I think a lot of Kirn's ideas were not argued against properly. He may very well have a point about this law going too far, but as far as whether or not it's necessary misses out on a lot of things.
He asks where the threat is and calls Tik Tok a non-news platform. I fully acknowledge that this statistic may be wrong but I've seen many ti…
I think a lot of Kirn's ideas were not argued against properly. He may very well have a point about this law going too far, but as far as whether or not it's necessary misses out on a lot of things.
He asks where the threat is and calls Tik Tok a non-news platform. I fully acknowledge that this statistic may be wrong but I've seen many times that a large majority of Americans under a certain age, I believe it was 25 or 30, get their news entirely from Tik Tok. At that point for all intents and purposes it is having the same or more impact than news agencies and needs to be treated as such (whether the law currently allows for or needs to be modified is a separate issue I leave to lawyers).
Kirn also references other methods of Chinese encroachment such as buying up the debt or purchasing land near military bases and asks why Tik Tok and not those things? But the simple fact is you have to start somewhere. If there is a genuine threat of Chinese influence on America then it's not going to be countered all at once. So why is this not a valid place to start?
I think a lot of Kirn's ideas were not argued against properly. He may very well have a point about this law going too far, but as far as whether or not it's necessary misses out on a lot of things.
He asks where the threat is and calls Tik Tok a non-news platform. I fully acknowledge that this statistic may be wrong but I've seen many times that a large majority of Americans under a certain age, I believe it was 25 or 30, get their news entirely from Tik Tok. At that point for all intents and purposes it is having the same or more impact than news agencies and needs to be treated as such (whether the law currently allows for or needs to be modified is a separate issue I leave to lawyers).
Kirn also references other methods of Chinese encroachment such as buying up the debt or purchasing land near military bases and asks why Tik Tok and not those things? But the simple fact is you have to start somewhere. If there is a genuine threat of Chinese influence on America then it's not going to be countered all at once. So why is this not a valid place to start?