Nacktmull comments on US lawmakers vote 50-0 to force sale of TikTok despite angry calls from users

[–] Nacktmull@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

By design. Especially the format (short video clips) and the optimization for being used on phones (not computers) makes it attractive for kids.

63% of Americans between the ages of 12 and 17 used TikTok on a weekly basis

Report Estimates One-Third of TikTok Users Are Children Age 14 and Under

TikTok reportedly has 18 million users who are 14 or younger, renewing concerns for children's safety

A Third of TikTok’s U.S. Users May Be 14 or Under, Raising Safety Questions

I tried googling, can’t find anything that supports these claims

Seriously? it took me one google search to find an endless list of such articles. Also, did you not notice all the kids outside filming Tik Tok dances with their phones, it has been going on for many years now, how is it possible you did not notice it?

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] Lulzagna@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago* (2 children)

Kids using tiktok and tiktok specifically targeting children to use their platform are distinctly different. Just because kids use tiktok doesn't mean it's because they were lured there. Those metrics only identify that tiktok is popular among youth, which is not an indication of malice whatsoever.

I appreciate your opinion, but short video clips on Mobile devices are nothing inherent to children. Now if tiktok was giving you pokemon for signing up or posting of their platform, then there'd be a valid argument that they're targeting children. (I feel like there was a pokeball collaboration with tiktok once, but I can't find a source to support it)

Getting back to the original context - the argument that Tiktok should be shut down because "it's short videos on mobile platforms that's popular among teens" is lunacy. Everyone is throwing shade at me and not realizing how absurd their argument is.

I'm not acting in bad faith either. I don't care about the fate of tiktok, but I'm seeing a trend of vilification without proper logical discourse. It's disconcerting to say the least.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] Nacktmull@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

I respect your opinion and don't think you are arguing in bad faith. However, I think you are missing the central point. Which -in my opinion- is that a social media platform that turns out to have extremely negative effects on society and especially kids, should get shut down. If it happens with intent or without is not particularly relevant as far as I see it. I apologize if my initial comments were phrased in any misleading way, I am not a native speaker so I sometimes miss the finer nuances of certain formulations.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Lulzagna@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago

No need to apologize, you're the first person to actually calmly and willingly discuss the topic without completely dismissing being disagreed with.

I know you're not the originally comment I was replying to, but you conveniently moved the goal posts. The context of the entire conversation is whether TikTok specifically should be shut down because it targets children for it's own gain. You're now arguing that social media in general has negative impact on society and children, which I agree with, but is completely skewing the conversation and was, in no way, the central point of the discussion.

So your opinion is that all social media platforms that deem to have negative affects on society should be shut down? Do you not see what's wrong with that? You're saying humans can't decide whether or not they want to use social media. You should understand how absolutely absurd that is - that is a completely dystopian totalitarian dictatorship idea. It sounds like a chapter in 1984.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent