Open/close all quotes
Better to go offline
Hotnews comments:
“Even before his inauguration, Donald Trump said that he would issue an executive order allowing Tiktok to operate in the US again. Tiktok promptly went back online in the US. The reasoning is not freedom of expression or that a government should not dictate which platform people use. It’s much simpler, Trump said. He wants America to own half of Tiktok to ‘protect’ the data. Which is to say: we want earn on Tiktok too, and more importantly, we want your consumer and lifestyle data, and to know your daily preferences. … When the government says it wants to ‘protect the data’, it’s better to go offline, which of course is impossible.”
A toxic information environment
Eldiario.es clarifies what Trump, Musk & Co. are up to:
“During Donald Trump’s presidency the communications ecology will change significantly. … Infodemics, information overload, especially with lies, is typical of techno-feudalism. … The implementation of the measures that accompany the digital transformation of these companies requires the psychological and social isolation of societal actors. This toxic information environment not only favours figures like Elon Musk but imposes an ‘invisible yoke’ that serves not only to accumulate wealth but also to shape the perceived social and political reality. … We need to act, not just respond with a tweet.”
China’s influence is a security risk
Aftonbladet hopes that Europe will take a hard line against tech giants:
“The US is putting pressure on Tiktok for legitimate reasons. Chinese companies are legally obliged to cooperate with their country’s intelligence services. … In addition, the regime in Beijing could control what kind of content is displayed. It’s easy to imagine how this power could be abused to influence public opinion. Or to influence election campaigns and information flows in times of crisis. The West cannot hand over control of its information infrastructure to China. That is a security risk. And that is why Sweden and the EU must also work to ensure that the tech giants comply with the established rules.”
Europe doubly powerless
L’Opinion criticises Europe for its technological and political failures:
“Technologically dependent Europe has not been able to propose an alternative model (next test: artificial intelligence). Worse still: faced with the new imperialists who want to remove our ‘legal hurdles’, Europe appears incapable of enforcing its own safeguarding laws. This double powerlessness discredits it and favours the engineers of chaos. In their entreprise of destruction they are obviously getting help from Elon Musk’s X engine. But also, and above all, from a fuel that is produced above all by our own leaders, who are incapable of stopping the impoverishment of the lower classes: anger on an XXL scale.”
Setting a precedent for autocrats
Hvg is critical of the law, passed under the Biden administration, ordering Tiktok to sell its US business for national security reasons:
“A dangerous precedent could be set in the US, but also worldwide. … Although the executive order that is now causing controversy is associated with the name Tiktok, any other app that the current US president considers a ‘threat to national security’ could indeed be banned in this way. … If something like this can be pushed through without problems in the US, which has a relatively strong democratic infrastructure, it could serve as an incentive for autocratic leaders in semi-democratic countries, who can now even point to the example set by the West.”