593
TikTok set to be banned in the US after losing appeal
(www.bbc.co.uk)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Dec 2024
593 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
59993 readers
1933 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I stay the f away from it. You haven't spent enough time to properly train it. As you watch, it tracks time spent on each video, interactions, passive and active choices and slowly builds a dossier on you.
As you keep going, it occasionally throws adjacent stuff in. It starts tossing you stuff that other people with your likes watch. If there is content on there that you'll appreciate, it will eventually find it. If there is enough, it'll stream it to you non-stop.
They'll find people who share your political alignment and say precisely what you want to hear. If you like brunettes with flowy blouses or redheads who are gym rats, you'll get them. If you like skeptics or preppers, you'll get them.
My wife gets a lot of her news from it, I find probably 1/3 of it to be suspect and 90% of it biased toward what she wants to hear. Nothing there is telling both sides of any story. (to be clear we have the same political/ethical views, but I'm a touch more skeptical about journalism and random influencers, especially popular influencers)
Wow, that's scary. I'm guessing a surprising number of people do this as well.
Why is it shocking that people hear about topics through social media? Seriously? Why? I heard about the UHC shooter through TikTok. And it's not necessarily just memes, there are "real" news accounts on TikTok. The same way I hear about new on Lemmy because people post links to stories. Like the literal platform and thread we are currently discussing.
It's not shocking that they hear about news through social media, it's shocking that people trust it anywhere near as much as traditional journalism.
There's no incentive for someone on social media to fact check or tell any more of the story than will get them views.
Did you fact check this article?
Not personally, but it's from a media org I trust, and they generally do a good job citing sources.
If the BBC got caught lying, it would be big news. If a random influencer got caught lying, people would shrug and say, "that tracks."
So how is it different if someone sees a news story from BBC's TikTok account? https://www.tiktok.com/@bbcnews
That's not at all what I'm talking about. I also don't use TikTok, so I don't know how their reporting differs there vs other media.
For all its bullshit, YouTube is the same. I've found myself on it more lately precisely because of the reasons you're saying. It's amazing how much niche content there is for any taste, even ones you don't yet realize you have.
Youtube at least realizes when its suggestions are in a rut and gives you that little popup offering to show you stuff slightly outside of your current echo chamber. Just how different it actually is I can't really prove.