Such Doublespeak—the word empower really means enfeeble and privacy its opposite.
They're silently collecting very personal information, without permission, from people that not users.
You can't object to Tiktok collecting information about your mental health because you're not told they're collecting it in the first place.
The "success" of GDPR is greatly overstated here. In practice, breaching it is the winning strategy.
Where is the lie?
The article details how Tiktok is using the tracking to collect data on non-tiktok users to build profiles of people without their consent, and trying to say that people consent to it in their "downflow" usage of sites that have tiktok embeds.
Again, even if others are doing it, it's shitty and unethical.
- Are we really empowered to stop being surveilled?
- Does the customization of my experience have any bearing with the actual allegation of tracking non-users on the internet?
- Are advertising pixels transparently shown to those who never have been on TikTok but are monitored all the same?
(edit: To be clear, Doublespeak isn't about a lie as much as words losing their entire meaning and being used to hide truth with comfortable phrasinggs)
Why are they still spending hundreds of millions on ads with athletes and other things that provoke a healthy image?
Because we're all monkey-brained. There are uncountable examples of this.
These pixels are a horse of a different color. They grab my info with no consent given (hiding behind "But the site we have the pixel on has to inform you, not us!" is a complete and utter cop out) and then make a profit selling or using it.
Totally different circumstances, and this shouldn't be ok.
Because they are foolish enough to believe that advertising actually works to influence people's behavior. Or because they are afraid that their bosses are similarly foolish, so they will get punished if they try to do Coca-Cola the favor of cutting that extreme waste from the budget.