The TikTok Election: When Algorithms Choose What We See


 Rather than transmitting information based on journalism's established norms of objectivity, fairness and factuality, TikTok's algorithm transmits information which gets instant engagement via likes, shares, rewatches, comments and emotional reactions; thus, as an outlet for political messaging, the platform optimizes its transmission of content for "virality" (for how quickly and widely it can be transmitted) rather than for accuracy.

During both the 2022 election cycle and the 2024 election cycle, news cycles on the platforms often started with the emergence of a video on TikTok before many traditional journalists had even responded. Thus, a single 30 second video from a political creator/influencer/meme page could misrepresent a policy or take a politician's words completely out of context and, by the time journalists fact checked the video, the video would have been viewed by millions of people on their phones, tablets or computers.

A media effects analysis of this phenomenon indicates that TikTok effectively enables and/or enhances agenda-setting that is, instead of editorial decision-makers determining what is important, TikTok's algorithmic-based decision-making system determines what is important. Additionally, TikTok creates and reinforces par-social relationships, such that many users feel more comfortable trusting influencers than they are in trusting journalists because the content is perceived as being more personal, casual and informal due to its format (front-facing camera, etc.). According to Pew Research, approximately 1 in 3 adults aged 18-29 currently receive political news through TikTok and among teens that number is significantly greater.

The use of TikTok for political messaging has several consequences including:

Fact checking will continue to be a reactive process (responding to messages after they have been transmitted), rather than a proactive process  (preventing the transmission of false/ misleading information).

Traditional media gatekeepers will no longer be able to control the flow of political messaging.

Youthful opinions regarding politics are increasingly shaped by influencers rather than institutions.

While TikTok does provide a means for individuals who may not otherwise have a voice in the public discourse, it also provides an expanded opportunity for politicians and other actors to manipulate the political message to the public. When political messaging is specifically designed to elicit emotion from recipients, the act of creating polarizing messages becomes a very lucrative enterprise.

References

  • Pew Research Center. “News Consumption Across Social Media Platforms in 2023.”

  • Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. “The Spread of True and False News Online.” Science, 2018.

  • Tucker, J. A. et al. Social Media and Democracy: The State of the Field. Cambridge University Press, 2021.

Comments

  1. Emily ZuluagaDecember 3, 2025 at 9:16 AM

    Mariam! I appreciate how you explain the platform’s algorithmic prioritization of engagement over accuracy, and how this shifts the traditional gatekeeping role of journalists to an algorithm-driven agenda-setting process. Your point about par-social relationships is particularly compelling, as it shows why users may trust influencers more than established news sources, which has profound implications for shaping opinions. Highlighting the reactive nature of fact-checking underscores the challenges of combating misinformation in real time. Overall, your post effectively underscores the power and risks of social media platforms like TikTok in shaping political discourse, particularly among younger, impressionable users.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Fox vs. CNN: The Same Story, Two Realities

Image
 If you tuned into the Fox News and CNN coverage of the same political debate, you would think that you were in two completely different worlds. One of the networks frames the candidate as consistent and assertive, while the other frames them as being clumsy and ineffective. This is the power of framing, which effects how a story is told that can affect public perception. Consider the 2024 presidential primary debates. Fox emphasized highlights where the conservative candidates staunchly critiqued “mainstream media bias.” CNN concentrated on contrasting candidate policy stances, coupled with fact-checking candidate claims. But they both covered the same event, and the viewers left with completely different takeaways. This sort of split coverage contributes to polarization. Those viewers, only consuming content from one of the two networks, may never see the whole picture, and therefore confirmation bias padding is only reinforced. And of course, when coverage is so vastly different...
Read more

Deepfakes in Democracy: When Seeing Isn’t Believing

Image
  “Seeing is believing” may not always hold true anymore. With artificial intelligence (AI), even audio or video can be generated. Deepfakes - media generated by AI which can make it seem that someone said or did something they didn’t do or say - are now one of democracy’s greatest threats. A 2024 McAfee survey indicated that 63% of respondents had seen a political deepfake in the past 60 days, and almost half (48%) said it affected how they viewed the candidates (Fox Business, 2024). Researchers at Northwestern University created a database that tracked 100+ confirmed political deepfakes beginning in 2017 (CASMI, 2024). Scholars warn of a “liar’s dividend”, where actual scandals are dismissed as fake, fake scandals are believed to be true. Public concern is high as O consented to 90% of respondents worry about deepfakes and voice cloning (Pindrop, 2024). Regulation, however, lags behind and citizens and platforms are left with the challenge of developing mechanisms to manage their...
Read more