
China would rather see TikTok U.S. close than a forced sale - elorant
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-bytedance-tiktok-exclusive/exclusive-china-would-rather-see-tiktok-u-s-close-than-a-forced-sale-idUSKBN2622L6
======
thewhitetulip
Can anyone who knows these things please tell me what good does banning an app
do to a country?

India banned loads of Chinese apps, sure, "to put pressure" but is that
"pressure" meaningful enough?

Will it work only if all nations decide to do so to counter China? Will that
ever happen?

Are we heading towards app-diplomacy?

~~~
CincinnatiMan
Banning an app reduces another nation’s control over the culture and mindset
of your country’s people. Whether this is a concern or not is less clear, but
theoretically China could censor content that is critical of China, which
India and US may not approve of. Or even more subtly it could nudge people in
certain directions. Such as the claim that Russia is stoking the fires of
internal strife within the US.

~~~
thewhitetulip
I'm pretty sure we weren't seeing Chinese culture via TikTok. Indian Tiktokers
made lot of money via TikTok.

But does this work to nudge China?

Is Indian lost revenue big enough for China to change their style just because
TikTok is banned?

~~~
CincinnatiMan
The point isn't to get China to change, but for a country to have control over
its own people instead of a different country having that control.

~~~
thewhitetulip
Is that's the case then I can understand. The way I hear it in Indian Media is
that our supreme leader "taught China a lesson by banning apps"

------
libertine
China is proud of TikTok being a Chinese company - in their eyes it's their
turn to have the next big social media platform.

It represents strength, progress of China and CCP, and maybe a glimpse of
change for the perception of China being the global tech powerhouse. Probably
Chinese people are proud of it as well.

So it really doesn't impress me to see their intentions to burn it down and
keep their pride/save face, instead of turning the the public perception of
"losing to the US"/"being the underdog" once again.

------
317070
It's also a precedent. Now it would be TikTok, which company would be next?
Especially since the border between state and company is less clear in China,
I could see why China would not allow this to happen and strengthen the US
economy with a loss on their side.

------
reminddit
It's still a probability between no deal and unfavorable deal. Any country
would do the same when confronted with this situation.

------
xnx
I really hope Internet Archive (or someone similar) is furiously downloading
all the videos and comments it can.

------
jacknews
I don't see how tiktok is worth billions.

USA could perhaps play China's game; ban tiktok, and support a 'local
champion' to create an identical US version, let's call it, toktik - it at
least sounds more like the poison it is.

Then again, we need to find ways to stop China gaming the world open trade
system, forcing the rest of the world to follow Chinese values and become more
like China - ie less free.

~~~
sthnblllII
I guess if the Chinese gov sold their stakes in Chinese tech companies to
politically connected businessmen then the censorship would be ok because free
speech doesn’t apply to “private” companies with ties to US intelligence like
Cisco and Microsoft?

The US is the one going out of its way to attack countries that don't bend the
knee like Iraq and Venezuela. China pays its partners in Africa for their
resources. US overthrows governments to steal them and “spread democracy”. Why
does US spread democracy to Iraq but not Saudi Arabia, a literal monarchy?
(Because US only care about power) The projection of US sins onto China is
unreal and lays bare US meddling and hypocrisy.

~~~
jacknews
USA is certainly no saint, eg Banana Republics, not to mention war crimes in
the middle-east.

But IMHO a world 'under' USA's insistence on openness, human-rights,
democracy, (and free-flowing oil, etc, of course), is preferable to China's
opaque mercantilism and spiteful sensitivity.

My point is that USA is aping those attributes.

We need to stop being dragged into a less-free world.

~~~
sthnblllII
But the US doesn't promote openness, human rights, or democracy. It promotes
its own mercantilism and spiteful sensitivity while accusing others of doing
so. How many human rights do Palestinians have in USA’s greatest ally, Israel?
(40% are denied citizenship) How much market openness is Tiktok seeing in US?
Why is US #2 mid east ally a monarchy? These are all baldfaced lies and only
uninformed Americans living in the US media bubble believe them. The people in
charge of the US are hell bent on destroying those things when they come into
conflict with their own power. Therefore they should have no role in enforcing
any international orders.

------
oxymoran
Of course, that’s the whole point. It’s of no use to the CCP if they can’t
control it.

~~~
sthnblllII
If China required Apple sell itself to Huawei to continue selling iPhones, US
government would outright forbid the sale, even if China payed a fair price.

~~~
TMWNN
People, including Chinese, buy iPhones _because_ they're from Apple. No one,
including Chinese, would buy Huawei "iPhones" because a) everyone would know
that they're not from Apple, and b) if they wanted to buy a Huawei phone,
they'd buy a Huawei phone.

~~~
sthnblllII
Sounds plausible. That’s completely irrelevant to my point however.

~~~
TMWNN
Not at all. It's my way of saying that the US government would not bother
forbidding the transaction.

Further, did the US protest when China ordered Google out of the country in
2008? (And Facebook, but it wasn't nearly as large then.) No.

~~~
sthnblllII
Ok I see what you mean now. Google left voluntarily because China refused to
let Google be a backdoor for US propaganda and surveillance. (exactly what
tiktoc is accused of) and yes, the US protested loudly at the time.

------
jeswin
Another possibility is that a forced sale could uncover links to Chinese
government surveillance in technical assets, and that's a risk they don't want
to take.

~~~
emteycz
Do you think they have API calls to the communist party's surveillance
backoffice?

~~~
arcticbull
Lots of cheap Android smartphones do, why wouldn't TikTok? I just don't think
they get anything material out of the integration due to the unbelievably low
signal to noise ratio.

~~~
charliemil4
I’d venture to say it’s filtered to knowing who influences culture. Then
pinpointing what those accounts respond to. Then designing content to shift
said culture through this channel.

------
mikece
Let’s assume for a second that TikTok really is a surveillance app designed by
the PLA cyber command as some in the Trump administration allege. How, then,
is a forced sale not a form of aggression or even warfare?

~~~
icegreentea2
Because dismantling other countries surveillance apparatus operating in your
own soil is not aggression. It's just like breaking up spy rings, and
destroying bugs.

It's certainly an aggressive posture, but it's not really aggression.

~~~
quantaum_dot
Yes,right, every country other than US should ban Facebook

~~~
icegreentea2
China literally did ban Facebook.

------
Dahoon
Swap China with USA and Tiktok with Google and see how insane it is. I hope
China doesn't back down to US aggression. This is like a child throwing a
tantrum. It needs to be put in its place by a grown-up.

~~~
colejohnson66
The problem is: _it’s China._ No matter your argument, it’s _very_ easy to
respond with _“but China.”_ Simply put: “the US doesn’t commit genocide,
therefore, we’re better.” It’s a ridiculous argument IMHO, but it’s one that
I’ve heard (even here) many times.

~~~
arcticbull
Not committing genocide is a good way to be better than a country committing
genocide, jmho.

~~~
olsonjeffery
The US doesn't need to commit genocide because it grooms foreign military
officers and paramilitaries to do it for them.

