Social Media, Authoritarianism, and the World As It Is - Meredith Whittaker

Meredith Whittaker (@mer__edith) is the President of Signal and the Cofounder and Chief Advisor of the AI Now Institute.

Earlier this month, the United States House of Representatives passed the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, a bill that would force TikTok’s parent company to sell the platform to U.S. citizens or be banished from the U.S. market. The same fate could await any other platform the President designates as a “foreign adversary-controlled application.” A loud mix of celebration and outcry greeted the bill’s movement, splitting both right and left and placing common allies across from each other. While its path in the Senate remains uncertain, the issues the bill raises and the political fissures it has exposed must be critically engaged.

In this I am not a neutral observer. I stake a position in the “outcry” camp. I see no evidence that this bill will offer meaningful privacy protection from China, the United States, or anyone else, or liberate people from the mental buffeting of engagement-driven algorithms. What the bill would do is ensure that TikTok joins almost all other widely-used social media platforms on earth under U.S. control, enriching U.S., not Chinese, interests and further entrenching U.S. social network dominance. U.S.-owned social media platforms include the top four most widely used services in the world, with TikTok lagging far behind YouTube, Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp. Nineteen of the twenty most widely used social media platforms in the world are based in either the United States or China — making all other countries consumers, not developers, of these services. In light of the existing concentration of military and financial power in the United States, handing the country even more “control” over all relevant social media platforms is not something we should reflexively embrace — especially when there is no evidence that U.S. control will make them meaningfully better in any way.

In this brief essay, I outline why I am particularly concerned with the implications of U.S. control in our present political moment, a view that is rooted in concerns for free speech and expression. Those who raise such concerns often do so in bad faith, and because of this, liberals and some on the left tend to dismiss these worries out of hand. In ceding speech and expression to the right, they misunderstand the problem that the current tech industry and its business model present, and thus proffer the wrong solutions, with this TikTok bill being just the most recent example.

If this sounds interesting to you click here to view the full essay.

8 Likes

Fantastic article. Meredith Whitaker hits the nail on the head. TikTok has very little to do with China. May as well be controlled by any other BRICS country. It’s just not US/West-controlled. It has everything to do with narrative control.

Case in point, the thousands of TikTok videos on the horrors of genocide. Generations of social engineering that set the stage for this have crumbled with the younger generations on TikTok, and rightfully so.

And when faced with an existential threat, there are no depths to the civil rights thievery and inhumanity to come from those that benefit from war, resource extraction (theft) and slavery in all it’s forms.

We have to resist the further degradation of basic human rights wherever we live.

3 Likes

Meredith touches so many third rails, I’m shocked. People who speak truth to power like this don’t usually last long, nor are they C-levels in tech or any major business.

It almost makes me a little suspicious of her. But I’m super jaded. For now I’m just going to go to bed happy about my deep personal investment in Signal and the leadership they’ve chosen.

Back on point, her dissection of censorship and the dangers of centralized control and moderation by just a few governments/NGOs/benevolent billionaires (stop laughing) stands as a warning. Also, “Good for me and not for thee” is not a winning strategy for censorship because political winds shift.

Way back when the ACLU fulfilled their mission, they fought for the rights of the KKK to protest. And so they did, spouting all their hateful, racist views. And what happened? Nobody died from the words and their membership shrunk to politically and socially insignificant levels.

The First Amendment worked. And it will continue to work if we remove the gatekeepers who use aggrieved groups as a shield to commit their massive crimes.

Human beings are fundamentally good, and communal, and want to do good. And when presented agenda-driven, divisive or hateful rhetoric and equally the truth, truth wins out. Propaganda fears truth, not the other way around.

So as imperfect as TikTok is right now, too many evil special interests are suffering because of their lighter moderation. So their political-goons-on-retainer (Congress) cometh with their xenophobic dog whistles. Don’t fall for it.

6 Likes