Taking back and giving back on TikTok: Algorithmic mutual aid in the platform economy

Abstract

This article explores three genres of TikTok content in which creators and users collaborate to re(direct) the value they create on-platform toward specific needs, people, and causes. Drawing from literatures on platform economies, user and creator labor, algorithmic imaginaries and resistance, and mutual aid, we used algorithmic ethnography to identify and define major genres of content, eventually creating a sample of 192 TikTok videos (including comments and metadata) and conducting a thematic analysis. The videos and practices shared the following themes: realizations of on-platform value, tactics oriented against platform logics and monetization programs, shared theories of value, and digital collaboration for a cause. We argue the genres constitute forms of algorithmic mutual aid, a practice unfolding in platform economies that demonstrates people’s increased recognition of the value of their digital labor, and efforts to reorient platform logics of value, visibility, and compensation to care for one another.

Keywords

Algorithmic ethnography algorithmic imaginaries digital activism influencers monetization mutual aid platform governance platform labor TikTok users

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abidin

(2020) Mapping internet celebrity on TikTok: exploring attention economies and visibility labours. Cultural Science Journal 12(1): 77–103.

Andrejevic

Banks

Campbell

, et al. (2014) Participations: dialogues on the participatory promise of contemporary culture and politics. International Journal of Communication 8: 1089–1106.

Bhandari

Bimo

(2022) Why’s everyone on TikTok now? The algorithmic self and the future of self-making on social media. Social Media + Society 8(1): 1–11.

Bishop

(2019) Managing visibility on YouTube through algorithmic gossip. New Media & Society 21(11–12): 2589–2606.

Botella

(2019) TikTok admits it suppressed videos by disabled, queer, and fat creators. Slate. Available at: https://slate.com/technology/2019/12/tiktok-disabled-users-videos-suppressed.html

Braun

Clarke

(2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3(2): 77–101.

Brock

(2020) Distributed Blackness: African American Cybercultures. New York: NYU Press.

Bruns

(2008) Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and beyond: From Production to Produsage. New York: Peter Lang.

Bucher

(2017) The algorithmic imaginary: exploring the ordinary affects of Facebook algorithms. Information, Communication & Society 20(1): 30–44.

10.

Bucher

(2018) Cleavage-control: stories of algorithmic culture and power in the case of the YouTube “Reply Girls.” In: Papacharissi

(ed.) A Networked Self and Platforms, Stories, Connections. New York: Routledge, pp. 125–143.

11.

Cambridge Dictionary (2023) TikToker. Available at: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/tiktoker

12.

Caplan

Gillespie

(2020) Tiered governance and demonetization: the shifting terms of labor and compensation in the platform economy. Social Media + Society 6: 1–13.

13.

Cho

(2020) Pandemic media: protest repertoires and K-pop’s double visions. In: Keidl

Melamed

Hediger

, et al. (eds) Pandemic Media. Lüneburg: Meson Press, pp. 333–342.

14.

Christin

(2020) Algorithmic ethnography, during and after COVID-19. Communication and the Public 5(3–4): 108–111.

15.

Cotter

(2020) “Shadowbanning is not a thing”: black box gaslighting and the power to independently know and credibly critique algorithms. Information, Communication & Society 26(6): 1226–1243.

16.

Cunningham

Craig

(2019) Social Media Entertainment: The New Intersection of Hollywood and Silicon Valley. New York: New York University Press.

17.

Duffy

(2017) (Not) Getting Paid to Do What You Love: Gender and Aspirational Labor in the Social Media Economy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

18.

Fuchs

Trottier

(2013) The internet as surveilled workplayplace and factory. In: Gutwirth

Leenes

de Hert

, et al. (eds) European Data Protection: Coming of Age. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 33–57.

19.

Garcia-Rapp

(2017) Popularity markers on YouTube’s attention economy: the case of Bubzbeauty. Celebrity Studies 8(2): 228–245.

20.

Gelderloos

(2015) The Failure of Nonviolence. Seattle, WA: Left Bank Books.

21.

Gibbs

Meese

Arnold

, et al. (2015) #Funeral and Instagram: death, social media, and platform vernacular. Information, Communication & Society 18(3): 255–268.

22.

Grosser

(2014) What do metrics want? How quantification prescribes social interaction on Facebook. Computational Culture 4. Available at: http://computationalculture.net/what-do-metrics-want/

23.

Jackson

Bailey

Foucault Welles

(2020) #Hashtag Activism: Networks of Race and Gender Justice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

24.

Jenkins

(2006) Convergence Culture. New York: NYU Press.

25.

Karizat

Delmonaco

Eslami

, et al. (2021) Algorithmic folk theories and identity: how TikTok users co-produce knowledge of identity and engage in algorithmic resistance. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5(CSCW2): 1–44.

26.

Kaye

DBV

Chen

Zeng

(2020) The co-evolution of two Chinese mobile short video apps: parallel platformization of Douyin and TikTok. Mobile Media & Communication 9(2): 229–253.

27.

Klug

Steen

Yurechko

(2023) How algorithm awareness impacts algospeak use on TikTok. In: WWW ’23 Companion. Available at: https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3543873.3587355

28.

Kneese

(2018) Mourning the commons: circulating affect in crowdfunded funeral campaigns. Social Media + Society 4(1): 1–12.

29.

Maris

(2021) The imagined industry. International Journal of Communication 15: 4819–4839.

30.

Martin

(1985) The Helping Tradition in the Black Family and Community. Washington, DC: NASW Press.

31.

Mendez

(2023) A TikTok watermelon filter raising money for Gaza highlights the platform’s potential for fundraising. Time. Available at: https://time.com/6335577/watermelon-filter-for-good-tiktok-gaza-aid/

32.

O’Flaherty

(2021) All the ways TikTok tracks you and how to stop it. Wired. Available at: https://www.wired.co.uk/article/tiktok-data-privacy

33.

Pappas

(2020) A message to our Black community. TikTok. Available at: https://newsroom.tiktok.com/en-us/a-message-to-our-black-community

34.

Petre

Duffy

Hund

(2019) “Gaming the system”: platform paternalism and the politics of algorithmic visibility. Social Media + Society 5(4): 1–12.

35.

Poell

Nieborg

Duffy

(2022) Platforms and Cultural Production. Cambridge: Polity.

36.

Risi

Pronzato

(2022) Algorithmic prosumers. In: Armano

Briziarelli

Risi

(eds) Digital Platforms and Algorithmic Subjectivities. London: University of Westminster Press, pp. 149–165.

37.

Rochford

Palmer

(2022) Trans TikTok: sharing information and forming community. In: Boffone

(ed.) TikTok Cultures in the United States. London: Routledge, pp. 84–94.

38.

Rosenblatt

(2021) Months after TikTok apologized to Black creators, many say little has changed. NBC News. Available at: https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/pop-culture-news/months-after-tiktok-apologized-black-creators-many-say-little-has-n1256726

39.

Schrock

(2016) Civic hacking as data activism and advocacy: a history from publicity to open government data. New Media & Society 18(4): 581–599.

40.

Senft

Baym

(2015) What does the selfie say? Investigating a global phenomenon. International Journal of Communication 9: 1588–1606.

41.

Shepard

(2015) Community Projects as Social Activism: From Direct Action to Direct Services. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

42.

Sot

(2022) Fostering intimacy on TikTok: a platform that “listens” and “creates a safe space..” Media, Culture & Society 44(8): 1490–1507.

43.

Spade

(2020a) Mutual Aid: Building Solidarity during This Crisis (And the Next). London: Verso.

44.

Spade

(2020b) Solidarity not charity: mutual aid for mobilization and survival. Social Text 38(1): 131–151.

45.

Terranova

(2000) Free labor: producing culture for the digital economy. Social Text 18(2): 33–58.

46.

Tiidenberg

Hendry

Abidin

(2021) Tumblr. Cambridge: Polity.

47.

TikTok (2023) Creator next. Creator Portal. Available at: https://www.tiktok.com/creators/creator-portal/en-us/getting-paid-to-create/creator-next/

48.

Tufekci

(2017) Twitter and Tear Gas: The Power and Fragility of Networked Protest. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

49.

Velkova

Kaun

(2019) Algorithmic resistance: media practices and the politics of repair. Information, Communication & Society 24(4): 523–540.

50.

Wang

Leo-Liu

(2023) An algorithmically woven community: disclosing mental illness and connecting with similar others on an algorithm-mediated platform in China. Social Media + Society 9(4): 1–13.

51.

Wiggins

Bowers

(2015) Memes as genre: a structurational analysis of the memescape. New Media & Society 17(11): 1886–1906.

52.

Zuboff

(2019) The Age of Surveillance Capitalism. New York: Public Affairs.

53.

Zulli

(2020) Extending the Internet meme: conceptualizing technological mimesis and imitation publics on the TikTok platform. New Media & Society 24(8): 1872–1890.