TikTok was conquering the world, until it became the victim of a new Cold War between China and Donald Trump, who wants it bought out – or shut down
With no hard evidence of abuse, are bans warranted? The real security concerns will likely come after the ban goes into effect, researchers said in our exclusive roundtable.
TikTok’s Chinese owner has fought tooth and nail to keep control over its wildly popular platform for dancing teens and young Los Angeles influencers. One big reason: The days of fast internet fortunes and meteoric digital growth in its home market may be coming to an end.
Lacking a powerful technology sector of its own, the European Union has instead tried to carve out a space in the digital economy as the world’s regulatory superpower, leading the charge on privacy rights and data protection by leveraging its enormous single market against Goliaths like Google and Facebook.
China is also growing more adept at targeting campaign workers. But contrary to Trump administration warnings, Beijing is mostly aiming at Biden campaign officials.
A vital connection for the Chinese diaspora, the app has also become a global conduit of Chinese state propaganda, surveillance and intimidation. The United States has proposed banning it.
On most days, companies like ByteDance, Microsoft, Walmart and Oracle are considered kings within their fields. But over the weekend, it became increasingly clear that they can also be something else: a set of pawns.
The second quarter of 2020 saw global domain name registrations continue to rise, with an increase of 3.3 million, or 0.9%. This took total registrations around the world to 370.1 million as the global COVID-19 pandemic continued to wreak havoc.
When Microsoft began talking this summer with the popular video app TikTok and its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, no one had any intentions of pursuing a blockbuster deal.
TikTok plans to sue the United States government, the company confirmed on Saturday, arguing that President Trump’s moves to block the app had deprived it of due process and claiming it had been unfairly and incorrectly treated as a security threat.