[runtime_blues]

I find it hard to interpret such whataboutism as sincere.

If you care about these perceived abuses by US tech companies, why wouldn't you applaud the outcry against TikTok? At the very least, it moves the needle in the right direction. It increases the awareness of industry practices and helps flesh out some constraints. Even if you're of the mindset that there's no practical difference between the US government and an authoritarian communist dictatorship that murdered millions of its compatriots for having the wrong political views, why defend their right to do the things you hate?

[nebulousthree]

It's because the pot is calling the kettle black and then getting annoyed when it is called out on it. It's not that complicated, and it doesn't call into question the legitimacy of the criticism. It just says: "you've had shit under your own shoe this whole time and only now that I got some under mine are you complaining about the smell"

[alpos]

I think people find it insincere because pointing out that both parties in question have a problem doesn't change anything about the situation or the problems.

It is most often used as an attempt at a defense by calling out other guilty parties. Yes, we should like to live in a world where anyone calling out a problem or injustice only does so from a place of unimpeachable moral authority. But we do not live in such a world so we are still left with the need to address problems where and when we can get the social and political will to do so. Using finger pointing as a defense has the effect of making the problem seem insurmountable and therefore sapping the will to fix it.

The more genuine admission might be to simply say, "I admit I have shit on my shoe, and it does stink; however, if you are to hold me to account for that, then I demand you also be held to account".

With that approach people have a much harder time seeing the complaint as merely a self-defense by way of finger pointing and it's much more likely to be taken seriously.

This is where many people in the US are probably at on, say, the Trump indictment. Can't really say it shouldn't happen, he has almost certainly broken a long list of laws for his whole career. But that also shouldn't be the end of it, more like "Great start getting a corrupt and lawless politician in jail! Who's next on that list? When does their indictment begin?".

[ImPostingOnHN]

you're literally describing logical fallacies: tu quoque and whataboutism

in fact, "the pot calling the kettle black" is a textbook example of a tu quoque logical fallacy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pot_calling_the_kettle_black

[pphysch]

"Whataboutism" is not a logical fallacy, in fact it is the opposite.

"We need to do X because A is bad because it does Y"

"But we also do Y, shouldn't we also do X for us?"

Logic says yes. "Whataboutism" was invented to kill basic logical inference, in the context of the bipolar Cold War era. Using that term to kill discussion and browbeat is anti-intellectualism, pure and simple.

[ImPostingOnHN]

whataboutism is simply another word for tu quoque, which, as previously indicated, is a logical fallacy

indeed, the whataboutism itself is intended to kill discussion of the initial topic (in your example, A doing Y, not simply Y), hence why it's a logical fallacy, too

[pphysch]

There's a world of difference between saying "you're a hypocrite, stop talking" and adding (uncomfortable) context to a discussion.

[ImPostingOnHN]

you are absolutely, 100% right here, and whataboutism is the first one, not the second one

in this case, the goal was to stop people from talking about China's actions and instead deflect to someone else's actions

that might explain why Whataboutism, invented by russian propagandists, is explicitly described as a subtype of the tu quoque logical fallacy:

"From a logical and argumentative point of view it is considered a variant of the tu-quoque pattern (Latin 'you too', term for a counter-accusation), which is a subtype of the ad-hominem argument."[0]

[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism