TikTok’s Algorithm Defines Our Digital Sociality & Culture (2024)
While some may only consider TikTok to be a platform full of dance challenges and self-proclaimed influencers, I consider it to be a medium crucial to our understanding of our digital culture. TikTok has seen rapid success since its introduction to the United States in 2018, and as of today, it is estimated that the platform has at least 148 million American users(1). With about half of the total population on TikTok, this situates the platform amongst competitors Facebook and Instagram as one of the most popular social media platforms in the United States. The success of TikTok’s short-form video content combined with the platform’s increasing user growth prompted the Meta platforms to follow suit and place more of an emphasis on short-form videos through the introduction of the “Reels” page. TikTok’s influence on the values of its competitors is only the first indication of the platform’s potential to redefine our digital culture, and I believe more scholarship should be dedicated to understanding the true extent of this cultural transformation. I contend that it is the digital affordances of TikTok, such as the algorithm and the creative and collaborative features, that are responsible for TikTok’s success and produce a unique digital culture that only exists within TikTok’s media landscape. Moreover, I argue that TikTok has cultivated an online community that is fully dependent on the platform’s algorithmically recommended content for social connection, which ultimately redefines our digital sociality and solidifies the platform’s value as a significant cultural artifact of the twenty-first century.
Since the platform’s technical structure is central to my claim, I will begin with an explanation of the algorithm, TikTok’s most important technical feature, to foreground my analysis of its role in determining user sociality. I will then discuss how TikTok’s technical structure produces a sense of “experiential seriality”(2) that is attributed with high levels of engagement and altered experiences of time. Subsequently, I will examine the niche communities or “sides” of TikTok that have emerged from the implementation of the algorithm in order to argue the dependency these communities have on the platform’s technical structure. Following that, I will examine specific creative and collaborative technical features to reveal how the platform fosters user participation in cultural production through those features. After that, I will explore the mimetic principles that are employed by the platform to illustrate how the digital culture on TikTok grows. This will then lead into my discussion of the homophilic tendencies produced by the algorithm, in which I will consider how these tendencies shape TikTok’s digital culture. I will then examine the role of algorithmic visibility in determining the content that is popularized and circulated on the platform. Finally, I will conclude by tying together how the aforementioned analyses indicate that TikTok’s technical structure redefines our digital sociality and proves the platform’s value as a cultural artifact of the twenty-first century. By focusing on the platform’s digital affordances and technical structure, I will unveil how TikTok has created a digital media culture in which all user experiences are algorithmically constructed and mediated.
TikTok’s embedded algorithm is arguably the most valuable technical feature of the platform. Every experience on TikTok, whether that be as a creator or as a consumer, is structured by the algorithm. While all social media platforms govern themselves through some sort of algorithm, TikTok’s algorithm seems to stand out in discussions of social media platforms due to its somewhat uncanny ability to determine individual interests. This can be observed through the platform’s highly personalized user recommendation feed known as the “For You Page” (or “FYP”). While the platform also oPers a “Following” page where users can view a content feed solely comprised of content from users they follow, the technical design of the platform positions the FYP as the landing page, which indicates the platform’s preference for users to watch content from that feed. The FYP is unique to each user and oPers content tailored to the user’s interests based on their previous actions on the platform. In order to determine the type of content each user prefers, the algorithm analyzes user behaviors by tracking their watch time and level of engagement with each video. This constant analysis of user behaviors results in the construction of each user’s personal FYP, which is immediately presented to them upon opening the app and features content recommended specifically to them based on their most recent behaviors on the platform.
An important characteristic of TikTok’s algorithm is its ability to alter users’ time perception, which is part of the motivation for positioning the FYP as the platform’s landing page. Users are given unlimited access to personalized recommendations through the FYP because the page is structured as a continuous flow of content. This endless feed keeps users engaged because there is no way to predict what content the algorithm will suggest next, so users are stimulated by these endless possibilities to keep consuming content. The spontaneity associated with the FYP is also what drives users to choose to consume algorithmically recommended content as opposed to content from users they follow. The platform’s decision to structure content in this way greatly impacts how users experience content because it results in what Jake Pitre refers to as “experiential seriality” – a "platformized aesthetic of enforced continuity in the infrastructural pursuit of total user dependency"(3). In other words, TikTok’s technical infrastructure is specifically designed to keep users engaged for as long as possible by providing a never-ending flow of content that prioritizes user dependency on the platform. In turn, this structure fosters constant feelings of anticipation and excitement that effect users’ perception of time and increase their reliance on the platform for its unpredictable yet personalized algorithm. Furthermore, Pitre’s concept emphasizes how it is the interconnected and repetitive nature of content consumption structured by TikTok’s algorithm that is responsible for the warped sense of time that has come to be associated with TikTok’s digital culture(4).
Given that the algorithm’s main objective is to structure content, users become positioned in a relational state of “algorithmic closeness” in which their connection to other users on the FYP is formed through their shared experience in consuming algorithmically recommended content(5). This means that users cultivate connections and experience a sense of closeness to other users predominantly through the consumption of content presented to them by the algorithm itself. Since the FYP positions users in a state of algorithmic closeness, one might imagine that this would drive users to view content on the “Following” page in order to have a more personal connection with the content they consume. However, this positioning has actually become part of the appeal for the platform because it oPers users the chance to cultivate relationships with other users based on similar interests(6). Moreover, algorithmic closeness has led to the formation of niche digital communities on TikTok that are fully dependent on the algorithm for connection to other community members. Often referred to as “sides” of the platform, these communities only exist on TikTok and are oriented around a particular genre of content that has already been established by the algorithm(7). These sides are crucial to TikTok’s algorithm because they are the categories in which users are placed after the algorithm has determined that their platform behaviors align with the typical behaviors of users already categorized within a particular side. By possessing both the ability to create sides and the ability to then place users as audience members within those sides, TikTok’s algorithm has the power to determine which sides of the platform users are exposed to, which in turn impacts the digital communities and users that they can then interact with(8).
It is important to recognize that TikTok is a deeply participatory platform(9). Not only is it crucial for users to interact with content so that the algorithm can determine their interests, but it is also crucial that users participate in the creation of content themselves so that content can be algorithmically recommended to other users categorized within the same side of the platform. TikTok encourages users to become creators by providing a variety of easy-to-use creative and collaborative technical features. If a user is interested in creating their own video, the “+” button situated in the center of the menu bar at the bottom of the screen will quickly take them to the creation page. Once on the creation page, TikTok oPers embedded filters, effects, music, and more features to streamline the creative process. The embedded creative features and user-friendly interface of TikTok indicate that the recruitment of users to become creators lies at the heart of the platform’s technical structure. In addition, the positioning of the creation page button in the center of the menu bar can be viewed as a metaphor for how central content creation is to the platform’s success.
By utilizing any of the aforementioned features, users are effectively transformed from consumers to producers, which is a kind of audience labor often called “prosumerism”(10). Users are taught how and where to access TikTok’s creative and collaborative features as soon as they create an account, which is because TikTok aims to turn every passive consumer into an active content producer(11). As previously discussed, TikTok’s algorithm is designed to “know” each user’s interests in order to provide personalized content recommendations. Since TikTok is reliant on prosumerism for success, this algorithmic design is employed not only as an attempt to increase the time users spend on the platform, but also as means of coaxing users into creating content that is similar to what they personally enjoy. The idea is that when a user consumes algorithmically recommended content “for them,” they will be enticed by the platform’s simplistic technical features to participate in the production of content that contributes to the niche community in which they have been categorized.
In addition to providing tools for creating original content, the platform also invites users to become creators through collaborative technical features. The “duet” and “stitch” features allow users to use any preexisting TikTok as “built-in material for further creation,” and these features can be easily employed from the preexisting content one wishes to collaborate with(12). Selecting one of these collaborative features will quickly bring the user to the creation page where they can record and edit using the same creative features as they would for an original video. Aside from TikTok’s predecessor Musical.ly, the platform’s collaborative features are unique digital affordances that have not been offered on any other major social media platforms(13). Whereas users on other platforms are technically limited from collaborating directly on the platform, TikTok provides the tools necessary to combine content without requiring additional editing software. The integration of these unique features has significantly contributed to the digital culture that has emerged on TikTok because they help to foster user participation in cultural production. When trends or challenges go viral on the platform, it is these collaborative tools that offer users the opportunity to provide their own individual interpretation of the viral content(14). Additionally, TikTok notifies users when their content is used for collaborative creation. The social interactions that transpire between users following a collaboration further demonstrate how TikTok’s digital affordances are essential to the structuring of sociality within the platform’s digital culture.
All of TikTok’s digital affordances indicate that mimetic principles are crucial to the platform’s digital culture and its overall success. The FYP explicitly exhibits these principles through its repetitive sequencing of content within its endless feed, and every time a user utilizes the platform’s creative or collaborative features, it results in the production of content that is an imitation of the original. Simply offering users these technical features does not guarantee their usage, so it is up to the algorithm’s recommendation system to provide content that shows users creative ways in which technical features “should or could be used, which incidentally promotes imitative behaviors”(15). The imitative nature of TikTok’s content promoted by the platform’s technical structure further establishes algorithmic closeness between users because they are connected through their mutual participation in the imitation and replication of preexisting content. Moreover, the mimetic principles fundamental to the platform’s success reveal the algorithm’s role in shaping social interactions and viewing experiences. This helps to create a distinctive digital culture that cannot extend to platforms that do not inherently depend on mimesis for success nor provide the same digital affordances as TikTok.
The platform’s technical structure reveals not only mimetic forces at work, but also homophilic forces. As discussed earlier, users become categorized within a side of the platform through their interactions with content they enjoy. This results in users voluntarily segregating themselves into networks of users who are “like them,” which ultimately positions them in groups with users who will reinforce the beliefs and preferences that they all already share(16). Users also find themselves taking part in TikTok’s inherent homophilic tendencies by accepting the algorithm’s friend suggestions, which are typically based on similar demographics or a user’s personal contacts on their phone. TikTok’s technical structure is purposely designed to align users with other users similar to them, and while the platform boasts the ability for content to become widely visible, the homophilic tendencies of the FYP complicate users’ ability to access any content offering perspectives that differ from their own. This idea further demonstrates how the digital affordances of TikTok play an integral role in determining the platform’s sociality, as users primarily form social connections with other users who have been identified by the algorithm to have the exact same interests.
Given that the platform’s success is dependent on the exploitation of user-generated content, TikTok’s algorithm also acts as a gatekeeper by possessing the power to determine each video’s level of visibility(17). The interests of TikTok’s algorithm have an especially acute impact on monetized content creators, as their success is contingent on their ability to avoid the threat of invisibility(18). The market size of TikTok’s creator economy is estimated to be around $100 billion, and this sum is distributed between the millions of monetized creators based on the engagement and views garnered by their content(19). This means that creators need to be as algorithmically visible as possible in order to earn the most money on the platform. The algorithm’s power to render any creator invisible indicates its ability to render any type of content invisible, which affects the content that users have access to viewing and collaborating with. By exercising that power, the algorithm directly controls what kind of content is popularized, allowing it to ultimately favor the content that it deems most profitable. While it is difficult to determine what content the algorithm finds to be most profitable on any given day, it has been found that the algorithm’s part in dictating content visibility has not only been inconsistent, but also biased(20). Numerous marginalized creators have experienced unfair treatment when the algorithm rendered their content invisible, which reveals the algorithm’s role in mediating the sociality that takes place on the platform. In order for content to reach its intended audience, it relies on the algorithm’s ability to identify the content as relevant within a particular side. Thus, the algorithm and its desire to gain the most profit from users’ content dictates the content that is circulated, which in turn determines the digital culture that emerges from the platform.
Additionally, TikTok’s complete authority over visibility means that each user has the potential to go viral any time they participate in content creation. This is another motivation for users to become creators that is directly tied to the platform’s technical design. By understanding the algorithm’s control over content visibility, users can strategically employ certain technical features to try to win “the visibility game” and go viral(21). The algorithm favors content that utilize the platform’s technical features, so by participating in trends or including popular hashtags, users are more likely to achieve widespread visibility. The algorithm’s tendency to favor content using technical features is because of the ability for users consuming that content to imitate it by employing the same features. Every video that utilizes TikTok’s creative or collaborative features indicates to the viewer which features are being used, making it extremely easy for the viewer to replicate that content immediately after watching. Users who see content go viral on their side of TikTok for using certain features are more likely to be motivated to employ the same features in hopes of attaining the same level of algorithmic visibility. This once again demonstrates the central role of the algorithm in determining what kind of content is popularized and what kind of digital cultures form in the process.
Based on the analysis above, I contend that TikTok’s technical structure plays a critical role in shaping the digital culture that has emerged from the platform. The algorithm has proven to be central to user sociality as it not only structures how content is consumed and produced, but also how user interactions take place. The sides of TikTok established by the algorithm are entirely dependent on the platform for social connection, which further proves that all user experiences on TikTok are algorithmically constructed and mediated. The sensation of algorithmic closeness produced by algorithm, along with the mimetic and homophilic forces perpetrated by the algorithm, have helped to create a unique digital culture that only exists on TikTok. Specific digital affordances, such as the creative and collaborative features discussed earlier, also play key roles in the platform’s digital sociality by simplifying the creative process in order to encourage users to participate in cultural production. Altogether, the unique digital affordances provided by TikTok’s technical structure has redefined our digital sociality and proven the platform’s worth as a significant cultural artifact. To understand our twenty-first century digital culture, one must turn to TikTok’s algorithm to find that definition.
Sources
(1) “TikTok Users by Country,” Oberlo, Accessed June 7, 2024, https://www.oberlo.com/statistics/tiktok-users- by-country.
(2) Jake Pitre, “TIKTOK, CREATION, AND THE ALGORITHM,” Velvet Light Trap 91 (2023): 71-74.
(3) Pitre, “TIKTOK, CREATION, AND THE ALGORITHM,” 72.
(4) Pitre, “TIKTOK, CREATION, AND THE ALGORITHM,” 72.
(5) Jessica Maddox & Fiona Gill, “Assembling “Sides” of TikTok: Examining Community, Culture, and Interface through a BookTok Case Study,” Social Media + Society (2023): 4.
(6) Andreas Schellewald, “Understanding the popularity and a_ordances of TikTok through user experiences,” Media, Culture & Society 45.8 (2023): 1573.
(7) Maddox & Gill, “Assembling “Sides” of TikTok: Examining Community, Culture, and Interface through a BookTok Case Study,” 2.
(8) Jake Pitre, “TIKTOK, CREATION, AND THE ALGORITHM,” 71.
(9) Jian Lin, Joëlle Swart, & Gouhua Zeng, “Theorising TikTok cultures: Neuro-images in the era of short videos,” Media, Culture & Society 45.8 (2023): 1152.
(10) Corinne Jones, “How to train your algorithm: The struggle for public control over private audience commodities on Tiktok.” Media, Culture & Society, 45.6 (2023): 1194.
(11) Charlie Gere, “Chapter 7: Digital Culture in the Twenty-first Century,” from Digital Culture, 213.
(12) Lin, Swart, & Zeng, “Theorising TikTok cultures: Neuro-images in the era of short videos,” 1159.
(13) Andreas Schellewald, “Communicative Forms on TikTok: Perspectives From Digital Ethnography,” International Journal of Communication (2021): 1449.
(14) Lin, Swart, & Zeng, “Theorising TikTok cultures: Neuro-images in the era of short videos,” 1160.
(15) Diana Zulli & David James Zulli, “Extending the Internet meme: Conceptualizing technological mimesis and imitation publics on the TikTok platform,” New Media & Society 24.8 (2020): 1880.
(16) Wendy Chun, “The Leakiness of Friends, or Think Di_erent Like Me,” 120.
(17) Taina Bucher, “Want to be on the Top? Algorithmic Power and the Threat of Invisibility on Facebook,” 572.
(18) Brooke Erin Du_y & Colton Meisner, “Platform governance at the margins: Social media creators’ experiences with algorithmic (in)visibility,” Media, Culture & Society, 45.2 (2022): 292.
(19) Pitre, “TIKTOK, CREATION, AND THE ALGORITHM,” 71.
(20) Duffy & Meisner, “Platform governance at the margins: Social media creators’ experiences with algorithmic (in)visibility,” 300.
(21) Kelley Cotter, “Playing the visibility game: How digital influencers and algorithms negotiate influence on Instagram,” New Media & Society 21.4 (2019): 899.