The public discourse in the US appears very distorted. The rececently elected legislative heavily tampers with the executive/judicative and somehow this is stil democratic?
IMO the tiktok ban is only about media control, no morale or legality, just political power and somehow there is still free speech for all?
All this is so bizare to me. I dont expect reasonable answers.
You have been misinformed, it is not illegal to publish biased media.
> The rececently elected legislative heavily tampers with the executive/judicative and somehow this is stil democratic.
What are you trying to say? The majority passes something, and the Supreme Court chose to allow it to continue.
> IMO the tiktok ban is only about media control, no morale or legality, just political power and somehow there is still free speech for all?
You're right that it's about media control, namely a foreign adversary being able to completely control media widely consumed in the United States. Framing a content-neutral conditional ban, which could've been avoided without any content changes, as being against "free speech" makes zero sense when the platform being banned is controlled by a foreign adversary that doesn't have free speech. The argument is that a foreign adversary shouldn't be allowed to censor and manipulate our media and farm our data.
So, the problem seems to be _foreign_ biased media and not biased media in general. General media bias could be made punishable too but this would take away influencial powers.
> a content-neutral conditional ban.
So TikToks content or bias is irrelevant? The only thing left is the adversarial ownership, which is ban worthy. How?
Red panic is back. I’d be careful honestly.