Indiana Lawsuit Accuses TikTok of Fraud, Calls the App a 'Chinese Trojan Horse'

The lawsuit alleges that TikTok's algorithm funnels inappropriate content directly to teens. That not only defies logic, but it is also antithetical to how a social media platform keeps users.

A lawsuit filed this week on behalf of the state of Indiana alleges that the video-sharing social media app TikTok, and its China-based parent company ByteDance, engage in deceptive practices to addict children and teens to the platform. The opening line of the complaint alleges that "TikTok Inc. is a Chinese Trojan Horse unleashed on unsuspecting American consumers who have been misled by the company's false representations about the content on its platform."

But despite the seriousness of the accusations, there is little evidence to back up the state's claims.

The lawsuit charges that the company lied in order to secure a more favorable age rating in Apple's App Store. TikTok currently has a 12+ rating in the App Store, indicating that it may be unsuitable for children under 12 years old but OK for anyone else. The suit says the app should have a more restrictive 17+ rating.

To justify that request, it specifically invokes TikTok's algorithm, which curates videos to show users. The lawsuit alleges that the algorithm "promotes a variety of inappropriate content to 13-17-year-old users throughout the United States" and that it "serves up abundant content depicting alcohol, tobacco, and drugs; sexual content, nudity, and suggestive themes; and intense profanity. TikTok promotes this content regardless of a user's age, which means that it is available to users registered with ages as young as 13."

To demonstrate the real-world impact exposure to inappropriate content can have, the suit cites a case in which an Indiana school superintendent blamed a rash of school vandalism and petty theft on the "devious licks" TikTok trend. "Obviously, our kids are influenced by social media and TikTok," Park Grinder, the Southwest Allen County Schools superintendent, told a Fort Wayne TV station.

But as Reason's Liz Wolfe pointed out last year, TikTok took down the "devious licks" hashtag, and there is no indication of how many of the videos constituted actual theft or vandalism or how many were faked for clout. Similarly, the lawsuit lists keywords and euphemisms that can be used to search for sexual content on the platform, workarounds which are only necessary because searches for explicit terms are not allowed.

Singling out the algorithm is similarly off-base. The lawsuit claims that "many children are exposed to non-stop offerings of inappropriate content that TikTok's algorithm force-feeds to them." Recommending explicit videos to a user watching kid-friendly content would certainly be an odd way to keep customers. If anything, it would behoove a platform like TikTok to keep explicit content away from anybody except those who intentionally seek it out.

The suit misunderstands how algorithms work: While platforms do engineer their algorithms to incentivize users to keep engaging, the way they achieve it is by selecting content that is similar to what a user is already interacting with. The only way it would prioritize inappropriate content is if the user had already watched videos like that. If anything, algorithms cut through the noise and deprioritize content not related to whatever the user has not interacted with or has actively avoided.

Indiana's claims of fraud seem aggressive, but it's likely that anything more moderate would have failed: In October, a judge threw out a lawsuit against TikTok relating to content on the platform. The judge cited Section 230, the law that largely protects platforms from liability for user-generated content.

Ultimately that's exactly what is at issue here: Some users generate content, other users view that content, and algorithms try to keep each of them engaged. The idea of algorithms intentionally funneling inappropriate content to unsuspecting users not only defies logic but is antithetical to how a social media platform keeps users.

Comments

[mad.casual]

The suit misunderstands how algorithms work: While platforms do engineer their algorithms to incentivize users to keep engaging, the way they achieve it is by selecting content that is similar to what a user is already interacting with.

Uh, that doesn't bolster your case, either case, that the app isn't providing them inappropriate content or that you, and not them, understand how algorithms work, Joe.

[mad.casual]

Similarly, Joe, you point out:
But as Reason's Liz Wolfe pointed out last year, TikTok took down the "devious licks" hashtag, and there is no indication of how many of the videos constituted actual theft or vandalism or how many were faked for clout.

Did the algorithms take the hashtag down or did the algorithms distribute content, per their intentional construction, that a human at TikTok said "Holy shit! That ain't right!" and pulled down in spite of the algorithm's intent to distribute them?

It's almost like you don't really have a clue about any of this Joe and just, for some unknown reason or literal prejudice, prefer TikTok over Indiana. Otherwise, yeah, pretty much everyone on Earth with an IQ at least on par with Donald Trump knows TikTok is a fucking anti-social trojan horse.

[DorianMount]

I am making $92 an hour working from home. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning $16,000 a month by working on a laptop, that was truly astounding for me, she prescribed for me to attempt it simply.
Everybody must try this job now by just using this website. http://www.LiveJob247.com

[TheresaMurray]

Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit..
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK. 🙂

HERE====)> http://WWW.WORKSFUL.COM

[AlyssaNeal]

I get paid over 190$ per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I never thought I’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over 10k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless. Heres what I’ve been doing..

HERE====)> http://WWW.RICHSALARIES.COM

[Rossami]

The accusation in the lawsuit is not that TikTok is "providing" them content, a verb that implies consent on the side the person being provided, but that TikTok is pushing that content, a verb that implies the absence of consent.

The article is correct that the content being "pushed" is only being pushed by the algorithm because the individual user has already requested that kind of content. Whether the content is "inappropriate" is a value judgment that belongs to the user. Or if the user is a minor, his/her parents. But the bottom line is that the algorithm won't push inappropriate content to any user unless that user has already asked for similarly inappropriate content.

The lawsuit would be on stronger ground if they had tried to argue that 13-17 year olds are not legally allowed to consent to the receipt (algorithmically or otherwise) of certain types of inappropriate content. But that argument would founder on the individual parents' failure to activate the available parental controls.

I agree that TikTok is an anti-social trojan horse but the answer is for parents to do their damn jobs and parent. This lawsuit is a loser.

[mad.casual]

Categorically wrong at every step.

First, you’re obvious semantic retardation over ‘provided’ vs. ‘pushed’ is obvious. Whether I request a product and the proprietor “pushes it” over the counter to me or whether they “provide it” whether I requested it or not is, again, retarded semantics wrt “pushed” vs. “provided”.

Per that specific point, if I’ve never used TikTok (which I haven’t) and go to the TikTok webpage, it *will* push/provide me with content absent any preferences on my part, it will provide/push material at me. The algorithm may be simply “most popular” or “latest” or “age appropriate” or other, but it definitively pushed and pushed without preference on my part. Further, if I select one video to watch it won’t just recommend I watch the same one video over and over again, it, the algorithm, will recommend/provide/push new content into my feed. The idea that the algorithm will push just your view history on you and nothing else is just as dumb as it will, or won’t, push barely-legal porn on children.

The lawsuit would be on stronger ground if they had tried to argue that 13-17 year olds are not legally allowed to consent to the receipt (algorithmically or otherwise) of certain types of inappropriate content.

Incorrect. This conceptualization is backwards. 13+ yr. olds are generally allowed to be tracked and consent to online material. Only children below 13 are specifically protected and only protected in the US by US law and as US Corporations.

I agree that TikTok is an anti-social trojan horse but the answer is for parents to do their damn jobs and parent.

It can’t be both? The people fooled by the actual Trojan Horse were adults, the euphemism regards the practice as deceptive and immoral regardless of the recipient’s age or ability.

You used to be more intelligent than this. Any more you’re just a zero-intelligence Reason support mouthpiece.

[dadif]

Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit..???? AND GOOD LUCK.:)

HERE====)>OPEN>> ONLINE USA WORKS

[Bill Falcon]

Tik Tok needs to be shut down. Its heroin for kids.

[Leizl]

One only needs to see how Tik Tok is used in China to understand that they are absolutely funneling inappropriate things to kids. Also the author clearly has no idea of the vast scope of different kinds of "algorithms" that can be created, if he thinks that only one thing is an algorithm. One kind of algorithm feeds you similar content as you have previously shown interest in, but an algorithm is just a computer based process or set of rules.

[Bender B. Rodriguez]

I fully understand the sentiment here. This app is like a brain suck. If I didn't use it for marketing work, I would never use it at all. I hate what it does to my kids' sense of time and temperament, which has led me to severely limit his usage. They're great kids when they're "clean" from small screens.

Here's a couple of interesting tidbits: ByteDance doesn't have TikTok available in China. China's version of the app limits daily usage, and only shows instructional and educational videos. When middle-school aged children in China were asked what their dream job is, the most popular answer is "astronaut." In America, the answer is "influencer."

I'm not saying that I advocate this legal action. I'd like parents and users to be more responsible for their app usage. I'm saying that I understand the concern.

[mad.casual]

I’m not saying that I advocate this legal action. I’d like parents and users to be more responsible for their app usage. I’m saying that I understand the concern.

I actually support the legal action. Legally, an American corporation can't track, store, ask/monitor, anything about a web user 13 or under. This is US law. If you try to sign up for a Gmail account, under the age of 13, you will be denied. If you registered as an adult and change your age back to below 12, expect to at least lose access to your account for a little while. However, Bytedance is not a US company. They can freely push content at 10 yr. olds and Apple's "12+" rating means precisely dick. It is between disinformation and a retarded compounding of the problem. Unlike the old paradigm of up-front moderation, like the MPAA performed, if someone pushed a bunch of snuff porn through TikTok, Apple's page would still give it a 12+ rating. Because, once again, their collective algorithm is "rate once, publish first, moderate later".

As per the usual internet S230 and other social "network of tubes"/"highways of information"/"we own it but we don't" bullshit, I don't agree that there should be a law preventing 13 yr. olds from accessing the internet as agents of themselves, if there are issues, they should be hashed out in various courts of law but, if they are going to be legislated *or* hashed out in courts of law, the law should be applied equally and it is not. The byzantine bullshit is such that the only logical foothold attainable by anyone, adult or child, not working for the government, managing a billion-dollar tech company, or both is "Fuck you, that's why."

[BillyG]

You're doing it wrong. You need to prevent your kids from using TikTok completely. Limiting isn't good enough. The algorithm they use for outside China is digital cocaine.

[Dillinger]

> Chinese Trojan

battle outfits would be too confusing.

[rev-arthur-l-kuckland]

Tic tic is a Chinese key logger
The ccp already admitted to using tic toc to swing the elections towards the dems

[EmmaSullivan]

Finally! There is a great way how you can work online from your home using your computer and earn in the same time... Only basic internet knowledge needed and fast internet connection...

Earn as much as $3000 a week.........>>> onlinecareer1

[Brett Bellmore]

"Recommending explicit videos to a user watching kid-friendly content would certainly be an odd way to keep customers."

Unclear about the concept of a "Chinese Trojan Horse"? Like all Chinese companies serving customers outside China, TicTok has to do the government's bidding.

Does getting caught building back doors into your routers, key loggers into your software, pushing content to children that parents find objectionable, hurt the bottom line? The Chinese government doesn't CARE. They care that you're advancing their own aims. Nothing else.

EVERY Chinese product is a Trojan horse. They're not allowed to NOT be Trojan horses!

[Laura Sandoval]

Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit.. ???? AND GOOD LUCK.:)

HERE====)> http://www.worksclick.com