TikTok can’t stop users from doxxing the Supreme Court
Some videos claim to share conservative judges' credit card info.
Retaliating TikTok users have created an online blitz of protest videos following the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade, and many of these videos claimed to be doxxing the five conservative judges who cast the votes denying the federal right to abortion.
Vice reports that some TikTok videos with thousands of likes, comments, and views had shared home addresses and "supposed credit card information" of conservative judges Supreme Court Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Amy Coney Barrett. According to Snopes and Vice, it has yet to be proven whether the credit card information was accurate or not.
Some, but not all of these videos have been swiftly removed by TikTok. Even if they were removed, though, the information shared in videos is often simply reposted through "smaller and smaller accounts," Vice reported.
In some of the videos, the credit card information is partially censored, seemingly using a thin white line or transparent red box to prevent the app's algorithm from flagging the post for removal.
TikTok responded to the supposed doxxing with a statement to Vice saying that its policies do not prohibit the topic of abortion, but creators must adhere to Community Guidelines that prohibit sharing personally identifiable information. TikTok did not immediately respond to Ars Technica's request for comment on the doxxing attempts.
Although Vice could not verify whether the credit card videos showed judges' actual account information, they confirmed the home addresses featured in videos appeared to be connected to judges in public records databases. Because the addresses are already publicly available, it's not exactly doxxing, but it makes the information easier to find for those planning to protest outside judges' homes.
Doxxing judges can lead to temporary TikTok account bans, but posting the personal information of Supreme Court justices isn't the only way TikTokers are expressing their frustration. There are videos showing protests around the country, and Vice called attention to a trend where users create explainer videos showing "how to debate anti-abortion views" or how to "poison" data collected by period-tracking apps by "posting fake information." The Washington Post recently profiled two influential Gen Z abortion advocates, one pro-choice and one pro-life, discussing how they use the platform to engage thousands in the debate.
Unless TikTok finds a way to more rapidly detect these thinly disguised doxxing videos, expect to continue seeing either videos claiming to share judges' personal information or response videos guffawing at the audacity of the tactic.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2022/06/tiktok-cant-stop-users-from-doxxing-the-supreme-court/
Retaliating TikTok users have created an online blitz of protest videos following the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade, and many of these videos claimed to be doxxing the five conservative judges who cast the votes denying the federal right to abortion.
Vice reports that some TikTok videos with thousands of likes, comments, and views had shared home addresses and "supposed credit card information" of conservative judges Supreme Court Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Amy Coney Barrett. According to Snopes and Vice, it has yet to be proven whether the credit card information was accurate or not.
Some, but not all of these videos have been swiftly removed by TikTok. Even if they were removed, though, the information shared in videos is often simply reposted through "smaller and smaller accounts," Vice reported.
In some of the videos, the credit card information is partially censored, seemingly using a thin white line or transparent red box to prevent the app's algorithm from flagging the post for removal.
TikTok responded to the supposed doxxing with a statement to Vice saying that its policies do not prohibit the topic of abortion, but creators must adhere to Community Guidelines that prohibit sharing personally identifiable information. TikTok did not immediately respond to Ars Technica's request for comment on the doxxing attempts.
Although Vice could not verify whether the credit card videos showed judges' actual account information, they confirmed the home addresses featured in videos appeared to be connected to judges in public records databases. Because the addresses are already publicly available, it's not exactly doxxing, but it makes the information easier to find for those planning to protest outside judges' homes.
Doxxing judges can lead to temporary TikTok account bans, but posting the personal information of Supreme Court justices isn't the only way TikTokers are expressing their frustration. There are videos showing protests around the country, and Vice called attention to a trend where users create explainer videos showing "how to debate anti-abortion views" or how to "poison" data collected by period-tracking apps by "posting fake information." The Washington Post recently profiled two influential Gen Z abortion advocates, one pro-choice and one pro-life, discussing how they use the platform to engage thousands in the debate.
Unless TikTok finds a way to more rapidly detect these thinly disguised doxxing videos, expect to continue seeing either videos claiming to share judges' personal information or response videos guffawing at the audacity of the tactic.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2022/06/tiktok-cant-stop-users-from-doxxing-the-supreme-court/
