Partially, yes? I don’t
see that as particularly controversial at this point. We are beyond consensus manufacturing and into explicit governmental crackdowns on anti-Israel voices in the US.
It’s for money and power. Because of the partisan nature of the power grab, a certain grab bag of evangelical, fossil fuel and anti-gay tenets are going to get reïnforced. But treating those as the cause dangerously misses that this is being started at home.
Also, I wasn't invoking some dog-whistle. I was using the same phraseology of the Zionists. From the CEO of the ADL, Jonathan Greenblatt, addressing the Israeli Knesset[1] :
"Pushing extremists off Wikipedia might not seem equal to the challenge of pushing Hezbollah to north of the Litani River; capturing TikTok might seem less meaningful than holding on to Mount Hermon ; libelous tweets certainly might seem less deadly than missiles from Yemen but this is urgent because the next war will be decided based on how Israel and its allies perform online as much as offline. Make no mistake it's real we saw that in the propaganda that anti-israel groups pushed out in America on October 7th accusing Israel of committing genocide."
He describes Tiktok as a target to be captured, comparing it to a mountain in Syria which Israel conquered late last year in its unannounced invasion of Syria. They make no bones about the fact that our minds are just another battlespace in this war that they're waging.
It's important to remember that the ultra-powerful and wealthy live whatever life they want to live regardless of what their media companies promote.
Someone can own a media company, have it push very specific political ideologies with the goal of turning people against each other and gaining power for themselves. By pushing antagonistic media, they can prop up fringe political figures who'd be more willing to help them with their political goals. (E.g. tax policies that help the wealthy person's companies.)
They can still live whatever life they want, even going against the ideologies the media companies espouse, because they're rich enough that the fallout doesn't impact them.
They're living a very different kind of life than us.
BTW, I'm not explicitly arguing that Larry Ellison is doing this -- I don't have the context or background on that. I am saying that his media companies will 1. do things to help Larry's interests (which are probably political), and 2. that doesn't have to be aligned with however he lives his personal life, since he's effectively immune.
> Larry Ellison’s daughter is gay. Why do you think her brother and father are going to infuse Paramount with anti-gay bigotry?
Sorry, I'm speaking generally. The people in power broadly align with these policies. That means that when they gain control over a pillar of industry, they're broadly going to do influence it to some combination of those ends. The reason they gained power isn't to do those things. Ellison isn't taking control of TikTok to influence the Israel narrative. But when he takes control of it, as a result of the contours of powers that are MAGA, he will probably be forced to put forward an anti-Palestinian editorial bias.
There is a lot of tail wagging the dog conspiracy in this thread. I'm pushing back on that.
Current Oracle CEO Safra Catz lives in Palm Beach and is a frequent visitor to Mar-a-lago. She is actually a big Israel supporter, visiting and donating money often.
In large part, yes. There is also Trump, Republicans and their drive to carve out a bigger conservative-space in a liberal-dominated media landscape. There is Silicon valley, the rising digital-military-industrial complex, the china hawks, the intelligence apparatus and the security state, and the usual self-interests of the billionaire class. All of these forces are currently colluding to control the narrative (i.e. minds) in their favor. But I will argue the Israel angle is a big part of it which is being under-reported on ( by design).
Trump went after TikTok in his first presidency but was ultimately unsuccessful. It was the Biden government that successully banned TikTok last year in a bipartisan bill. What was the impetus then and why did it succeed? Listen to Charlie Kirk's personal take[1] on why Tiktok got banned (and how the right capitalized on it) :
[..] the buried lede of the October 7th was that it it got TikTok banned and remember the Tiktok ban stalled based on just China concerns, but TikTok was the the hub of a lot of the anti-israel sentiment that was brewing with Gen Z and all of a sudden the TikTok ban got resurfaced. Mitt Romney said at a security conference "we are Banning Tik Tok because it is sowing anti-israel sentiment in the United States."
Multiple congressman and representatives have cited anti-israel sentiment as their reason [2].
Tiktok recently hired Erica Mindel - an instructor in the Armoured Corps in the Israeli army’s spokesperson’s unit - to lead the company’s hate speech policy. The potential hiring of Bari Weiss to head the CBS news division reveals a similar underlying motive. One which is laid out by the CEO of the ADL, in his address to the Israeli Knesset[3] :
"Pushing extremists off Wikipedia might not seem equal to the challenge of pushing Hezbollah to north of the Litani River; capturing TikTok might seem less meaningful than holding on to Mount Hermon (A mountain peak in Syria which Israel conquered in their undeclared invasion of Syria late last year); libelous tweets certainly might seem less deadly than missiles from Yemen but this is urgent because the next war will be decided based on how Israel and its allies perform online as much as offline. Make no mistake it's real we saw that in the propaganda that anti-israel groups pushed out in America on October 7th accusing Israel of committing genocide."
Now would be a good time to remind people that freedom of speech, whether you like it or not, applies to large entities as well as individuals. TikTok is as free to boost a pro-Israel narrative as you are to boost an anti-Israel narrative.
Stating that there’s some sort of “mind control” at work is both false and insults people’s intelligence. For one, there is literally no way to “control” someone’s mind. Influence is not control. It’s not the same as shaping a narrative. I think you ought to choose your words more responsibly and accurately.
What’s needed is to protect the marketplace of ideas from which people can choose for themselves. Some people will carry larger megaphones and have bigger venues than others. But being louder and bigger doesn’t assure the outcome you want. History has illustrated time and time again that minority opinions can, in the fullness of time, become majority ones.
And if they don’t, it doesn’t necessarily mean the opinion wasn’t heard. (I doubt people haven’t heard that Israel is committing atrocities or that Gaza is a horrible mess.) Some ideas just fail for lack of popularity or traction. You might think you’re right, but the majority just might not agree with you.
And even if major media outlets are all pushing your favorite narrative, that’s no guarantee of an outcome, either. If every major media outlet came on TV and social media tomorrow and said hemlock juice is good for you, I wouldn’t buy it.
>TikTok is as free to boost a pro-Israel narrative as you are to boost an anti-Israel narrative.
I boost an anti-israel narrative by exercising my right to free speech. In this case, The zionists are boosting a pro-israel narrative by excising free speech like mine - by banning Tiktok, then coercing Bytedance into selling their US subsidiary, and installing a IDF spokesperson to censor and moderate it.
>Stating that there’s some sort of “mind control” at work is both false and insults people’s intelligence. For one, there is literally no way to “control” someone’s mind. Influence is not control. It’s not the same as shaping a narrative. I think you ought to choose your words more responsibly and accurately.
I didn't mean to imply "mind-control". More like narrative-control and thought-policing. It may have came off differently than i intended.
> What’s needed is to protect the marketplace of ideas from which people can choose for themselves. Some people will carry larger megaphones and have bigger venues than others. But being louder and bigger doesn’t assure the outcome you want. History has illustrated time and time again that minority opinions can, in the fullness of time, become majority ones
What we are witnessing is a hostile-takeover in the marketplace of ideas. See above.
> History has illustrated time and time again that minority opinions can, in the fullness of time, become majority ones.
This might be a desperate measure that is unlikely to work in the long-term. Even Israelis, and their supporters in the conservative movement think that they have lost the support of the next generation or two. Which is probably why Netanyahu is going all out in this brief window of opportunity. It might be enough to buy them some breathing space in the near-term while they complete their genocide / ethnic-cleansing and re-occupation of the Gaza strip (with possible involvement of US ground-forces or contractors), complete their formal annexation of the West bank, and continue their invasion and annexation of Southern Syria. It (coupled with Trump's clampdown on college campuses) may also be aimed to preempt any vietnam-style protests against a second war with Iran (which will certainly US troops and seems all but certain to happen in the near future).
>History has illustrated time and time again that minority opinions can, in the fullness of time, become majority one
“One day, when it’s safe, when there’s no personal downside to calling a thing what it is, when it’s too late to hold anyone accountable, everyone will have always been against this.” The time to speak out and act is now.
Partially, yes? I don’t see that as particularly controversial at this point. We are beyond consensus manufacturing and into explicit governmental crackdowns on anti-Israel voices in the US.
So if I say, here or anywhere, that I disagree with Israel’s actions related to Gaza, I should be afraid?
Well, here I am. Come and get me.
> to support Israel? Is that what this is about?
It’s for money and power. Because of the partisan nature of the power grab, a certain grab bag of evangelical, fossil fuel and anti-gay tenets are going to get reïnforced. But treating those as the cause dangerously misses that this is being started at home.
I'd like to hear from the person I'm responding to, as it sounds an awful lot like a dog whistle.
I replied to your original comment.
Also, I wasn't invoking some dog-whistle. I was using the same phraseology of the Zionists. From the CEO of the ADL, Jonathan Greenblatt, addressing the Israeli Knesset[1] :
He describes Tiktok as a target to be captured, comparing it to a mountain in Syria which Israel conquered late last year in its unannounced invasion of Syria. They make no bones about the fact that our minds are just another battlespace in this war that they're waging.[1] - https://x.com/DelGroyp/status/1856577467596845279 https://xcancel.com/DelGroyp/status/1856577467596845279
> anti-gay
Larry Ellison’s daughter is gay. Why do you think her brother and father are going to infuse Paramount with anti-gay bigotry?
It's important to remember that the ultra-powerful and wealthy live whatever life they want to live regardless of what their media companies promote.
Someone can own a media company, have it push very specific political ideologies with the goal of turning people against each other and gaining power for themselves. By pushing antagonistic media, they can prop up fringe political figures who'd be more willing to help them with their political goals. (E.g. tax policies that help the wealthy person's companies.)
They can still live whatever life they want, even going against the ideologies the media companies espouse, because they're rich enough that the fallout doesn't impact them.
They're living a very different kind of life than us.
BTW, I'm not explicitly arguing that Larry Ellison is doing this -- I don't have the context or background on that. I am saying that his media companies will 1. do things to help Larry's interests (which are probably political), and 2. that doesn't have to be aligned with however he lives his personal life, since he's effectively immune.
> Larry Ellison’s daughter is gay. Why do you think her brother and father are going to infuse Paramount with anti-gay bigotry?
Sorry, I'm speaking generally. The people in power broadly align with these policies. That means that when they gain control over a pillar of industry, they're broadly going to do influence it to some combination of those ends. The reason they gained power isn't to do those things. Ellison isn't taking control of TikTok to influence the Israel narrative. But when he takes control of it, as a result of the contours of powers that are MAGA, he will probably be forced to put forward an anti-Palestinian editorial bias.
There is a lot of tail wagging the dog conspiracy in this thread. I'm pushing back on that.
> Ellison isn't taking control of TikTok to influence the Israel narrative.
he might be doing it for money, but if he wasnt going to influence the Israel narrative in a specific way, he wouldnt be allowed to own TikTok
Current Oracle CEO Safra Catz lives in Palm Beach and is a frequent visitor to Mar-a-lago. She is actually a big Israel supporter, visiting and donating money often.
So what?
In large part, yes. There is also Trump, Republicans and their drive to carve out a bigger conservative-space in a liberal-dominated media landscape. There is Silicon valley, the rising digital-military-industrial complex, the china hawks, the intelligence apparatus and the security state, and the usual self-interests of the billionaire class. All of these forces are currently colluding to control the narrative (i.e. minds) in their favor. But I will argue the Israel angle is a big part of it which is being under-reported on ( by design).
Trump went after TikTok in his first presidency but was ultimately unsuccessful. It was the Biden government that successully banned TikTok last year in a bipartisan bill. What was the impetus then and why did it succeed? Listen to Charlie Kirk's personal take[1] on why Tiktok got banned (and how the right capitalized on it) :
Multiple congressman and representatives have cited anti-israel sentiment as their reason [2].Tiktok recently hired Erica Mindel - an instructor in the Armoured Corps in the Israeli army’s spokesperson’s unit - to lead the company’s hate speech policy. The potential hiring of Bari Weiss to head the CBS news division reveals a similar underlying motive. One which is laid out by the CEO of the ADL, in his address to the Israeli Knesset[3] :
[1] - https://x.com/DelGroyp/status/1856577467596845279 https://xcancel.com/DelGroyp/status/1856577467596845279[2] - https://theintercept.com/2025/01/09/tiktok-ban-israel-palest... https://archive.is/20250918033631/https://theintercept.com/2...
[3] - https://x.com/infolibnews/status/1968177947724198243 https://xcancel.com/infolibnews/status/1968177947724198243
[4] - https://jewishinsider.com/2025/07/tiktok-hate-speech-manager... , https://www.middleeasteye.net/trending/tiktok-hires-ex-israe...
Now would be a good time to remind people that freedom of speech, whether you like it or not, applies to large entities as well as individuals. TikTok is as free to boost a pro-Israel narrative as you are to boost an anti-Israel narrative.
Stating that there’s some sort of “mind control” at work is both false and insults people’s intelligence. For one, there is literally no way to “control” someone’s mind. Influence is not control. It’s not the same as shaping a narrative. I think you ought to choose your words more responsibly and accurately.
What’s needed is to protect the marketplace of ideas from which people can choose for themselves. Some people will carry larger megaphones and have bigger venues than others. But being louder and bigger doesn’t assure the outcome you want. History has illustrated time and time again that minority opinions can, in the fullness of time, become majority ones.
And if they don’t, it doesn’t necessarily mean the opinion wasn’t heard. (I doubt people haven’t heard that Israel is committing atrocities or that Gaza is a horrible mess.) Some ideas just fail for lack of popularity or traction. You might think you’re right, but the majority just might not agree with you.
And even if major media outlets are all pushing your favorite narrative, that’s no guarantee of an outcome, either. If every major media outlet came on TV and social media tomorrow and said hemlock juice is good for you, I wouldn’t buy it.
>TikTok is as free to boost a pro-Israel narrative as you are to boost an anti-Israel narrative.
I boost an anti-israel narrative by exercising my right to free speech. In this case, The zionists are boosting a pro-israel narrative by excising free speech like mine - by banning Tiktok, then coercing Bytedance into selling their US subsidiary, and installing a IDF spokesperson to censor and moderate it.
>Stating that there’s some sort of “mind control” at work is both false and insults people’s intelligence. For one, there is literally no way to “control” someone’s mind. Influence is not control. It’s not the same as shaping a narrative. I think you ought to choose your words more responsibly and accurately.
I didn't mean to imply "mind-control". More like narrative-control and thought-policing. It may have came off differently than i intended.
> What’s needed is to protect the marketplace of ideas from which people can choose for themselves. Some people will carry larger megaphones and have bigger venues than others. But being louder and bigger doesn’t assure the outcome you want. History has illustrated time and time again that minority opinions can, in the fullness of time, become majority ones
What we are witnessing is a hostile-takeover in the marketplace of ideas. See above.
> History has illustrated time and time again that minority opinions can, in the fullness of time, become majority ones.
This might be a desperate measure that is unlikely to work in the long-term. Even Israelis, and their supporters in the conservative movement think that they have lost the support of the next generation or two. Which is probably why Netanyahu is going all out in this brief window of opportunity. It might be enough to buy them some breathing space in the near-term while they complete their genocide / ethnic-cleansing and re-occupation of the Gaza strip (with possible involvement of US ground-forces or contractors), complete their formal annexation of the West bank, and continue their invasion and annexation of Southern Syria. It (coupled with Trump's clampdown on college campuses) may also be aimed to preempt any vietnam-style protests against a second war with Iran (which will certainly US troops and seems all but certain to happen in the near future).
>History has illustrated time and time again that minority opinions can, in the fullness of time, become majority one
“One day, when it’s safe, when there’s no personal downside to calling a thing what it is, when it’s too late to hold anyone accountable, everyone will have always been against this.” The time to speak out and act is now.