Digital communication technologies transform social relationships by networking strangers into mediated intimate publics. Guided by the question of what happens when displays of public intimacy go viral, I analyze communicative methods within intimate publics on TikTok through an exploratory, qualitative case study of the viral “couch guy” meme. Results indicate that users on TikTok participate in intimate publics through the uploading of original content, duplication and replication of content, commenting, and lurking. Utilizing sensemaking as an analytic, first, I demonstrate how TikTok’s platform affordances transform displays of public intimacy into public extimacy, transforming TikTok into a space where social scripts and relationship expectations are negotiated. Second, I offer a preliminary organizational structure of communicative actions within the “couch guy” public on TikTok. Overall, this article concludes that participation in mediated publics has the potential to influence interpersonal relationships offline.
AndalibiNGarciaP (2021) Sensemaking and coping after pregnancy loss: the seeking and disruption of emotional validation online. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction5(CSCW1): 127.1–127:32.
2.
AndreassenR (2017) Online community and new family scripts. In: AndreassenRPetersenMNHarrisonK, et al. (eds) Mediated Intimacies: Connectivities, Relationalities and Proximities. New York: Routledge, pp. 46–59.
3.
BaxterPJackS (2008) Qualitative case study methodology: study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report13(4): 544–559.
4.
BeasleyCHolmesMHarrisonK, et al. (2017) Innovations in intimacy: internet dating in an international frame. In: AndreassenRPetersenMNHarrisonK, et al. (eds) Mediated Intimacies: Connectivities, Relationalities and Proximities. New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 89–102.
5.
BerlantL (1998) Intimacy: a special issue. Critical Inquiry24(2): 281–288.
6.
BerlantL (2008) The Female Complaint: The Unfinished Business of Sentimentality in American Culture. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
7.
boydd (2010) Social network sites as networked publics: affordances, dynamics, and implications. In: PapacharissiZ (ed.) A Networked Self. New York: Routledge, pp. 47–66.
8.
De LeynTDe WolfRVanden AbeeleM, et al. (2022) In-between child’s play and teenage pop culture: tweens, TikTok & privacy. Journal of Youth Studies25: 1108–1125.
DíazLT (2013) Intimacy and «extimacy» in social networks: ethical boundaries of Facebook. Comunicar: Media Education Research Journal21(41): 205–213.
11.
DobsonASCarahNRobardsB (2018) Digital intimate publics and social media: towards theorising public lives on private platforms. In: DobsonASRobardsBCarahN (eds) Digital Intimate Publics and Social Media (Palgrave Studies in Communication for Social Change). Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 3–27.
12.
DoughertyDSSmytheMJ (2004) Sensemaking, organizational culture, and sexual harassment. Journal of Applied Communication Research32(4): 293–317.
13.
FlyvbjergB (2006) Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry12(2): 219–245.
14.
FordJLIvancicSR (2020) Surviving organizational tolerance of sexual harassment: an exploration of resilience, vulnerability, and harassment fatigue. Journal of Applied Communication Research48(2): 186–206.
15.
GarciaJRReiberCMasseySG, et al. (2012) Sexual hookup culture: a review. Review of General Psychology16(2): 161–176.
GerliebA (2021) TikTok as a new player in the contemporary arts market: a study with special consideration of feminist artists and a new generation of art collectors. Arts10(3): 52.
18.
GibsonMTalaieG (2018) Archives of sadness: sharing bereavement and generating emotional exchange between strangers on YouTube. In: DobsonASRobardsBCarahN (eds) Digital Intimate Publics and Social Media (Palgrave Studies in Communication for Social Change). Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 281–297.
19.
HeaphyB (2011) Critical relational displays. In: DermottESeymourJ (eds) Displaying Families: A New Concept for the Sociology of Family Life (Palgrave Macmillan Studies in Family and Intimate Life). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, pp. 19–37.
KaplanD (2005) Public intimacy: dynamics of seduction in male homosocial interactions. Symbolic Interaction28(4): 571–595.
22.
KaplanD (2014) The architecture of collective intimacy: masonic friendships as a model for collective attachments. American Anthropologist116(1): 81–93.
23.
KaplanD (2021) Public intimacy in social media: the mass audience as a third party. Media, Culture & Society43(4): 595–612.
24.
KennedyJ (2018) Oversharing is the norm. In: DobsonASRobardsBCarahN (eds) Digital Intimate Publics and Social Media (Palgrave Studies in Communication for Social Change). Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 265–280.
25.
KofoedJ (2017) Temporal ephemerality, persistent affectivity: circulation of intimacies on Snapchat. In: AndreassenRPetersenMNHarrisonK, et al. (eds) Mediated Intimacies: Connectivities, Relationalities and Proximities. New York: Routledge, pp. 117–129.
LupinacciL (2021) ‘Absentmindedly scrolling through nothing’: liveness and compulsory continuous connectedness in social media. Media, Culture & Society43(2): 273–290.
30.
MøllerKPetersenMN (2017) Bleeding boundaries: domesticating gay hook-up apps. In: AndreassenRPetersenMNHarrisonK, et al. (eds) Mediated Intimacies: Connectivities, Relationalities and Proximities. New York: Routledge, pp. 208–223.
MiguelC (2017) Beyond engineered intimacy: navigating social media platforms to manage intimate relationships. I. In: AndreassenRPetersenMNHarrisonK, et al. (eds) Mediated Intimacies: Connectivities, Relationalities and Proximities. New York: Routledge, pp. 130–142.
33.
Negreira-ReyM-CVázquez-HerreroJLópez-GarcíaX (2022) Blurring boundaries between journalists and TikTokers: journalistic role performance on TikTok. Media and Communication10(1): 146–156.
34.
NewtonGZappavignaMDrysdaleK, et al. (2022) More than humor: memes as bonding icons for belonging in donor-conceived people. Social Media + Society8(1): 20563051211069056.
35.
NordqvistP (2021) Telling reproductive stories: social scripts, relationality and donor conception. Sociology55(4): 677–695.
36.
NouwenMDuflosM (2022) Displaying intergenerational solidarity on TikTok during the COVID-19 pandemic: understanding the implications in the grandparent-grandchild relationship. Journal of Family Studies. Epub ahead of print 3 February. DOI: 10.1080/13229400.2022.2032275.
37.
PaasonenS (2017) Infrastructures of intimacy. In: AndreassenRPetersenMNHarrisonK, et al. (eds) Mediated Intimacies: Connectivities, Relationalities and Proximities. New York: Routledge, pp. 103–116.
38.
PriceM (2011) Mad at School: Rhetorics of Mental Disability and Academic Life. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
39.
ReadeJ (2021) Keeping it raw on the ‘gram: authenticity, relatability and digital intimacy in fitness cultures on Instagram. New Media & Society23(3): 535–553.
40.
SalterM (2018) Publicising privacy, weaponising publicity: the dialectic of online abuse on social media. In: DobsonASRobardsBCarahN (eds) Digital Intimate Publics and Social Media (Palgrave Studies in Communication for Social Change). Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 29–43.
41.
SchellewaldA (2021) Communicative forms on TikTok: perspectives from digital ethnography. International Journal of Communication15: 1437–1457.
42.
ShifmanL (2013) Memes in a digital world: reconciling with a conceptual troublemaker. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication18(3): 362–377.
43.
SimonWGagnonJH (1986) Sexual scripts: permanence and change. Archives of Sexual Behavior15(2): 97–120.
44.
Şotİ (2022) Fostering intimacy on TikTok: a platform that “listens” and “creates a safe space.”Media, Culture & Society44(8): 1490–1507.
SteeleCK (2021) Black feminist pleasure on TikTok: an ode to Hurston’s “Characteristics of Negro Expression.”Women’s Studies in Communication44(4): 463–469.
Valdovinos KayeDBRodriguezALangtonK, et al. (2021) Y You made this? I made this: practices of authorship and (mis)attribution on TikTok. International Journal of Communication15: 3195–3215.
YinRK (2003) Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 3rd ed. (Applied Social Research Methods Series Vol. 5). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
57.
YoungALMillerAD (2019) “This girl is on fire”: sensemaking in an online health community for vulvodynia. In: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI ’19), New York, 2 May, pp. 1–13. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
ZengJSchäferMSAllgaierJ (2021) Research perspectives on TikTok & its legacy apps—reposting “Till Albert Einstein Is TikTok Famous”: the memetic construction of science on TikTok. International Journal of Communication15: 32.
60.
ZhangYErniJN (2017) In with expectations and out with disappointment: gay-tailored social media and the redefinition of intimacy. In: AndreassenRPetersenMNHarrisonK, et al. (eds) Mediated Intimacies: Connectivities, Relationalities and Proximities. New York: Routledge, pp. 143–156.
61.
ZulliDZulliDJ (2020) Extending the internet meme: conceptualizing technological mimesis and imitation publics on the TikTok platform. New Media & Society. Epub ahead of print 26 December. DOI: 10.1177/1461444820983603.
