Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center assumes that anyone who defends TikTok, as well as all of its millions of users, are stooges for "communist China" -- even though the MRC is acting like a stooge for Facebook, which paid a Republican PR firm to spread anti-TikTok talking points in right-wing media (much like the ones the MRC has been using). For instance, a March 23 post by Curtis Houck complained:
Ahead of Thursday’s House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing featuring TikTok CEO Shou Chew, the “big three” networks of ABC, CBS, and NBC had their flagship morning news shows spouting off tales of possible despair and financial ruin from TikTok influencers the Chinese-owned social media app paid to fly to Washington to appear as props.
Always game for the superficial, ABC’s Good Morning America was at the forefront of the pressure to keep the app that’s dumbing down the country alive. Co-host Robin Roberts teased that “creators lobb[ied] lawmakers, saying a ban would threaten their livelihoods.”
Houck showed no concern for those who make their living off TikTok -- they're just collateral damage. He also doesn't explain that companies flying in people to testify on their behalf in Congress is hardly a novel thing; activists on both sides do it.
So when Montana actually issued a ban on the use of TikTok in the entire state , the MRC was incredibly giddy. Gabriela Pariseau gushed in a May 18 post:
In a first-of-its kind ordeal, the state of Montana has sent the communist Chinese government-tied TikTok platform packing.
Montana Governor Greg Gianforte signed SB 419 into law Wednesday, May 17, prohibiting TikTok from operating “within the territorial jurisdiction of Montana. “To protect Montananas’ personal and private data from the Chinese Communist Party, I have banned TikTok in Montana,” wrote the governor in a tweet Wednesday.
Montana banned the app from government devices in December, but it is the first state to ban the app outright on all devices.
Aside from the usual "national security" talking points, Pariseau went on to quote a right-wing activist claiming that one argument for banning TikTok is that "it pushes critical race theory." We thought the MRC opposed censorship of ideas.
And, really, censorship is what the Montana law is about -- and the MRC is effectively arguing that it's not censorship when right-wingers do it. It's also unconstitutional, as one observer noted:
First off, it’s a clear bill of attainder, which is explicitly barred by the Constitution.
Second, it violates the 1st Amendment rights of TikTok, in that it’s no different than the government banning a magazine from printing in the state, or seizing their printing press.
Third, it violates the 1st Amendment rights of app store operators, who have the right to determine what they do and don’t distribute.
Fourth, it violates the 1st Amendment rights of users of TikTok who want to use the app to communicate with others.
Fifth, it violates the the Dormant Commerce Clause in regulating interstate commerce.
And as another observer noted, the law is unenforceable because the internet can't be stopped at state borders: "The only way to enforce Montana’s ban is to build this system and begin massive surveillance of all U.S. internet-connected devices, reporting precise location and the contents of all phones to any law enforcement at will. Sound familiar? That’s because that is the surveillance state in China."
But because the MRC cares only about hating TikTok and not complications like constitutionality, it will ignore such messly little complications. Indeed, a May 19 post by Catherine Salgado complained that "Some users of the communist Chinese government-tied TikTok are suing the state of Montana for banning the app that poses a serious data security hazard" labored hard to play down that stuff:
The lawsuit claims the ban is beyond Montana’s legal authority, while the state attorney general’s office said it is “fully prepared to defend the law,” according to the [New York] Times.
The lawsuit attempts to make the TikTok ban a violation of the First Amendment, The Times noted. It claims Montana “can no more ban its residents from viewing or posting to TikTok than it could ban The Wall Street Journal because of who owns it or the ideas it publishes.” But it’s not a matter of “disliking” TikTok’s content or owners. Based on evidence the CCP can access detailed TikTok user data, many lawmakers and experts have labeled TikTok a national security risk.
Salgado did not explain how Montana can possibly enforce the law.
When TikTok filed its own lawsuit against the ban, Luis Cornelio ranted in a May 23 post:
The communist Chinese government-tied TikTok is hypocritically lashing out at Montana for protecting its citizens’ data security.
Days after Montana became the first state to ban the Chinese Communist Party-tied app, TikTok launched legal warfare against the state government in court in an effort to continue sweeping up Americans’ data for its communist overlords in Beijing.
TikTok dubbed the ban “unconstitutional” in a Monday tweet, claiming the lawsuit will “protect” their business and “the hundreds of thousands” of TikTok users in Montana. What a joke.
[...]
Media Research Center Founder and President Brent Bozell praised Montana in a May 18 tweet: “TikTok is a spy tool of the Chinese Communists. Kudos to Montana for banning it. More states need to follow suit,” said Bozell, who was echoed by MRC Free Speech America & MRC Business Director Michael Morris.
Cornelio did not bother to explain how the Montana is constutitional and can be enforced; instead, he did a lot of screaming about the CCP.
Salgado returned for a supposed gotcha in a June 28 post:
TikTok influencers just let the cat out of the bag with a lawsuit against Montana for banning the social media platform.
Multiple states have banned or restricted the popular app TikTok, which is tied to the Communist Chinese government, as concerns rise that the app is spyware. As Montana’s ban on TikTok from operating in the state is set to take effect Jan. 1, TikTok is seemingly growing desperate.
The Chinese-tied app not only filed its own lawsuit but also finally acknowledged that it was financing a lawsuit against Montana from five creators, according to The New York Times.
Five Montana TikTok influencers sued Montana last month, claiming the ban not only exceeded the state government’s authority, but even undermined their First Amendment rights. TikTok reportedly dodged questions about its potential involvement, opting instead to file its own lawsuit. But then two of the suing TikTok creators admitted to The Times that TikTok was financing their case.
TikTok spokeswoman Jodi Seth reportedly tried to justify TikTok’s backing as a free speech effort. “Many creators have expressed major concerns both privately and publicly about the potential impact of the Montana law on their livelihoods,” Seth claimed. “We support our creators in fighting for their constitutional rights.”
Seth did not, of course, address the issue of TikTok as potential spyware, as the social media platform has connections to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
Salgado did not explain how TikTok is behaving any different from any other organization in defending its rights, nor did she bother to explain why the law is not constitutional or how it could possibly be enforced (jailing teenagers, perhaps?). And, like Houck, she offered no concern for the livelihoods of TikTok creators in Montana -- perhaps she too assumes they're nothing more than dumb CCP stooges (just like Facebook told her to think).
