Everyone has easy access right now. Everyone had easier access before the TikTok deal. That's the wrong direction for a free country and it's particularly alarming because the deal was forced by the government.

Censorship doesn’t become okay when it’s easy to work around it.

I’m not condoning censorship. It’s bad.

I’m saying it’s silly hyperbole to make the leap to implying that only people in other countries have easy access to information.

These absurd claims always turn into a game of motte and bailey when they’re called out, with retreats to safer claims. I’m talking about the original claim, that “people in other countries” have easy access to this information which we, in the US, see everywhere all the time right now (except TikTok apparently).

That information may be readily accessible but if it isn't on the screen you're currently engaged with, it may as well not exist.

_you_ have access to it, for an increasingly large number of people TikTok is their only source of news. Same as Fox News or CNN, one news source.

Censorship of TikTok is inevitable given the owners, and it will inevitably lead to a new news bubble.

> I’m not saying this ICE censorship is good

I hope not because it’s bad and that’s really all that matters in this conversation. And nitpicking whether or not there are other avenues for information is completely besides the point. I don’t even really understand what point you’re trying to make. If you think this is bad, then say it’s bad and we shouldn’t be ok with it. Saying “I’m not saying it’s good” then muddying the waters reads like you’re trying to defend the action.

> And nitpicking whether or not there are other avenues for information is completely besides the point

That was literally the argument I was responding to and talking about.

I am not getting that from your previous comment but I’ll just assume I’m misreading it.

This entire comment thread was me responding to someone claiming that people “in other countries” have easy access to information.

Given the downvotes and angry responses I think a lot of people misinterpreted it as something else. I should learn to avoid comment sections about politics.

I don’t think that’s the lesson here if you’re looking for one. I think it’s just a clarity/phrasing issue. If that’s not what you meant then that’s fine, no harm no foul as far as I’m concerned. I was just going off how I read it.

If you’re looking for feedback, “I’m not saying…” without saying what you are saying generally comes off as obfuscating or at best wishy washy.

> I think you’re greatly overestimating the number of people who only use one social media platform and never check any other news source at all.

When it comes to the _younger generation_, I don't think it's an over-estimation; they don't read news sites at all.

I was responding to a claim about people who use only one social media platform.

>The information is everywhere.

For those who know to look for it, sure.

For those who do not already know it, discovery is increasingly challenged by the deliberately obscurant curators of the information space, who are oddly tightly and uniformly aligned with special interest groups openly declaring their intent to hide that information and punish dissemination thereof.