An analysis of TikTok as a social media platform and its impact on creativity

Introduction

TikTok is a Social media app, where users post 15-60 second clips of various genres. These clips can the be liked, commented on, shared and even duetted by other users. Many users post with the goal of amassing followers, others to express themselves or share information. It was initially launched in China in September 2016, under the name Douyin. The following year the app was launched for markets outside of China, under the name TikTok. TikTok is now available all around the world via the App store or Google Play store, except in China where the app remains under the name Douyin and is ran on a different network in order to comply with Chinese censorship restrictions. Since being launched the app has gained over 2 billion downloads and has 800 million active users worldwide (Omnicore 2020). Its widely considered to be an app for the younger generations, claiming that 60% of users are Gen Zers (born between 1997-2012) this means that its potential impact is even more important, as it has to ability to help form the beliefs and values of people.

The objective of this case study is to evaluate the role that TikTok plays as a social media app and understand the way it interacts with creativity and society. In the first section, this report will discuss how TikTok works as a social space, how it fits in with other social medias and why the role it plays is successful. The second section will explore the role that TikToks algorithm plays in content creation and the creative industry, particularly looking at the idea of a creativity paradox and its limitations.

Getting to Know TikTok and its Role as a Social Media

To understand TikToks role as a social media we must first evaluate were it fits in with other apps. The best way to understand its place is to acknowledge that there has been an increased popularity in video creation and sharing across social media, from short looping videos to live-streaming (Anderson, 2017). Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat and Twitter all have “stories” functionality where users can create short videos (around 3-15 s depending on the app) that will be displayed on a loop. (Constine, 2017). The idea of a short looping video to tell a story started on much smaller platforms than Snapchat and Instagram. About a year before Snapchat released “My Story” (Hamburger, 2013), Vine was used to create and share 6-second-long videos. Vine was created in 2012 and acquired by Twitter before it was even released, Vine was popular until it was discontinued in 2017. Vine was the starting place for several now YouTube stars, who usually gained their following from a 6-second gimmick before being forced to move their following to other platforms, the positive being that other platforms came with better monetization models (Kosoff, 2016). By the time Vine shut down in early 2017, Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat all provided similar services, but the demise was lamented as the loss of “one of the internet’s weirdest and funniest spaces” with Vine being credited as having been an unparalleled space for creation of memes that travelled into mainstream culture (Feldman, 2016).

When Vine was shut down, many users moved to Musical.ly, so it is not surprising that after the merger of Musical.ly and TikTok that TikTok has often been compared to Vine, though some Vine enthusiasts will disagree that it is a viable replacement. The memes, challenges and trends that appear on TikTok make it into the mainstream in similar ways that they did from Vine. While there certainly are differences in the platforms, TikTok seems closer to Vine than to the stories of Instagram, Facebook and Twitter as a place for creativity and experimentation. In a cinematic study of TikTok, Bresnick (2019) describes the app as a virtual playground and more as a creative media than a social media, pointing out that “TikTok liberates young people to play without adhering to the visual styles, narratives and online cultures of the past.” The author points out that the audio-visual options and effects invite make-believe with users using the app as an escape from reality. In scrolling through the content on TikTok, this is found to be true, but at the same time, there is content that is the opposite of make-believe, absent of any audio-visual enhancements, just people talking into the camera from their cars and their bedrooms.

There is a creative chao present in the app that is further deepened by an element of uncertainty. As one swipes up, it is difficult to anticipate what will appear, and several swipes can bring up an astounding variety of content that can be described as sincere, ironic, cringy, wholesome, offensive, make believe, authentic, ridiculous, confusing and everything in between. This chaos has been described as “a feature, not a bug of the online world” and is an example of the cultural mind-set known as metamodernism (Weil, 2019). Metamodernism can be described as oscillation between modernism’s optimism and postmodernism’s irony (Vermeulen and van den Akker, 2010). Weil describes the metamodern sensibility as “nostalgic and cynical, knowing and naïve; manipulative, manipulated and spontaneous,” which is a very apt description of TikTok. The jarring contrast and pendulous swinging between poles are what make the app unique and intriguing, if also a little bit confusing, for those not expecting or unused to this metamodern structure of feeling. It is an excellent example of this cultural sensibility and is worth looking into to understand the digital lives of our patrons, specifically the younger ones. TikTok is primarily algorithm driven, which makes it unique from the other social media apps that are modelled around following and followers. A TikTok video from a user with absolutely no followers can quickly gain an audience as it appears in other user’s feeds. Tolentino (2019) describes TikTok as “a social network that has nothing to do with one’s social network,” an “enormous meme factory, compressing the world into pellets of virality and dispensing those pellets until you get full or fall asleep” (Tolentino, 2019). Those pellets of virality are then easily shared outside of the platform on other social media platforms which brings more users to the app. This clearly settles TikTok into its own place within social media, providing a service that is unique enough to be interesting whilst also being accessible and easy to share, meaning content can easily reach the mainstream.

TikToks Algorithm and the Creativity Paradox

As mention in Section 1, TikTok is unique in the fact that it is primarily algorithm driven. It relies on a constantly learning changing system to push the right videos, highlight guideline violations and predict what is going to be popular. TikTok both extends and limits the creative process. It presents users with a series of options from which they can choose to enhance their performance, but it then limits their creative freedom by pre-empting a series of practices and performances of identity with which they are intended to engage. The commenting and feedback system produces interactions with other users that give a sense of intimacy, connection and attention. The type of content that was TikTok is designed for is playful, meme-based, visually engaging, reproducible and apolitical. The platform also works relentlessly to render public what was once regarded (and is still by many) as deeply cringeworthy activities: “TikTok is every embarrassing thing you do alone in your bedroom, but broadcast for the whole world to see” (Tait, 2019, para. 3). All these once private activities now play themselves into an algorithm which is often hard to understand and keep up with, and it is all with the aim of fitting into a particular aspect of society.

In a way, TikTok exemplifies the many ways in which we now delegate the work of reassembling the social (Latour, 2005) – “the sorting, classifying and hierarchizing of people, places, objects and ideas” (Striphas, 2015, p. 395) – to carefully engineered and commercially orientated algorithms. As such, this cultural management is now increasingly organised by a logic of surveillance, data aggregation and monetisation. A key sigh of the alienation of participants, due to an algorithm, is the current trend on TikTok to include the #foryou hashtag on all uploaded videos, on the suspicion that this will improve the chances of being promoted by the algorithm and going viral. This clearly illustrates the two-way nature of the relationship between algorithms and our culture – our habits of thought and cultural expression are being increasingly shaped by the logic of these algorithms (Striphas, 2014): “Culture now has two audiences, in other words: people and machines. Both will have a significant hand in shaping the material that finds its way into the public realm” (Striphas, 2014, “How do you envision the future of the Cultural Industry?”, para. 4).

The unfair and unpredictable nature of TikToks algorithm is a well-known issue among users. In fact, some TikTok users now attempt to “game” the app’s algorithm, developing a range of strategies to generate awareness about various causes, often political or social which can often be censored by the algorithm. For example, an American teen recently posted a video to raise awareness about the treatment of Muslims in Chinese camps that was disguised as a beauty tutorial (Kelion, 2019). TikTok claims to not moderate political content (Kelion, 2019) and the operations of its algorithms remain unavailable for public or regulatory scrutiny. Questions of user privacy and surveillance are particularly difficult to address or regulate in such an environment. Nevertheless, the clever use of a make-up tutorial to spread awareness of a political message is an instance of great creativity within the affordances provided by TikTok. We can also look at, Lil Nas X’s savvy use of the #yeehaw challenge to promote his own music as an additional example. These two instances highlight the paradox at the heart of TikTok. The platform relies on user Creativity and freedom to drive engagement and teach the algorithms, yet this very creativity is subject to control in response to the apolitical vision and context in which it functions.

Conclusion

It is easy to understand why TikTok blew up like it did, it is unique approach to content creation and sharing is intriguing and the often-limitless feeling options of content creation draws a large crowd. However, it is also clear that the way that TikTok content is regulated and popularised is not understood by anyone outside of the algorithm. It is important to acknowledge that the limits imposed by TikToks desire to apolitical can encourage creativity, and the unpredictable algorithm can encourage users to try new video styles and ideas, in hopes of one being randomly picked up by the algorithm and pushed to a large crowd. However, it is also important to consider the impact censorship can have on creativity, creators can no longer create what they love and expect to become poplar. Instead, they must learn an algorithm and play to it, in order to draw a large enough audience to feel successful.

As a platform TikTok is relatively new, meaning little academic research has been done on it as a singular platform. In the future it would be necessary to review the algorithm further, to evaluate it in a more specific light. Like looking at it from a purely political standpoint. As with all Social Medias it would be worthwhile to evaluate TikToks impact on the blurring of lines between private and public matters.

Bibliography

Anderson, K.E. (2017), “Getting acquainted with social networks and apps: periscope up! Broadcasting via live streaming”, Library Hi Tech News, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 16-20.

Bresnick, E. (2019), “Intensified play: cinematic study of TikTok mobile app”, Research Gate, available at: www.researchgate.net/publicati... (accessed 3 December 2020).

Constine, J. (2017), “Twitter loops all videos under 6.5 seconds as vine shrivels into a camera”, TechCrunch, available at: https:// techcrunch.com/2017/01/17/tvine/ (accessed 2 December 2020).

Feldman, B. (2016), “The death of vine makes the internet a worse place”, Intelligencer, available at: https://nymag. com/intelligencer/2016/10/the-death-of-vinemakes-the-internet-a-worse-place.html (accessed 3 December 2020).

Hamburger, E. (2013), “Snapchat’s next big thing: ‘stories’ that don’t just disappear”, The Verge, available at: www.theverge.com/ 2013/10/3/4791934/snapchats-next-big-thingstories-that-dont-just-disappear (accessed 2 December 2020).

Kelion, L. (2019). Teen’s TikTok video about China’s Muslim camps goes viral. BBC News, 26 November. Available at: https://www.bbc.com/news/techn... (accessed 4 December 2020)

Kosoff, M. (2016), “The inside story of vine’s demise”, Vanity Fair, available at: www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/1... (accessed 2 December 2020).

Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to Actor-Network Theory. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Omnicore (2020) TikTok by the numbers: Stats, demographics & fun facts. Omnicore, 12 February. Available at: https://www.omnicoreagency.com... (accessed 4 December 2020).

Striphas, T. (2014). Algorithmic culture. “Culture now has two audiences: people and machines”: A conversation with Ted Striphas. (G. Granieri, interviewer). Medium, 1 May. Available at: https://medium.com/futurists-v... -culture-now-has-two-audiences-people-and-machines-2bdaa404f643. (accessed 4 December 2020)

Striphas, T. (2015). Algorithmic culture. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 18(4–5), 395–412.

Tait, A. (2019). TikTok has created a whole new class of influencer. Vice, 15 May. Available at: https://www.vice.com/en_in/article/597dbn/tiktok-what-uk-stars-influencer. (accessed 4 December 2020)

Vermeulen, T. and van den Akker, R. (2010), “Notes on metamodernism”, Journal of Aesthetics & Culture, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 1-14.

Weil, E. (2019), “What do teens learn online?”, The New York Times Magazine, available at: www.nytimes.com/interactive/ 2019/11/13/magazine/internet-teens.html (accessed 3 December 2020).