Machine Translated by Google

1086241SMSXXX10.1177/20563051221086241Social Media <span class="symbol" cstyle="Mathematical">+ SocietyBhandari and Bimo

research-article20222022

Article

Social Media + Society

Why’s Everyone on TikTok Now? January-March 2022: 1–11

© The Author(s) 2022
Article reuse guidelines:
The Algorithmized Self and the Future of sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/20563051221086241
https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051221086241

Self-Making on Social Media journals.sagepub.com/home/sms

Aparajita Bhandari1* and Sara Bimo2*

Abstract
The video-sharing social media platform TikTok has experienced a rapid rise in use since its release in 2016. While its popularity is undeniable, at
the first glance, it seems to offer features already available on previously existing and well established platforms such as Instagram, YouTube, and
Facebook. To understand processes of self-making on TikTok, we undertake two methods of data collection: a walkthrough of the app and its
surrounding environment, and 14 semistructured participant interviews. A qualitative analysis of this data finds three distinct themes emerge: (1)
awareness of the algorithm, (2) content without context, and (3) self-creation across platforms. These results show that TikTok departs from existing
platforms in the model of self-making it engenders, which we term “the algorithmized self”—a complication of the pre existing “networked self”
framework.

Keywords
social media, TikTok, algorithms, self-making, self-representation

Introduction variety of content, from humorous skits to beauty tutorials to political

advertisements to educational DIY videos. As the New York Times
Since its release in 2016, the video-sharing platform TikTok has enjoyed
states, “[On TikTok] You can join a dare-like challenge, or participate in
a meteoric rise in popularity: as of February 2021, it has been
a dance meme, or make a joke. Or you can make fun of all of these
downloaded over 2.6 billion times world wide (with 315 million of these
things. TikTok assertively answers anyone’s what should I watch with
downloads occurring in the first quarter of 2020), and has approximately
a flood” (Herrman, 2019).
one billion monthly active users (TikTok Statistics, 2021). Originally
released by the Chinese company ByteDance under the name
While its rise in popularity is noteworthy, it may be slightly surprising
“Douyin” (as it is still known in China), TikTok only became available
to those only peripherally aware of the platform. At first glance, the
worldwide after merging with another Chinese social media service,
particular services offered by TikTok seem to be similar to previously
Musical.ly, in 2018. Centered around video sharing, TikTok allows
established social media platforms.
users to create music and lip-sync videos of 2–15 s, and looping videos
Functionally, it can be understood as the latest iteration of a growing
of initially 2–60 s (Williams, 2020) with recent changes now allowing
trend in social media which has seen the populariza tion of video
verified users to create videos that are up to 3min long (TikTok
creation and sharing in the form of live-stream ing and short looping
Newsroom, 2021). It also allows users to “duet” (a function where users
videos. It is regarded by many as the spiritual successor of the now-
can directly respond to an existing video and display the response and
defunct app Vine, which was
original side by side), “stitch” (clip and integrate other users’ video into
one’s own), and live-stream content, in addition to many other features.
TikTok is a constantly evolving and dynamic plat form, with new 1

Cornell University, USA

2

features regularly being added and changed, often rapidly. While it is York University, Canada
perhaps best known for its music and dance-oriented videos, the *Co-first authorship
platform features a diverse
Corresponding Author:
Aparajita Bhandari, Cornell University, 100 Mann Drive, Ithaca, NY
14853-0001, USA.
Email: ab2725@cornell.edu

Creative Commons Non Commercial CC BY-NC: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction
and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages
(https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
Machine Translated by Google

2 Social Media + Society

based on sharing videos of less than 6s and which fostered a Literature Review
distinct brand of surrealist “millennial” humor that is echoed in the
creative chaos that characterizes many TikTok videos (Anderson, The Self and Self-Representation
2020). TikTok also shares similarities with other popular social When it comes to examining the creation of the self on social
media: both Instagram and Facebook allow live streaming, and media, the concept of “self-representation” is highly rele vant. Self-
since 2016 have added a “stories” feature which allows users to representation can be understood as a form of mediation and
create short looping videos of less than 20s (a functionality which involves the social process of creating media objects that stand in
had been available on Snapchat since 2013) (Verstraete, 2016). In for, transform, and recreate a person or object (Thumim, 2012).
addition, the video-sharing giant YouTube, released in 2005, has
long offered the ability to share short videos and added live- While people have used technology and media to record, share,
streaming in 2008 (Anderson, 2020). Such platforms, which are and communicate the self since time immemorial, the tools and
predicated pri marily on the sharing of visual media, have been environments furnished by social media spaces have supplemented,
studied extensively in terms of the sociality and self-making pro and arguably, propagated self-represen tational practices (Rettberg,
cesses they engender for their users (Thumim, 2012; Tiidenberg & 2014). Visual media sharing has become a “hallmark of
Whelan, 2017). contemporary internet culture”
(Mirzoeff, 2016). For example, Facebook users, upload 350 million
However, there is one key new element that sets TikTok apart photos per day; users of Snapchat and Whatsapp share over 700
from other outwardly similar social media platforms: the prevalence million daily photo shares (Tiidenberg & Whelan, 2017). On social
of “the algorithm.” TikTok unprecedentedly centers algorithmically media, visual self-representations “circulate between individuals
driven feeds and algorithmically driven experiences. On TikTok, and groups, facilitate the cre ation and maintenance of relationships,
unlike on other platforms, the user experience is obviously, memories, norms, and ideologies, and are widely understood as
unambiguously, and explicitly driven by what is commonly called tools for iden tity formation and communication” (Tiidenberg &
the “For You” algorithm (Xu et al., 2019). While algorithms are Whelan, 2017, p. 141; Van Dijck, 2008).
becoming increasingly prevalent across the social media landscape,
on other platforms, they are still ostensibly only an “element” (or
enhancement) of an otherwise user-driven experience.
How Does Self-Representation Work?
Of the major social media platforms on the market, TikTok is the When it comes to the extant literature on self-representa tion,
only one to position its algorithm at the center of the social traditional cultural studies frameworks offer a model of how people
experience it engenders; the algorithm determines the type of self-represent with visual media: visual rep resentations can be
video content the user is exposed to, and viewing this content understood as indexical images that stand in for or represent a
makes up the majority of the experience on the platform. person or object (Hall, 1997, p.
1). However, conceiving of images as merely indexical
This key element—the forefronted algorithm—of TikTok has the representations of what they depict disregards the social contexts
potential to alter previously seen models of self-mak ing on social within which online images are embedded (Cruz & Thornham,
media. While there has been extensive research that has examined 2015; Frosh, 2015), and risks overemphasiz ing the media itself as
self-making on social media, especially through the creation and absolutely central to the meaning production process and thus
consumption of visual content, and work that has probed into the understating the technocul tural processes which intervene in the
connection between algorithms and user self-creation, these two creation of media texts and the circulation of meaning in society
areas of research have not often been put into conversation. This (Thumim, 2012, p. 54). Thus, scholars have called for more
article seeks to fill this gap in the literature by pursuing the following nuanced understandings of self-representation that move away
research ques tion: how is “the self” created on and through from indexicality as the primary model for how we produce and
TikTok, and does the process of self-making on TikTok differ when circulate meaning.
com pared to other social media sites?
This issue has been addressed by authors such as Thumim,
To address the particular issue of “self-making” on TikTok and who proposes that self-representation be understood as a genre
to accurately draw comparisons to other social media platforms, it rather than a discrete set of practices (Thumim, 2012).
is first necessary to review the extant literature regarding issues Genre in this case refers to something multidimensional and
related to “the self” on social media plat forms and establish an intertextual, something which can be understood as a “tacit
understanding of the common model of self-making on social agreement” between producers and audiences (p. 166).
media. In the next section, we explore what the current literature Content within the genre of self-representation will contain
says about how self-mak ing “works” on social media, and how combinations of certain elements, such as community, expe rience,
algorithmic experi ences intersect with self-making practices. interior worlds, emotion, personal artifacts, and so on, but no one
work is necessarily bound to contain all the
Machine Translated by Google

Bhandari and Bimo 3

elements associated with this genre. Furthermore, examples in This understanding of a “networked self” posits that social
the genre may differ strongly in their “politics, purpose, conditions media sites—apart from the influence they may have on social
of production, and more” (p. 167). Shifting our understandings practice through their design and affordances—are relatively
away from indexicality in this manner brings into relief the social, neutral stages, or tools, for individuals to engage in these
context-dependent, and mediated quali ties of self-representation. processes of identity management and representation.
Interaction and curation are ostensibly self-directed; despite the
Tiidenberg and Whelan (2017) build on the work of Thumim growing prevalence of algorithmically directed feeds, for
to further complicate our understanding of self representation. example, these sites at least claim that the content that users
Departing from media and cultural scholar ship, they point out consume is essentially within their control and is ultimately
that self-representation can also be understood as a process of chosen by the user through their conscious choices: the site
“identification” (in the psycho analytical sense). Psychoanalytical thus provides a space for free self-representation (Van Dijck,
identification is defined as the psychological process of 2013). The conceit of these social media platforms is the notion
association between oneself and something else (Tiidenberg & that technology is mainly a tool or extension of the user’s will:
Whelan, 2017). Thus, self-representation-as-identification digital environments merely supplement existing modes of social
involves the construc tion of the self in terms of the objects and experience, as opposed to fundamentally shaping or altering it
images that we identify with (Bamberg, 2011). (Papacharissi, 2013).
In the context of visually based social media platforms, the
A psychoanalytical lens re-centers “the self” in self-repre notion of the networked self operates hand in hand with the
sentation. Emphasizing the self and reorienting conceptual previously discussed concept of self-making: users con struct
izations away from static representations to dynamic processes their identities by engaging with (through varied and
of self-making and identification also gives rise to a more multidimensional practices such as identification, indexical ity,
nuanced interpretation of identity. It allows identity to be etc.) the visual media objects created and posted by oth ers in
something that is often multiple, fragmented, and discor dant; their network.
constructed across varying discourses, practices, and positions,
and constantly in the process of change and trans formation
Algorithms and Identity
(Hall, 1997).
Within this article, we draw on the notions of genre and self- The networked self-model operates on the assumption that
representation as proposed by Thumim (2012) and Tiidenberg social media spaces are merely neutral stages for this “reflex
and Whelan (2017), respectively, as an entry point into ive process of fluid associations with our social circles.”
understanding how self-making occurs on social media. We use However, in recent years, this notion has been increasingly
the term self-making to highlight the set of intertextual and troubled due to the growing prevalence of algorithmically
flexible practices, conventions, and norms of both the production directed feeds and social media experiences. Scholars have
and consumption of visual content that constitutes identity begun to question the impact that such new forms of technol
creation online. ogy can have on self-making processes.
Hearn (2010) argues that under current conditions of
modernity, self-hood, and self-presentation are inextricably
The Networked Self
entangled with advances of capitalism and its ever-evolving
Within the context of online self-making research, the “networked search for new forms of profit. Therefore, it follows that the self
self” model examines how social media spaces constitute sites must be understood in relation to the “datalogical turn,” wherein
of self-presentation and identity manage ment (Papacharissi, the capitalist mode of production that characterizes our society
2011). Papacharissi (2013) writes that the “appeal” of social has become predicated on the collection, genera tion, and sale
media sites is their provision of a “stage for self-presentation of vast amounts of consumer data (Gregory et al., 2015). This
and social connection” (p. 206): through their multimedia new form of “effective” capitalism takes as its raw material the
capabilities, they pro vide props (in the form of text, photo, “desires, emotions, and forms of expres sivity” that users present
video, etc.) that facilitate self-presentation. In such an in digital spaces; thus, the practices involved in online self-
environment, the self is performed through public displays of making become part of a wider eco nomic infrastructure (Hearn,
social connec tions: thus, the self is created through the 2017, p. 63).
“reflexive pro cess of fluid association with social Affective capitalism is enabled by tools such as algo rithms
circles” (Papacharissi, 2013, p. 208). In this school of thought, and automated recommendation systems. These tech nologies
social media sites are ultimately projects in managing sociality allow for the self-making practices of users to be collected and
and negotiat ing self-expression through these social ties: one sold by companies like Twitter and TikTok, and, through
self-rep resents by engaging with one’s network within the processes of aggregation, abstraction, and cat egorization, be
context of the social media sites. rendered into consumer profiles. The catego ries that are
derived from user’s online actions are ultimately
Machine Translated by Google

4 Social Media + Society

projected back onto them, enframing them in an “algorithmic identity documents put forward by the app from its launch until February
—an identity formation that works through mathe matical algorithms 2020. This was taken in conjunction with narra tives put forward in
to infer categories of identity on other wise anonymous media articles about TikTok. In the sec ond phase, we conducted
beings” (Cheney-Lippold, 2011, p. 165 as seen in Hearn, 2017). a technical walkthrough of TikTok.
This was done in February 2020 on two different phones, using
Through algorithms, affective capitalism succeeds in enacting both Android and iPhone versions of the app. To ana lyze the
particularly insidious and far-reaching forms of control: control over everyday use of the app both researchers used TikTok for at least
user identity. Cheney-Lippold sheds light on the implications such 30min daily for a period of 1month in 2020, and collected extensive
technologies have over self making practices, arguing that “the fieldnotes, screenshots, and screen recordings. This allowed us to
automated categorization practices and the advertisements and investigate the envi ronment of expected use, user interface
content targeted to those categorizations effectively situate and arrangement, func tions and features, textual content and tone,
define how we create and manage our own identities” (Cheney- and symbolic representations present in the app (Light et al.,
Lippold, 2011, p. 177). 2018).
In addition to collecting data through the walkthrough method,
In summation, the current literature on the impact of algorithms we conducted in-depth interviews with 14 college students who
on self-making argues that algorithms have the power to define use TikTok, ranging in age from 18 to 24 years.
and situate our identities by fitting users into predefined College students are not necessarily a representative sample of
categorization schema for the purpose of data gathering and all those who use TikTok, and the findings of this article cannot be
advertising. However, this literature tends to underscore or even generalized beyond the scope of this study.
overlook the agency of users within these processes of self-making. However, it is important to note that almost 60% of TikTok users
The current study seeks to bridge the gap in the literature between are under 30 with roughly 41% of users between the ages of 16
studies of self-representation on platforms that can be said to follow and 24years (TikTok Statistics, 2021).
the “networked self” model of self-making, which ascribes a Our interview participants were from a US east coast uni
relatively high degree of agency to individual users, and the versity and came from varied educational backgrounds: their
literature that interrogates the effects that increased algorithmization completion levels (freshman through postgraduate) and courses of
may have on user identity creation on social media (which highlights study included computer science, communication, engineering,
the reduced agency users experience in terms of self-making and hotel management, among other subjects.
practices). The central questions guiding this project are: how do These participants were recruited and compensated through the
algorithms influ ence the process of “self-making” on social media? university’s research management system. The inter views were
How do everyday users make sense of their experiences on all conducted over video conferencing technol ogy, and upon
algorith mic social media streams? completion, participants were compensated with a university
research credit. Women were greatly over represented in our
sample (n=11), which may reflect larger social media usage
We answer these questions by exploring what new models of patterns (Anderson & Jiang, 2018). All of our interviewees were
self-making might result from the combination of an oth erwise enrolled in university, reflecting a cer tain level of relative privilege.
traditional social media platform with the heightened presence of
the algorithm. We take up the issues of self-hood and self-making The interviews had an average duration of 35–45min, and
under the influence of the algorithm by tak ing a look at user followed a semistructured protocol. Discussion topics included
practices on TikTok, a platform where user experience is heavily initial use and changing experiences with TikTok, regular usage
guided by an algorithm. patterns, the types of content viewed and shared and why, and
participants’ likes and dislikes of the platform, and forms of self-
expression (e.g., “Do you often post TikToks that you think
Methods
represent you?”). Interviews were recorded with permission and
To conduct a rigorous inquiry, we employed two means of data transcribed, and the researchers used an inductive approach to
collection in this project. First, we used the walkthrough method as establish coding categories. We followed a grounded theory
described by Light et al. (2018). This method, grounded in Actor approach, which involves subjecting “inductive data to rigorous
Network Theory, involves the systematic collection of data comparative analysis that successively moves from studying
throughout various steps of app registra tion and entry, everyday concrete realities to rendering a conceptual understanding from
use, and discontinuation of use to analyze an app in its entirety. these data” (Charmaz & Belgrave, 2012, p. 347). The process of
data collection and analysis was overall iterative and induc tive; for
In accordance with this method, our walkthrough data collection example, when we heard about the different “sides”' of Tik Tok, we
process comprised two distinct phases. First, the environment of added more follow-up questions about this to our interview protocol.
expected use was established by examining the app store
descriptions, white papers, and newsroom
Machine Translated by Google

Bhandari and Bimo 5

Findings and Analysis difficult to navigate out of this space to find the relatively small
icons that will allow users to comment on videos, fol low others,
Upon analysis of our data, we found that three overarching
send messages, and so on. Visually, such activi ties are
themes emerged. We present the findings of our walkthrough
presented as secondary to the content presented by the
and interview data in tandem through a discussion of these
algorithm.
themes, which are as follows: (1) awareness of the algorithm,
This design decenters the traditionally “social” activity on the
(2) content without context, and (3) self-creation across plat
platform: for example, users need not be following or otherwise
forms. Taken together these themes inform what we term the
engaging with other creators to see their videos.
“algorithmized self” on TikTok, a conceptualization of the
Rather, they need only interact with the For You algorithm for a
changing nature of self-making online.
certain period of time in order for it to “get to know” their
personalities and interests well enough to present them with
accurate and entertaining content: the algorithm does the work
Theme 1: Awareness of the Algorithm
that “following” does on other platforms, but more effectively
The predominant theme that emerged from both the partici and efficiently.
pant interviews and the walkthrough analysis was a sense of The For You page is visually and organizationally domi nant
heightened awareness of the “infrastructure” of TikTok: in in the TikTok experience, and this dominance reflects its
particular, the algorithm that curates a user’s home feed. importance and prominence in the minds of users, who spend
Participants often referred to this as the “For You” algorithm as the bulk of their time on the platform experiencing and engaging
it determines the content that appears on the For You page, with this page. The prominence of the For You page leads
which consists of an endless stream of videos uniquely per naturally to the prominence of the For You algo rithm in the
sonalized for each user. While the exact workings of the psyche of users, as they are quickly made aware that their
algorithm are kept secret by ByteDance, the basic mechanics experience on TikTok is almost entirely shaped by this algorithm.
are such: TikTok considers data from user interactions (such as In centering the algorithm in this way, TikTok differs from other
videos liked and shared, accounts followed, comments, etc.), mainstream social media sites, which fre quently employ
video information (captions, sounds, and hashtags), and device algorithms to curate user content, but often do so to supplement
and account settings (language preference, coun try setting, other user interactions (e.g., Facebook uses algorithms to help
and device type) to present users with the videos that are most curate user feeds [and promote tar geted advertisements], but
relevant to their interests (Latermedia, 2020). maintains the conceit that users design their own feeds through
All participants interviewed discussed the For You algo their choices to follow certain friends or pages) (Willson, 2017).
rithm at length, and indicated that their engagement with it While other platforms obfuscate the fact of algorithmic
constituted a significant portion of their overall activity on the intervention, TikTok dis penses with this illusion by highlighting
platform. In many cases, participants stated that the accu racy the role its algo rithms play in shaping user experience and
of the algorithm was a significant draw, and was the reason for promoting user-generated content.
either their initial interest in or continued use of TikTok: “It is
such a good algorithm, I have no idea how they do it. Probably In addition to exhibiting a heightened awareness of this
a lot of data collection, I’m assuming.” algorithm, many participants indicated a temporal element to
Findings from the walkthrough analysis suggested that this their relationship with it; their experience on TikTok changed
hyper-awareness of the algorithm is augmented by the design the longer they were on the platform. This often resulted in the
of TikTok. Upon opening the application, users are directed use of distinctly personifying and humanizing language to
toward the For You page, which constitutes the “home page” of describe the algorithm. Interviewees repeatedly described a
the platform and from where all other activ ity types can be shift in their recommended content and this shift was described
found. While many social media platforms have home pages as the moment that TikTok “got them” or under stood them and
that display a “feed” of content that com prises the posts made was able to capture their personalities and interests with pinpoint
by followed users, pages, or friends, they additionally draw accuracy. As one participant explained, “The more time I spend
attention to other “spaces” of the site: for example, while both on TikTok, the better it gets to know my personal likes or
Twitter and Facebook situate users in their home feed, to begin dislikes, and it gives me more and more content that I like.”
with, they also direct users toward other activities, such as Another participant described how TikTok was “boring at first,”
looking at profiles, sending messages, and so on through a but once the algorithm “got me,” the app became more
design which places visual prominence on a variety of interaction entertaining. Participants expressed awareness that TikTok was
types. By contrast, the visual design of TikTok obfuscates the collecting and sharing their personal data, but this was seen as
interaction types which make up the bulk of social activity in an acceptable trad eoff for the level and quality of personalization
digital spaces (i.e., activities that connect users). The videos of their feeds and recommendations provided in return. However,
that make up the For You page feed take up the entire screen, not all interviewees viewed this hyper-personalized curation of
and it can be
Machine Translated by Google

6 Social Media + Society

content as a wholly positive feature of TikTok’s algorithm; many Thus, while the prevalence of “the algorithm” as the main
saw the content as restricting and overly fitted to the algorithm’s shaping force of user feeds does away with the illusion of user
conceptualization of them and their tastes. control present on other platforms (i.e., the illusion that users can
While participants discussed the algorithm at length, they were completely curate the content they consume through conscious
often uncertain as to exactly how it worked. At most, they choices of whom to follow, what to like, etc.) and thus reduces the
understood it as an external entity that amalgamated their data kinds of meaningful interactions that users partake in, it presents
input and used this information to present them with content other avenues for user engagement. While other platforms
specifically curated to their interests. One par ticipant stated: ostensibly see users engaging with other people in their network
through the activity corridors of the platform, TikTok sees users
engag ing almost exclusively with the algorithm itself. Interview
When I first got on, it was a little bit more broad and exposed participants often mentioned that they did not feel the need to
me to a lot of interesting and different things. Then, as the follow certain creators to gain access to their content, nor did they
TikTok algorithm got to know me, the content is now more make use of the commenting feature to discuss videos with others,
curated, which can be kind of annoying because if I see the as one would on other video sharing platforms.
same type of content over and over again, I want to sometimes
get out of it, but it’s hard to because I don’t know how to get
Instead, they repurposed these activity corridors as mecha nisms
away from what I’m typically seeing.
through which they could further interact with the algorithm. As one
participant explained:
Similarly, another participant stated, “The algorithm sometimes
is so specific, that I just end up seeing the same video over and
Sometimes you’ll see a post where it’ll just be dedicated to
over again,” while another expressed baffle ment at the videos
saying welcome to the x side of TikTok (maybe the black side
TikTok was presenting to them: “one week I was getting all these
or the queer side), which is obviously more of a joke. But then
videos of frogs, and everyone was like, why am I on the frog side
in the comments everyone will be talking about how to get on
of TikTok? It was so random.” Yet another participant mused about this side, talking about what side of TikTok we’re on and how
how, “there’s an entire side of TikTok that I’m not exposed to at all we got there. And sometimes I’ll comment just to make sure
just because of what the algorithm thinks.” that I’m engaging enough to stay on this side too if it’s
something I’m into.
The prominence of the algorithm in combination with the lack
of knowledge about its inner mechanics lead to the cre ation of a The status of the algorithm as the main external entity with
kind of “algorithmic imaginary,” an idea defined by Bucher as the which participants interact, in combination with the per sonifying
“ways in which people imagine, perceive and experience algorithms language participants use to describe it, results in the algorithm
and what these imaginations make possible” (Bucher, 2017). While occupying a unique role in the TikTok experi ence. Rather than
the algorithmic imaginary is a significant part of the experience of being merely an element or building block in the infrastructure of
any social media site and is likely to become even more so as the platform (part of the aforemen tioned “stage” that a social
algorithms gain increasing visibility and prominence in shaping media site provides to enable the “real” social behavior of interacting
online social experience, interviewees indicated that the mental with other egos in one’s network), or another independent ego with
energy they devoted to the TikTok algorithm far exceeded that whom users can interact (as they would with a friend), the algorithm
spent on the algorithms of other social media sites. exists somewhere in between. It is an entity with which users can
engage and which they can influence and manipulate, so users
have some degree of control over what this algorithm shows them.
In addition, the prevalence of the temporal element on TikTok However, it is largely impenetrable: it is thus not analogous to an
leads to participants moving beyond simply imagin ing the inert “tool” with which they can freely enact their own independent
algorithm, toward a heightened understanding of their own processes of self-representation and identity construction. At the
relationship with the algorithm; a relationship characterized as same time, it is not indepen dent; it exists solely to present them
dynamic and changeable. Participants fre quently took an active with access to content that reflects their own internal worlds;
role in their TikTok experience, exhib iting a high degree of what content that reflects their interests, likes, and personality, and
we might call “algorithmic engagement.” Not only were participants which might be seen as a curated collection representing their
highly aware of the algorithm and invested in understanding it; they inner “self.”
also inter acted with it heavily (in fact, such activity often made up
the bulk of their interactions on TikTok). Participants believed that Participants occasionally displayed an awareness of the
they knew how exactly to interact with the affordances and activity strangeness of this relationship. One participant noted with unease
corridors of the app to “work with” the algo rithm so that it could moments when the algorithm was almost “too accu rate,” describing
provide them with more relevant or entertaining content. how at one point it was presenting content that was not only
reflective of their sense of humor and inter ests, but also their
physical appearance. The participant felt
Machine Translated by Google

Bhandari and Bimo 7

Figure 1. Screenshots of the TikTok app. On the left is an example of the For You page and on the right is the Discover tab.

“weird” about being confronted with various iterations of people on other social media platforms. In addition to appealing to their
who acted and looked too much like them. At this point, the personal interests, participants explained that the con tent on
participant ceased to view the algorithm’s accuracy as a positive TikTok was appealing in that it was a way to stay “up to date”
quality and felt that a line had been crossed. with trends, memes, and current events. As one participant put
Other participants pointed to moments where they realized that it:
the algorithm was showing them “repackaged” versions of
themselves. These moments frequently engendered a sense of [TikTok] just continuously recommends me content that I enjoy,
unease as participants became aware that what they had been like Netflix will recommend shows. I never really like any of the
interacting with was a version of themselves fil tered through shows Netflix recommends me, I usually hate them [. . .] But on
TikTok, the material that is recommended to me is always really
the algorithm, rather than an external ego.
good, even though it recommends such a bulk amount.

Theme 2: Content Without Context Another participant stated:

When asked to explain the specific appeal of TikTok, par

I’m not particularly on it for [the social aspect]. I just really like
ticipants frequently praised the quality of the “content.” the content, I feel like [. . .] it can sometimes give me a lot of
They explained that, as a result of the accuracy of the For You information and [is] super up to date. Like my TikTok feed is
algorithm (see Figure 1), they were usually highly interested in very political so it’ll just be a lot of different stuff from different
the videos curated for them and were more consistently areas of life that I need to know about and I
entertained in comparison to their experiences just love that.
Machine Translated by Google

8 Social Media + Society

Many participants viewed TikTok as an access point to a store While interview participants were highly invested in experiencing
of cultural knowledge. As such, maintaining a presence on TikTok content, they made little mention of creating it: in this regard,
led to the accumulation of social currency in their networks, and participant interviews departed from predic tions made through
set the stage for future social interactions. As one participant analysis of the data collected with the walkthrough method. In
explained: “mentioning a popular sound or trend gets me social terms of design, TikTok seems to incentivize and encourage
currency cause everyone will be like ‘oh yeah, I saw that too!’ Or “content creation.” One of the ways in which this is done is through
‘that’s so funny!” the design of the home screen: the size and placement of the
While on other social media platforms with home feeds the “record” button make it more natural and easy for users to record
presentation of content often depends on users following the and post videos than to find people to follow or comment on videos.
creators of this content, TikTok dispenses with this requirement: Despite this leading design, the participants we talked to view them
content is divorced from the context in which it is created. Thus, selves as observers and viewers rather than creators. This
while new users of Instagram, for exam ple, are given a moment illuminates the fact that user behaviors are not always pre dictable,
to organize their accounts and fol low the creators that they are and are not entirely beholden to the suggestions made by the
interested in to begin curating their feed, new TikTok users are affordances of a platform.
immediately presented with content: the “default state” of the
platform is one of the stimulations without reflection or planning.
Users need not concern themselves with anything other than
Theme 3: Self-Creation Across Platforms
consumption of content curated specifically for them, but that they
them selves do not have to curate. When asked to relate their experiences using TikTok, inter view
participants would often, unprompted, describe it through
As mentioned, the hyper-prominence of content resulted in comparison to other prominent social media plat forms, explaining
social interactions falling to the wayside. One participant stated how various aspects of the platform dif fered or aligned with
that they did not use TikTok to connect with their net work; the features of these other platforms.
purpose of the app was purely to gain entertain ment from funny Interestingly, participants seemed to lack the language to explain
videos. Other participants expressed that they would rarely follow TikTok in its own terms, and frequently struggled to articulate
other users or use the commenting function (except when they where exactly TikTok fell in the larger social media landscape.
wanted to “work with” the algo rithm to help it curate more relevant Users often expressed that the TikTok experience was difficult to
content for them). In fact, a number of participants suggested that describe: comparisons to other platforms did not exactly “fit,” or
they did not care about creators at all, and preferred to experience needed extensive qualify ing to be accurate.
content on its own, estranged from its source:
Participants most commonly compared TikTok to Instagram,
Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, often in terms of the self-making
I’m using it mostly for the content. And I like the For You page practices in which they partook. These four sites occupy distinctly
because it’s suggesting to me all the stuff that I like even though different niches in the current social media landscape, and can be
I might not be following the people and might not even want to seen as belonging to three different “categories” according to the
actually follow them. I don’t care about them beyond that video. definitions proposed by Kaplan and Haenlein (2010, p. 62). Each
category reflects a distinct purpose and offers a specific model of
In addition, participants did not use the “direct messag ing” sociality; thus, it is somewhat curious that TikTok drew comparisons
function in the same manner as they would on other social media to three platforms which can be seen as differing fundamen tally in
platforms (where it functions as a private mes saging service). ethos and organization.
Rather, they would only use it to share TikToks with their friends,
without any additional commen tary. As one participant said, “the Comparisons to Twitter place TikTok in the “blogging” genre of
TikTok is the message.” social media. This category of social media provides a stage for
This reinforcement of the content as the main draw high lights the self-representation through the curation of content relevant to the
importance of self-making through identificatory practices in the user’s identity (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). On such sites, processes
TikTok experience. As the media text (the TikTok) is hyper- of self and identity construction are enacted through the curation
centered, the social contexts and technocul tural conditions of its of a collection of content rele vant to the user’s identity. The user
production fall to the wayside; rather, the significance of the media constructs and represents their identity through such identificatory
text as a circulator of meaning lies more heavily in the process of processes, and thus, interaction types such as liking, retweeting,
identification it facilitates in the psyche of the individual user who and reblogging are the predominant mode of engagement. Unlike
encounters it. In this regard, the prominence of the For You other genres of social media, the central activity on such sites is
algorithm leads to the prevalence of individualized identificatory not cross-user interaction through activities like commenting and
self-making pro cesses over processes that are more overtly social liking, but rather engagement with content related to the project of
and net work dependent. self-making and from the fostering of relationships
Machine Translated by Google

Bhandari and Bimo 9

through the act of self-disclosure. The For You page can be establish ties among members of a network. When compar ing
said to offer a version of this process of curation, as users are TikTok to Facebook, participants pointed out that the two
able to assemble a collection of media objects that represents platforms shared a number of functionalities: it was possible to
them and with which they identify. Participants pointed out that see the activity of others in one’s network, and engage with
the act of liking TikToks and experiencing content rele vant to them through messages, comments, and “duets.” Analysis of
their experiences and interests was analogous to the process walkthrough method data confirmed that there were indeed a
of scrolling through their Twitter feeds and liking or retweeting multitude of interaction types that prioritized social communication
tweets that they found relatable. They also indi cated that the between users. However, participant interviews revealed that,
“direct messaging” feature was used similarly on both sites: to while these interaction types existed, they were seldom
share content they found relevant with their friends, without employed by users for their intended purpose; rather, they were
much additional commentary. However, TikTok differs from frequently repurposed to interact with the algorithm.
Twitter in a number of significant ways.
Most apparent was the lack of user control over the For You TikTok’s combination of features seems to place it simul
feed; in contrast, the content of Twitter’s home feed is almost taneously in a variety of social media categories, and none at
entirely determined by the following choices of the user. all: it can be seen as a microblogging site, a social network ing
Comparisons to YouTube and Instagram align TikTok with site, and a content community, and yet, it departs signifi cantly
the “content community” genre of social media sites. Such sites and fundamentally from each type. Correspondingly, the self-
prioritize the sharing of media: experiencing the content is the making practices it engenders (which can be broadly aligned
main purpose of the platform. Thus, the aforementioned with certain social media sites; for example, sites such as
prominence of content on TikTok seems to support its place Instagram that prioritize the sharing of media may promote
ment within this category. The design of TikTok is similar to the more indexical practices of self-making) also eschew distinct
design of content communities like Instagram and YouTube, categorization.
which visually emphasize the content and feature a smaller
section for comments. In addition, the function of the For You
Conclusion
algorithm is perhaps most analogous to the algorithms used to
supplement user feeds on YouTube: while users can to certain At the outset of this project, we sought to understand what made
extent control what content they see by subscribing to channels, TikTok special or unique in the eyes of users. Our find ings
YouTube’s algorithms play a significant role in determining revealed that TikTok differed from other social media platforms
exactly which videos a user is exposed to. that, upon first glance, seemed to offer similar ser vices and
Yet, TikTok does not neatly fit into this category either. In features. However, it did not do so through the cre ation of
content communities, the social aspect derives from the user radically new features or affordances. Rather, TikTok
following other users, and from the discussion of the pre sented engendered a mode of self-representation and identity cre ation
content through comments. Such engagements with a wider that departs significantly from the model of “the net worked self”
network (which situate users in a community bound together by that is found on other social media.
common interests) in tandem with the identifica tory practices TikTok users occupy the precarious position of dually
involved in selecting and curating content that can be said to engaging with an external and internal entity; they engage with
represent the user, constitute the self-making processes that versions of themselves, as mediated through the algo rithm.
occur on content communities. As explained by participants, While other social media platforms facilitate interac tion with
these elements are minimally relevant in the TikTok experience. other egos through a variety of methods (whether this be direct
Rather, TikTok engenders and supports social self-making self-disclosure, the discussion of media, etc.), on TikTok the
practices beyond the confines of the digital space: through the user interacts most heavily with the personal ized algorithm
well of culturally relevant information made available by the For which repeatedly confronts them with vari ous aspects of their
You algorithm, TikTok was primar ily a means through which own personas. This model of sociality can perhaps be termed
users may gain cultural knowledge which facilitates engagement the “algorithmized self”—an exten sion and complication of the
in other spaces, whether this be on other sites or in real life. previously discussed “net worked self”; while the latter posits
Participants indicated that aware ness of TikTok increased their that the self is created through the “reflexive process of fluid
cultural literacy and “clout” on other sites such as YouTube, as associations with social circles,” the former understands the self
well as allowing them to “keep up” with their friends online and as deriving primarily from a reflexive engagement with previous
offline. self representations rather than with one’s social connections
Finally, comparisons to Facebook place TikTok in the “social (Papacharissi, 2011).
network category” of social media. Such sites priori tize
communication between individuals through the activ ity In addition to offering a new understanding of “the self,”
corridors offered by the platform. On social networks, users TikTok offers users a new “type” of social media by refusing to
perform their identities through interaction types like commenting, subscribe to an established categorization scheme. It bor rows
following, and friending—interactions that elements from a variety of pre-existing platforms, but
Machine Translated by Google

10 Social Media + Society

ultimately eludes the forms of sociality engendered by con tent Author’s Note
communities, blogs, and social networks in favor of pre senting a All authors have agreed to the submission and that the article is not
very different vision of sociality based on repeated engagement currently being considered for publication by any other print or
with the “algorithm.” electronic journal.
Rather than occupying a static position in the overall internet
ecosystem, TikTok’s identity relative to other digi tal spaces is Acknowledgements
shifting; it can be said to exist on a spectrum rather than in a We would like to thank Cid Decatur for his work conducting inter
category. The precarious and ambiguous place that TikTok views through the Cornell Social Media Lab.
occupies in the experience of our partici pants indicates that current
understandings of the function and purpose of social media Declaration of Conflicting Interests
platforms are overly simplistic.
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect
This issue extends beyond the question of TikTok’s iden tity; the to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
existing subdivisions—indeed, the act of categoriz ing in itself—
fail to account for changes in usage patterns and platform Funding
functionalities that occur as platforms and users co-evolve.
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, author
ship, and/or publication of this article.
Indeed, factors such as increased algorithmization have already
affected fundamental changes in the operation of social media and ORCID iD
the experiences of the users therein. While TikTok is an extreme
Aparajita Bhandari https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4844-209X
example of the prominence of algo rithms in user experience, it is
an example of trends that are quickly becoming visible in other References
digital spaces. For exam ple, users of Instagram report increased
levels of engagement with and awareness of the algorithms that Anderson, K. E. (2020). Getting acquainted with social networks and
apps: It is time to talk about TikTok. Library Hi Tech News, 37(4),
play a role in find ing relevant content for their home feeds, and
7–12. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHTN-01-2020-0001
also engage in behaviors that aim to “work with” the algorithm to
Anderson, M., & Jiang, J. (2018). Teens, social media & technol ogy
generate relevant content (such as commenting on posts to indicate
2018. Pew Research Center, 31(2018), 1673–1689.
to the algorithm that the content is interesting). Such practices Bamberg, M. (2011). Who am I? Narration and its contribution to self
diminish the unambiguity of Instagram’s identity as a “con tent and identity. Theory & Psychology, 21(1), 3–24.
community.” Bucher, T. (2017). The algorithmic imaginary: Exploring the ordinary
affects of Facebook algorithms. Information, Communication &
Similar evolutions are occurring on more traditional sites such Society, 20(1), 30–44.
as Facebook, which once was understood as merely a platform Charmaz, K., & Belgrave, L. (2012). Qualitative interviewing and
through which users could engage in traditional social interactions grounded theory analysis. In J. F. Gubrium, J.s A. Holstein, A.
such as commenting, liking, and friend ing. With algorithms playing B. Marvasti, & K. D. McKinney (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of
interview research: The complexity of the craft (2nd ed., pp.
an increasingly visible role in shaping the content that Facebook
347–365). SAGE.
users see on their feeds, Facebook overlaps significantly with
Cheney-Lippold, J. (2011). A new algorithmic identity: Soft bio
platforms which employ similar methods to shape user experience,
politics and the modulation of control. Theory, Culture & Society,
such as Instagram. In this way, the division between platforms we 28(6), 164–181.
understand as belonging in different categories collapses: the Cruz, E. G., & Thornham, H. (2015). Selfies beyond self-repre
distinction between the experience of users in “content com sentation: The (theoretical) f(r)ictions of a practice. Journal of
munities” and “social networks” lessens. Aesthetics & Culture, 7(1), Article 28073.
Frosh, P. (2015). Selfies| The gestural image: The selfie, photogra
The ever-changing nature of digital spaces suggests that social phy theory, and kinesthetic sociability. International Journal of
media cannot be understood as occupying discrete cat egories. Communication, 9, 1607–1628.
Nor can they be understood in a vacuum; as evi denced by the Gregory, K., Clough, P., Scannell, J., & Haber, B. (2015). The data
logical turn. In P. Vannini (Ed.), Non-representational meth
descriptions of participants who could only explain TikTok through
odologies: Re-envisioning research (pp. 146–164). Routledge.
comparisons to other platforms.
Hall, S. (Ed.). (1997). The work of representation. In Representation:
Moving forward, academic analysis of social media ontolo gies
Cultural representations and signifying practices (Vol. 2, pp. 13–
needs to examine and interpret social media not as dis crete
74). SAGE.
entities, but rather as moving nodes in a more extensive ecosystem. Hearn, A. (2010). Structuring feeling: Web 2.0, online ranking and
Individual platforms do not exist separately from one another; rating, and the digital “reputation” economy. Ephemera: Theory
rather, all of the elements that comprise these digital spaces & Politics in Organization, 10, 421–438.
interact, influence one another, and co-evolve, changing the nature Hearn, A. (2017). Verified: Self-presentation, identity management,
and meaning of the activities and experi ences of the users that and selfhood in the age of big data. Popular Communication,
inhabit them. 15(2), 62–77.
Machine Translated by Google

Bhandari and Bimo 11

Herrman, J. (2019, March 10). How TikTok is rewriting the world. TikTok Newsroom. (2021, July 01). More Tok on the Clock: Introducing
New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/10/style/ longer videos on TikTok [Press release]. https://
what-is-tik-tok.html newsroom.tiktok.com/en-us/longer-videos
Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010.). Users of the world, unite! TikTok Statistics —Everything You Need to Know [Feb 2021 UPDATE].
The challenges and opportunities of Social Media. Business (2021). https://wallaroomedia.com/blog/social media/tiktok-statistics
Horizons, 53(1), 59–68.
Latermedia. (2020). This is how the TikTok algorithm works. Later Blog. Van Dijck, J. (2008). Digital photography: Communication, iden tity,
https://later.com/blog/tiktok-algorithm/ memory. Visual Communication, 7(1), 57–76.
Light, B., Burgess, J., & Duguay, S. (2018). The walkthrough method: An Van Dijck, J. (2013). The culture of connectivity: A critical history
approach to the study of apps. New Media & Society, 20(3), 881– of social media. Oxford University Press.
900. Verstraete, G. (2016). It’s about time. Disappearing images and sto ries
Mirzoeff, N. (2016). How to see the world: An introduction to images, in Snapchat. Image & Narrative, 17(4), 104–113.
from self-portraits to selfies, maps to movies, and more. Hachette. Williams, K. (2020). TikTok was installed more than 738 million times in
2019, 44% of its all-time downloads. Sensor Tower.
Willson, M. (2017). Algorithms (and the) everyday. Information,
Papacharissi, Z. (Ed.). (2011). A networked self. In A networked self:
Communication & Society, 20(1), 137–150.
Identity, community, and culture on social network sites
Xu, L., Yan, X., & Zhang, Z. (2019). Research on the causes of the “Tik
(pp. 304–318). Routledge.
Tok” app becoming popular and the existing problems.
Papacharissi, Z. (2013). A networked self identity performance and
Journal of Advanced Management Science, 7(2), 59–63.
sociability on social network sites. In F. L. F. Lee, L. Leung, J.
L. Qiu, & D. S. C. Chu (Eds.), Frontiers in new media research
(pp. 207–221). Routledge.
Author Biographies
Rettberg, J. W. (2014). Seeing Ourselves Through Technology: How We Aparajita Bhandari (MSc, Cornell University) is a PhD candidate in
Use Selfies, Blogs and Wearable Devices to See and Shape Communication at Cornell University. Her research interests include
Ourselves (pp. 33–44). Palgrave Macmillan. social media and the creation of community and critical approaches to
Thumim, N. (2012). Self-representation and digital culture. platform and media studies.
Springer. Sara Bimo (M.A. York University) is a PhD student of Commu nication
Tiidenberg, K., & Whelan, A. (2017). Sick bunnies and pocket dumps: & Culture at York University. Her research interests include digital
“Not-selfies” and the genre of self-representation. infrastructures, intersections between digital and physical space, and
Popular Communication, 15(2), 141–153. online self-making.