PELARANGAN PLATFORM TIKTOK OLEH NEGARA BARAT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Platform Tiktok merupakan platform populer dan didukung oleh masyarakat dunia. Namun, paltfrom Tiktok justru mendapatkan pelarangan oleh sejumlah negara. Platform Tiktok dilarang untuk digunakan pada perangkat pemerintah atas keamanan data. Dari hal tersebut, muncul pertanyaan “bagaimana pelarangan platform Tiktok oleh sejumlah negara?”. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah mendeskripsikan pelarangan dari platform Tiktok dan menjelaskan bagaimana pelarangan yang dilakukan sejumlah negara pada platform Tiktok. Dalam penelitian ini, penulis menggunakan konsep pelarangan dalam mendeskripsikan dan menjelaskan bagaimana tindakan yang dilakukan suatu negara atas platform Tiktok. Penulis menggunakan metode pendekatan kualitatif eksplanatif dengan fokus penelitian pada 5 negara barat yaitu Amerika Serikat, Inggris, Australia, Uni Eropa dan Kanada. Dengan jenis sumber data sekunder, teknik pengumpulan yang digunakan berupa studi dokumen berdasarkan website kementerian, laman berita dan laporan resmi. Teknik pengumpulan yang digunakan: kondensasi data, data display dan penarikan kesimpulan. Penelitian ini menemukan sejumlah regulasi yang dilakukan oleh negara barat pada platform Tiktok sebagai suatu ancaman keamanan. Pelarangan platform Tiktok tidak hanya sekedar perlindungan atas data tetapi juga adanya upaya dinamika kekuasaan global dalam mempertahankan dominasi hegemoni barat atas ruang digital dan membatasi pengaruh Tiongkok. Perlindungan atas data menjadi alasan yang digunakan dalam membenarkan tindakan politik yang dilakukan negara barat dalam pelarangan platform Tiktok. Dimana sebenarnya terdapat tujuan geopolitik terkait mengamankan ruang digital global, melindungi perusahaan teknologi barat, membatasi Tiongkok dan melindungi kepentingan ekonomi-politik dari negaranya itu sendiri. Kata Kunci: Pelarangan, Platform Tiktok, Digital Sovereignity, Regulasi The TikTok platform is popular and supported by people around the world. However, the TikTok platform has been banned by a number of countries. The TikTok platform is prohibited from being used on government devices for data security reasons. This raises the question, “How did a number of countries ban the TikTok platform?” The purpose of this study is to describe the ban on the TikTok platform and explain how a number of countries banned the TikTok platform. In this study, the author uses the concept of prohibition to describe and explain how a country took action against the TikTok platform. The author uses an explanatory qualitative approach with a research focus on five Western countries, namely the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, the European Union, and Canada. With secondary data sources, the collection technique used is document study based on ministry websites, news pages, and official reports. The collection techniques used are data condensation, data display, and conclusion drawing. This study found a number of regulations imposed by Western countries on the TikTok platform as a security threat. The ban on the TikTok platform is not only about data protection but also an effort to maintain Western hegemonic dominance in the digital space and limit China's influence. Data protection is the reason used to justify the political actions taken by Western countries in banning the Tiktok platform. In reality, there are geopolitical objectives related to securing global digital space, protecting Western technology companies, limiting China, and protecting the economic and political interests of their own countries. Keywords: Ban, Tiktok Platform, Digital Sovereignity, Regulation
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.073 | 0.043 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".