8月1日，《連線》雜誌（Wired）總編輯Nicholas Thompson對川普政府威脅封禁短視頻社交應用TikTok一事發表評論文章，以下是原文：
7月31日，美利堅合眾國總統宣布他要封殺「充滿活力的美國社交平臺」TikTok，意在進一步減少競爭，而現狀是，當前市場本就競爭不足。這是一項不成熟的壯舉，將同時動搖美國兩項民主制度的根基：言論自由和市場競爭自由。
TikTok在美國的命運現在還沒有定論。川普的上述威脅可能是談判策略的一部分，而這個策略的目標就是撤銷TikTok中國母公司字節跳動對這個平臺的所有權。然後，微軟可能會趁機進入。
川普如果如他所言提出行政令，可能會面臨法律審查。同時，TikTok也已經宣布它「不會離開」。但不論最後結果如何，這份總統聲明都充滿了虛偽的氣息。
TikTok的確受到數據安全方面的質疑，因為它和其他網際網路產品一樣，會複製你寫在你粘貼板上內容。所以禁止美國軍事人員和外交人員在公務手機上使用這些產品是合理的。但要將這一點作為TikTok危害美國國家安全的證據，是不成立的。
比起「威脅美國國家安全」，TikTok更威脅著Facebook的生意。相比Facebook過去的那些手下敗將，TikTok是一個合法的、尚未被打壓或者制裁的、生意興隆的競爭者。
在7月29日針對Facebook、Amazon、微軟、谷歌的反壟斷聽證會上，美國國會提出一項重要指控：Facebook現在在使用它所有收集到的秘密信息，來對付最新出現的競爭對手。「如果我說不，扎克伯格會摧毀Instagram嗎？」Instagram創始人Kevin Systrom曾經在與公司董事會成員Matt Cohler討論Facebook提出的收購意向時這樣問，Matt Cohler當時的回答是：「他很可能會的。」
Instagram和Whatsapp都被Facebook「一口吃掉」，Snapchat則是被襲擊得「一瘸一拐」。雖然Facebook這家美國公司不願意承認其強大，也誤解了其高明之處，但TikTok從Facebook的「毀滅模式」下倖存了下來。到後來，Facebook只能史無前例地、焦急地、試圖克隆TikTok，但其實一切都已經來不及。
Facebook的轉機，來自於川普對TikTok的強勢立場。他的TikTok孿生子，旗下Instagram所開發的Reels即將上市。沒有了TikTok，這個應用通往成功的道路將會更加開闊明朗。
自從川普和扎克伯格在去年11月共進晚餐後，一些陰謀論便冒了出來。這些陰謀論猜測這兩人之間達成了某種心照不宣的協議：扎克伯格允許川普隨意使用他旗下的平臺，而川普則會在另外的方面幫助扎克伯格。我一直懷疑這一協議不會有明顯的證據，但是強大的外交並不是這樣的——它會在小動作，眨眼間和點頭間發生。並且，懷疑扎克伯格對於白宮的善意，我覺得川普不會不記在心上。
但這當然掩飾了川普此舉的虛偽。實際上，這是對言論自由的否定。從某種程度上講，Facebook之所以對川普保持溫和的態度，是因為扎克伯格在捍衛言論自由。川普怎麼能將一個社交媒體判處死刑呢？就算TikTok上難免有些垃圾信息，有時也許會引起反感，但TikTok畢竟是是自由開放的，在這一點上，甚至遠超其他平臺。
有些保守派的批評家指責推特缺乏對美國《第一修正案》的尊重，這些人是真誠的，我渴望看到他們對今天這些新聞的回應。我已經和白宮聯繫，可以發表相關評論。如果能與白宮對話，我將持續更新信息。
川普威脅封禁TikTok的真正動機是什麼？其中有一部分是他對美國國家安全和間諜活動的關注，但毫無疑問還有政治上的考量：在與拜登的總統角逐中，展示對中國的強硬手腕會給川普加分。另外，TikTok上的達人們被認為在塔爾薩的競選集會上放了川普鴿子，還有人因嘲弄川普而在平臺上成為大V，這些事情都讓川普對TikTok產生了反感。
過去的幾年中，我一直警告網際網路行業發展最大威脅，是東西方的技術冷戰。如今，川普政府展現出的對言論自由和開放市場的否定，和我之前的預判並無差別。
以下為英文原文
The Rank Hypocrisy of a TikTok Ban
ON FRIDAY THE president of the United States declared that he intends to ban a vibrant source of American speech. And that he intends to eliminate competition in a giant industry that doesn’t have nearly enough of it. It’s a rare feat to upturn two such fundamental democratic values—free speech and free markets—at the same time.
TikTok’s fate in the US remains uncertain. Trump’s declarations could be part of a negotiating strategy, with the intended goal of getting Bytedance, TikTok’s Chinese parent company, removed entirely from the platform’s ownership. Microsoft may then swoop in. Trump’s proposed executive order could face legal review, and TikTok has vowed that it’s 「not planning on going anywhere.」 But regardless of how this all shakes out, the president’s declaration stinks of hypocrisy.
and that its hacking and espionage operations have deep and malevolent roots. And smart people have raised valid concerns about TikTok’s security. (Any company that copies what you put on your clipboard is one that deserves very little trust.)
But that’s a reason to ban the app on the phones of American soldiers and diplomats, and it’s reason to warn others about the risks. It’s an argument, too, that US data privacy laws are woefully inadequate to protect people from data over-reach by any app, regardless of the country of origin. But the public evidence that TikTok is a fundamental and unique threat to US security is simply not there.
TikTok, however, is a threat to Facebook. It’s a legitimate competitor that has been able to thrive without being captured or killed. During the antitrust hearings on Wednesday, one of Congress’s central critiques was that Facebook uses all the secret information it gathers to sniff out its nascent opposition. 「Will [Zuckerberg] go into destroy mode if I say no?」 Instagram founder Kevin Systrom asked one of his board members, Matt Cohler, while discussing a potential Facebook acquisition of his company. 「Probably,」 came the reply, according to a memo released during the hearings.
Instagram and Whatsapp were gobbled by Facebook, and Snapchat was hobbled. But TikTok has survived Facebook’s destroy mode. The US company didn’t recognize its growth and misunderstood its genius. By the time Facebook first tried desperately to copy and clone it, it was too late. But now, with Trump’s aggressive stance, Facebook has been given a gift from above. Its new TikTok twin, Instagram’s Reels, launches soon. Without TikTok, the road to its success would be more open and clear.
There has been a certain amount of conspiratorial talk about Trump and Zuckerberg since the two had dinner last November: theorizing perhaps that they reached some sort of tacit agreement that Zuckerberg would allow Trump to use the platform as he saw fit, and Trump would help Zuckerberg in other ways? I』ve always doubted that there was anything explicit. But powerful diplomacy doesn’t work that way. It happens through subtle signals, winks, and nods. And I doubt that Zuckerberg’s kindness toward the White House didn’t weigh somewhat in Trump’s mind.
But this of course just lays bare the hypocrisy in Trump’s move. It’s a move against free speech, and to the extent that Facebook has been gentle on the president, it’s because of Zuckerberg’s defense of that fundamental right. And if one is an avid believer in free speech, how can one even threaten the death penalty for a social media platforrm? TikTok is full of garbage and sometimes hate. But it’s free and open, even in ways that other platforms aren’t. Conservative critics who rail about Twitter’s lack of respect for the First Amendment are often just working the refs. But many are sincere. I am eager to see how they react to today’s news. (The White House did not respond to my request for comment.)
What are Trump’s true motives? Surely there is an element of legitimate concern about national security and espionage. And surely there is some concern about politics: Being tough on China is an issue where he can score points against Joe Biden. It also can’t hurt that TikTok stars are accused of (or credited with) sandbagging his rally in Tulsa, and that some of the biggest names on the platform have made their names through hysterical mockery of him.
For the past several years, I』ve warned that the biggest threat to the internet is the technological cold war between the reasonably open, free internet of the West and the closed authoritarian internet of the East. Now, with the president’s repudiation of free speech and open markets, I worry that there isn’t much difference between the two sides after all.
END
DoNews是中國領先的IT媒體網站。每天及時向您傳遞IT業界發生的各類新鮮資訊。有料、有趣，推送的每篇文章都不辜負您的關注。