Several justices have raised questions about how many degrees of separation lie between TikTok (a US company) and the Chinese Communist party, and Justice Neil Gorsuch asks whether China would let ByteDance sell TikTok. “It would be exceedingly difficult under any timeframe” to sell, says Francisco — not because China controls it, but for logistical reasons like carving out US videos from TikTok’s global platform.
We’re getting a question about past cases involving limits on foreign media ownership — Francisco says these involved media like radio, where the government had greater discretion because of basic spectrum scarcity, so they aren’t good points of comparison. Broadcast regulations are a big deal recently.
The prime metaphor in the case so far, raised by TikTok’s attorney, is an analogy about whether the government could ban The Washington Post from operating if the Chinese government kidnapped Jeff Bezos’ children and forced him to print propaganda. (He’s against it.) Regardless of the questions over speech and TikTok, Justice Sonia Sotomayor seems pretty skeptical of his claim that the government couldn’t meaningfully step in.
Roberts raises the national security concerns of ByteDance working from China. “Do you dispute that ByteDance has ultimate control” of TikTok? Francisco does dispute it, but he says, “I don’t think it would change the analysis.”
The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments from TikTok, a group of TikTok users, and the US government before deciding whether to block a law that will otherwise take effect on January 19th. You can listen on C-Span or the Supreme Court’s site, starting at 10AM ET.
Poor Mark Zuckerberg. Imagine calling the 2024 election a “cultural tipping point” for “prioritizing speech” and then the guy who got elected starts bragging about how he threatened you into self-censorship. At least Trump won’t throw him in jail?
The Meta Oversight Board — a semi-independent body that interprets Meta’s rules and suggests changes — has responded to the recent dissolution of the company’s third-party fact-checking system. Its statement contains a series of gently worded reminders to Meta that it exists and would very much like to continue existing in the future, pretty please.
The company sent a statement to The Verge emphasizing that it doesn’t agree with some allegations in a lawsuit it’s paying millions to settle. It has admitted that Siri recordings were shared with Apple contractors — but it promised years ago that the system was changed.
