This study examines how former teenage hostages use TikTok to process and present their captivity and its aftermath. Through a qualitative thematic analysis of 67 TikTok videos created by adolescent survivors of the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel, the study explores how platform-specific affordances—viral trends, POV storytelling, dark humor, and digital memorialization—shape trauma narratives. Findings reveal that TikTok enables young survivors to renegotiate their post-captivity identities through participatory storytelling, humor as a coping mechanism, and the integration of personal grief into collective digital memory. The study situates these practices within theories of trauma representation, adolescent identity development, and Goffman’s dramaturgical model, illustrating how TikTok serves as both a space for self-expression and a site of performative meaning-making. By bridging digital media studies with trauma psychology, this research highlights the evolving role of social media in shaping adolescent resilience and identity reconstruction.
AbidinC (2021a) From “networked publics” to “refracted publics”: a companion framework for researching “below the radar” studies. Social Media + Society. Epub ahead of print 21January. DOI: 10.1177/2056305120984458.
2.
AbidinC (2021b) Mapping internet celebrity on TikTok: exploring attention economies and visibility labours. Cultural Science Journal12(1): 77–104.
3.
AllenTSeatonJ (1999) The Media of Conflict: War Reporting and Representations of Ethnic Violence. London: Zed Books.
4.
AzoulayA (2008) The Civil Contract of Photography (trans. MazaliRDanieliR). London: Zone Books.
5.
BhandariABimoS (2022) Why’s everyone on TikTok now? The algorithmized self and the future of self-making on social media. Social Media + Society. Epub ahead of print 22March. DOI: 10.1177/20563051221086241.
6.
BöschMDivonT (2024) The sound of disinformation: TikTok, computational propaganda, and the invasion of Ukraine. New Media & Society26(9): 5081–5106.
7.
BoydD (2014) It’s Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
8.
BullinghamLVasconcelosAC (2013) The presentation of self in the online world: Goffman and the study of online identities. Journal of Information Science39(1): 101–112.
9.
ChoJLeeEH (2014) Reducing confusion about grounded theory and qualitative content analysis: similarities and differences. The Qualitative Report19(32): 1–20.
10.
DeterdingNMWatersMC (2021) Flexible coding of in-depth interviews: a twenty-first-century approach. Sociological Methods and Research50(2): 708–739.
11.
DivonTEriksson KrutrökM (2024) Playful trauma: TikTok creators and the use of the platformed body in times of war. Social Media + Society10(3): 20563051241269281.
12.
DivonTEriksson KrutrökM (2025) The rise of war influencers: creators, platforms, and the visibility of conflict zones. Platforms and Society. Epub ahead of print 24April. DOI: 10.1177/29768624251325721.
13.
ElsayedY (2016) Laughing through change: subversive humor in online videos of Arab youth. International Journal of Communication10: 20.
14.
EriksonEH (1968) Identity: Youth and Crisis. New York: W. W. Norton and Company.
15.
FranzkeASBechmannAZimmerM, et al. (2020) Internet Research: Ethical Guidelines 3.0. AOIR.
16.
GeertzC (2008) Thick description: toward an interpretive theory of culture. In: The Cultural Geography Reader. Routledge, pp. 41–51.
17.
GerbaudoP (2024) TikTok and the algorithmic transformation of social media publics: from social networks to social interest clusters. New Media & Society. Epub ahead of print 19December. DOI: 10.1177/14614448241304106.
18.
GoffmanE (1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Anchor Books.
19.
GordonYTiroshN (2024) “Things that can only happen on . . . TikTok”: a case study of a female Ukrainian refugee’s use of a voice-enabling platform. European Journal of Cultural Studies. Epub ahead of print 7June. DOI: 10.1177/13675494241258965.
20.
HobbsR (2020) Propaganda in an age of algorithmic personalization: expanding literacy research and practice. Reading Research Quarterly55(3): 521–533.
21.
Jaramillo-DentDContreras-PulidoPPérez-RodríguezA (2022) Immigrant influencers on TikTok: diverse microcelebrity profiles and algorithmic (in)visibility. Media and Communication10(1): 208–221.
22.
KalnesØBjørgeNM (2025) ‘So, we have occupied TikTok’: Ukrainian women in #ParticipativeWar. Media, War and Conflict18(2): 233–250.
23.
KaplanD (2024) Performing identity or performing relationships? Rethinking performance theory in social media studies. Cultural Sociology18(4): 441–463.
24.
KerriganFHartA (2016) Theorising digital personhood: a dramaturgical approach. Journal of Marketing Management32(17–18): 1701–1721.
25.
KhvorostianovN (2025) “Is everyone alive?” Smartphone use by Ukrainian refugee children. New Media & Society27(1): 246–262.
26.
KozmanCMelkiJ (2018) News media uses during war: the case of the Syrian conflict. Journalism Studies19(10): 1466–1488.
27.
LiteratIKligler-VilenchikN (2019) Youth collective political expression on social media: the role of affordances and memetic dimensions for voicing political views. New Media & Society21(9): 1988–2009.
28.
MalyI (2025) Digital face-work, politics, and small scandals. Language in Society1–21.
29.
MarinoS (2024) Refugees’ storytelling strategies on digital media platforms: how the Russia–Ukraine war unfolded on TikTok. Social Media+ Society10(3): 20563051241279248.
30.
MarkhamA (2012) Fabrication as ethical practice: qualitative inquiry in ambiguous internet contexts. Information, Communication & Society15(3): 334–353.
31.
Matamoros-FernándezA (2023) Taking humor seriously on TikTok. Social Media+ Society9(1): 20563051231157609.
32.
MeekA (2016) Cultural trauma and the media. In: AtariaYGurevitzDPedayaH, et al. (eds) Interdisciplinary Handbook of Trauma and Culture. Cham: Springer, pp. 27–37.
33.
MeyrowitzJ (1985) No Sense of Place. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
34.
NesiJChoukas-BradleySPrinsteinMJ (2018) Transformation of adolescent peer relations in the social media context: part 1—a theoretical framework and application to dyadic peer relationships. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review21: 267–294.
35.
NesiJPrinsteinMJ (2015) Using social media for social comparison and feedback-seeking: gender and popularity moderate associations with depressive symptoms. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology43(8): 1427–1438.
36.
PapacharissiZ (2012) Without you, I’m nothing: performances of the self on social media. International Journal of Communication6: 2002–2019.
37.
PinchevskiARichardsonM (2022) Trauma and digital media: introduction to crosscurrents special section. Media, Culture & Society45(1): 178–180.
38.
PrimigFSzabóHDLacasaP (2023) Remixing war: an analysis of the reimagination of the Russian–Ukraine war on TikTok. Frontiers in Political Science5: 1085149.
39.
PruccoliJDe RosaMChiassoL, et al. (2022) The use of TikTok among children and adolescents with eating disorders: experience in a third-level public Italian center during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Italian Journal of Pediatrics48(1): 138.
40.
RiederBMatamoros-FernándezACorominaÒ (2018) From ranking algorithms to “ranking cultures” Investigating the modulation of visibility in YouTube search results. Convergence24(1): 50–68.
41.
RuchWHofmannJ (2017) Fostering humour. In: Positive Psychology Interventions in Practice. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 65–80.
42.
StahlCCLiteratI (2023) #GenZ on TikTok: the collective online self-portrait of the social media generation. Journal of Youth Studies26(7): 925–946.
43.
SteenEYurechkoKKlugD (2023) You can (not) say what you want: using algospeak to contest and evade algorithmic content moderation on TikTok. Social Media + Society. Epub ahead of print 31August. DOI: 10.1177/20563051231194586.
44.
TambuscioMTschiggerlM (2023) “#schleichdiduoaschloch” terror, collective memory, and social media. Social Media + Society. Epub ahead of print 6August. DOI: 10.1177/20563051231186365.
45.
ThorsonKCotterKMedeirosM, et al. (2021) Algorithmic inference, political interest, and exposure to news and politics on Facebook. Information, Communication and Society24(2): 183–200.
46.
TrillòTScharlachRHallinanB, et al. (2021) What does #freedom look like?Instagram and the Visual Imagination of Values, Journal of Communication71(6): 875–897. DOI: 10.1093/joc/jqab021.
47.
UhlsYTEllisonNBSubrahmanyamK (2017) Benefits and costs of social media in adolescence. Pediatrics140(S2): S67–S70.
48.
WilliamsAThompsonP (2022) Algorithmic aesthetics: how social media platforms shape digital storytelling. New Media & Society24(6): 1251–1270.
49.
WilliamsMLBurnapPSloanL (2017) Towards an ethical framework for publishing Twitter data in social research: taking into account users’ views, online context and algorithmic estimation. Sociology51(6): 1149–1168.
50.
YarchiMBoxman-ShabtaiL (2023) The image war moves to TikTok: evidence from the May 2021 round of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Digital Journalism. Epub ahead of print 13December. DOI: 10.1080/21670811.2023.2291650.
51.
ZiberiLLengelLMLimaniA (2023) Visualizing conflict: analyzing visual narratives of photojournalistic images of Balkan war refugees. Studies in Media and Communication11(6): 329–341.
52.
ZulliDZulliDJ (2022) Extending the Internet meme: conceptualizing technological mimesis and imitation publics on the TikTok platform. New Media & Society24(8): 1872–1890.
