Submitted Fact Check Request: One of our subscribers submitted a request asking us to fact check an article published by CNN titled “MrBeast is officially bidding for TikTok.” As always, users can submit similar requests via our free service, allowing us to investigate claims and deliver transparent, accurate results.
Conclusion: While the article provides an engaging narrative, it contains several examples of unverified claims, missing context, and potential exaggeration regarding MrBeast’s intentions and the events surrounding TikTok’s potential sale. Let’s break it down for clarity.
Deep Dive into Misinformation and Missing Context
1. Is MrBeast serious about buying TikTok? The article heavily implies that MrBeast, alongside a group of investors, is actively bidding for TikTok. However, the statement “Okay fine, I’ll buy TikTok so it doesn’t get banned,” made by MrBeast on January 13th on X (formerly Twitter), was clearly tongue-in-cheek. While his lawyer noted seriousness to CNN, no evidence was provided to confirm a legitimate or formalized bid by MrBeast or his consortium. Additionally, the quotation from MrBeast’s TikTok video where he mentions, “I just got out of a meeting with a bunch of billionaires,” should be scrutinized as part of his online persona, which often incorporates satirical or dramatic overstatements.
2. Did MrBeast lead the investor group? The article names Jesse Tinsley, founder of Employer.com, as the leader of the investor group attempting to acquire TikTok. Contradictorily, the headline and text heavily focus on MrBeast, creating an exaggerated sense of his involvement. There is little verifiable information indicating that MrBeast is more than a high-profile participant or spokesperson. Readers might be misled into believing he is spearheading the initiative, which is factually inaccurate based on the evidence presented.
3. Erroneous References to Donald Trump: Multiple references to Donald Trump’s presidency are riddled with inaccuracies that must be addressed. The article states that President Trump signed an executive order delaying the TikTok ban by 75 days, following his inauguration on Monday. However, Donald Trump’s presidency ended in January 2021, and in this context (January 2025), it is nearly impossible for him to be the current president without any mention of an extraordinary political event, which the article completely omits. This oversight casts significant doubt on the article’s editorial accuracy.
4. Misleading Timeline About TikTok’s History: The article correctly notes that TikTok has faced recurring legislative challenges regarding its ties to ByteDance, a Chinese company. However, the timeline provided muddles key facts. For example, the claim that “President Trump, during his first term in the White House, issued an executive order intending to ban TikTok” fails to mention that the order was blocked by federal courts and was never enforced. By omitting this essential context, the article creates a more sensationalized narrative of TikTok’s legal troubles.
5. Lack of Evidence for Supreme Court Decision: The article states, “The Supreme Court upheld the federal law banning TikTok unless it is sold to a non-China-based company.” This is a significant legal development, but no evidence or details are provided about the supposed Supreme Court ruling. A thorough search of reputable and accessible public records reveals no such recent ruling regarding TikTok. This absence of evidence casts doubt on the very foundation of the article’s claims.
User Question Answered: Is MrBeast genuinely serious about buying TikTok?
The claim that MrBeast is seriously bidding for TikTok is largely speculative and arguably overstated in the article. While his lawyer expressed a degree of seriousness about the investment efforts, much of the evidence points to MrBeast leveraging his public platform to engage his audience rather than a structured acquisition attempt. Without transparency about the consortium’s activities or financial backing, it remains unclear whether this is a genuine business move or a publicity stunt aimed at bolstering his online persona. DBUNK advises caution against taking these claims at face value without more concrete evidence.
Final Verdict
The article published by CNN contains a mix of truth, exaggeration, and missing context, particularly regarding MrBeast’s role and the intricacies of TikTok’s legal situation. Sensationalized headlines and unverified claims dampen the credibility of the piece. Readers should critically evaluate the plausibility of MrBeast’s involvement and realize that much of the information presented remains unsubstantiated.
Think critically. Stay informed. Fight misinformation. Download the DBUNK App today.
