
If you try installing TikTok on a Samsung Android device inside Secure Folder,
your account will get banned pretty quickly. Same for WeChat, too.

~~~
stevewodil
Why?

~~~
tim--
I'm not sure, there was a ban screen that showed up, saying that I was using
unofficial software to log into my account, and required a self-service
unblock process to be completed, which included getting a number of WeChat
users to verify/vouch for my account.

The specific reason given by WeChat was that I was using an Android emulator
(such as Andy or Youwave) and was sent to this page[0]

[0] [https://help.wechat.com/cgi-bin/micromsg-
bin/oshelpcenter?t=...](https://help.wechat.com/cgi-bin/micromsg-
bin/oshelpcenter?t=help_center/topic_detail&opcode=2&lang=en&plat=android&id=120813euejvf150504mfan7b)

------
rajacombinator
This actually seems like a pretty reasonable and detailed response to me. The
content was down for 50 minutes before their internal checks reinstated it.
Probably a much better and more transparent response than any of the other
socials would provide.

------
goblin89
I chuckled at Hasan Minhaj’s (obviously at least semi-facetious) take on
TikTok being a Chinese company during one of his stand-ups. The gist of it
was, basically, what if all of TikTok’s user base was suddenly doing their
usual viral moves, but wearing something that says “I stand with Hong Kong”,
for example. That’d be bound to send CCP for a loop…

------
SpaceManNabs
Anyone know why TikTok and Douyin are bifurcated domains of the same app? They
want to separate their domestic and international data mining efforts to
minimize pre-processing or something?

~~~
euix
It's the only way to be a Chinese company and have a international audience.
Douyin fully complies with Chinese regulators (i.e. censors) while TikTok is
content managed separately.

It's the same reason why the wechat that exists in the Chinese internet is
different from the international wechat.

------
cjhanks
Feels like the silly focus on process buries the lead on the video
([https://vm.tiktok.com/9hL3uY/](https://vm.tiktok.com/9hL3uY/))

That is brilliant awareness building.

------
jijji
i liked the transition from eye lash etiquette to chinese concentration
camps... well played

------
miki123211
so, is there any platform, that's both free, easy to use for non-techies and
is just that, a platform, not a publisher? I'm fine with a company removing
stuff when the law absolutely requires them to, but not in any other case.

~~~
Avamander
Blogger.com?

Techies can use Keybase or GitHub pages with something like Pelican for
Python.

------
kp98
I think the best way for America to deal with Tik Tok is to ban the app from
the American App Store. This will allow current users to continue to use it +
have their data collected while stymieing the growth of the app/cancer. India
already restricted it due to child abuse, and Tik Tok leaders failed to show
up at congressional hearings.

~~~
icebraining
On what grounds would America ban it? It's not like other social networks
don't censor stuff.

------
aritmo
Judging from the account names, that user just wanted to collect karma by
posting non-OC on tiktok?

------
chews
And the fact that the video will never be available on douyin.

------
spectramax
> TikTok user posted a video that included the image of Osama bin Laden,
> resulting in an account ban in line with TikTok's policies against content
> that includes imagery related to terrorist figures.

The chinese government has started to classify protestors of Hong Kong as
terrorists. What good are these policies where the core definition of the law
itself is left for interpretation by the Chinese government?

The whole enterprise of China and their principles are just... absurd. The
elephant in the room is complete authoritarian control by a uncontestable
leader, but let's bikeshed about company policies. What company policies, if
they only rest on the stilts built by the CCP?

~~~
HunOL
Because clearly only West is allowed to decide who is terrorist and who is
not.

~~~
spectramax
Now, that I think of it - yes. You're right. I can't trust the Chinese
government at all. To the CCP, anyone who criticizes the government is a
potential terrorist.

~~~
0x8BADF00D
What is Edward Snowden, then? Will he be greeted with open arms when returning
to the USA, or immediately end up in a black site? He criticized the real
government of the USA, not the sham you see on news media.

~~~
x220
What about the 1-3 million people in Chinese concentration camps (excuse me,
"re-education camps")?

~~~
baddox
1-3 million? That seems like a pretty big range of uncertainty. What are your
sources?

~~~
x220
This estimate gives 1.5 million [1], this gives 1-3 million. [2][3]

[1] [http://www.jpolrisk.com/brainwashing-police-guards-and-
coerc...](http://www.jpolrisk.com/brainwashing-police-guards-and-coercive-
internment-evidence-from-chinese-government-documents-about-the-nature-and-
extent-of-xinjiangs-vocational-training-internment-camps)

[2] [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-
concentrationca...](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-
concentrationcamps/china-putting-minority-muslims-in-concentration-camps-us-
says-idUSKCN1S925K)

[3] [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/04/world/asia/trump-china-
ui...](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/04/world/asia/trump-china-uighurs-
trade-deal.html)

------
r32a_
next facebook.

~~~
vernie
How's that, growing without bound despite countless controversies?

~~~
r32a_
Doing something

people get upset

blame it on the tech

------
suyash
All your data belong to China!

------
SrslyJosh
Why should we believe anything this company says?

