[Intralexical]

> users need to act for themselves and optimize their own privacy.

> You need coordination if you want to see the balance changed.

Which is, actually, what the BBC author of TFA is doing, by writing an article as a user, to inform other users so they too can act to protect their privacy.

Seems like industry insiders passing responsibility for their bad practices on to consumers really means they want consumers to stay divided.

[hulitu]

> Which is, actually, what the BBC author of TFA is doing, by writing an article as a user, to inform other users so they too can act to protect their privacy.

No. The author only singles out TikTok. Looks like a paid piece.

A real journalist would have made some research.

[godelski]

  > Seems like industry insiders passing responsibility for their bad practices on to consumers really means they want consumers to stay divided.

I think this is why they also encourage the old trope of "It's not just <X>".

It's a truth, but used in a way that makes people feel powerless. Like the war is already lost. It makes people apathetic, because it makes people overwhelmed. It causes the evangelists to quiet themselves as they become exhausted. It normalizes the behavior. It just becomes another one of the many things we're powerless to fight against, so why even try.

I'm not accusing the OP of doing this, but I do want to point out that it is a strategy being used. Not misinformation, not disinformation, but malinformation. Truths used in a specific way, often lacking context. It is the same way people dog whistle, hiding their true intent in normalized speech (it's not a dog whistle if everyone can hear it, that's just a whistle).