This article addresses how the Chinese short video-sharing platform TikTok, a key actor of global platform economy and its disconnect or subsequent ban influenced and changed ideas of creativity in India. Through qualitative interviews and content analysis of TikTok videos (available on YouTube), YouTube interviews of content creators and newspaper articles of the app ban, this paper suggests that TikTok, as a ‘memetic text’ and a site of ‘vernacular creativity’, encourages both ‘everyday acts of resistance’ and professionalism/entrepreneurial citizenship. While the app ban signposts digital ‘imitation’ publics’ transition from ‘low’ to ‘high’ technology environments, the values of professionalism and entrepreneurship remain constant. The paper shows the tension between professionalism/entrepreneurship and the ‘everyday acts of resistance’ to state-led technocratic vision. It argues against the disconnect between democratisation and ‘demoticisation’ of technology.
AbidinC. (2021). Mapping Internet celebrity on TikTok: Exploring attention economies and visibility labours. Cultural Science Journal, 12(1), 77–103. https://doi.org/10.5334/csci.140
2.
AmirS. (2013). The Technological State in Indonesia the co-constitution of high technology and authoritarian politics. London and New York: Routledge.
3.
AthiqueA.ParthasarathiV. (2020). Platform economy and platformization. In AthiqueA.ParthasarathiV. (Eds.), Platform capitalism in India (pp. 1–20). London, United Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan.
BrayF. (2008). Constructing intimacy: Technology, family and gender in East Asia. East Asian Science, Technology and Society: An International Journal, 2(2), 151–165. https://doi.org/10.1215/s12280-008-9051-8
7.
BurgessJ. (2006). Hearing ordinary voices: Cultural studies, vernacular creativity and digital storytelling. Continuum, 20(2), 201–214. https://doi.org/10.1080/10304310600641737
CasilliA. A. (2017). Digital labor studies go global: Toward a digital decolonial turn. International Journal of Communication, 11(2017), 3934–3954.
10.
ChakravarttyP. (2004). Telecom, National development and the Indian state: A postcolonial critique. Media, Culture & Society, 26(2), 227–249. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443704041174
11.
ChakravarttyP.SarkarS. (2013). Entrepreneurial justice: The new spirit of capitalism in emergent India. Popular Communication, 11(1), 58–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/15405702.2013.747941
12.
Dal ZottoC.OmidiA. (2020). Platformization of media entrepreneurship: A conceptual development. Nordic Journal of Media Management, 1(2), 209–233.
13.
DingN.YangZ.LiS.ZhangA. (2021). Where translation impacts: The non-professional community on Chinese online social media – A descriptive case study on the user-generated translation activity of Bilibili content creators. Global Media and China, 6(2), 171–190. https://doi.org/10.1177/20594364211000645
Dyer-WithefordN. (2015). Cyber-proletariat: Global labour in the digital vortex. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
16.
FlitschM. (2008). Knowledge, embodiment, skill and risk: Anthropological perspectives on women’s everyday technologies in rural Northern China. East Asian Science, Technology and Society: An International Journal, 2(2), 265–288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12280-008-9049-2
17.
HessD. J.AmirS.FrickelS.KleinmanD. L.MooreK.WilliamsL. D. A. (2017). Aging: The sociomaterial constitution of later life. In FeltU.FoucheR.MillerC. A.Smith-DoerrL. (Eds.), The handbook of science and technology studies (4th ed., pp. 319–348). Cambridge, MA; London, England: The MIT Press.
18.
HsiehH.-S.ShannonS. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
19.
HuwsU. (2014). Labor in the global digital economy: The cybertariat comes of age. New York, NY: Monthly Review Press.
JoyceK.PeineA.NevenL.KohlbacherF. (2017). Aging: The sociomaterial constitution of later life. In FeltU.FoucheR.MillerC. A.Smith-DoerrL. (Eds.), The handbook of science and technology studies (4th ed., pp. 915–942). Cambridge, MA; London, England: The MIT Press.
KomarrajuS. A.AroraP.RamanU. (2021). Agency and servitude in platform labour: A feminist analysis of blended cultures. Media, Culture & Society, 44(4), 1–18.
29.
KuehnK.CorriganT. F. (2013). Hope labor: The role of employment prospects in online social production. The Political Economy of Communication, 1(1), 9–25.
30.
LinJ.de KloetJ. (2019). Platformization of the Unlikely Creative Class: Kuaishou and Chinese Digital Cultural Production. Social Media + Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305119883430.
31.
MaY.HuY. (2021). Business model innovation and experimentation in transforming economies: ByteDance and TikTok. Management and Organization Review, 17(2), 382–388. https://doi.org/10.1017/mor.2020.69
NayakaS.ReddyV. K. (2022). Going Viral: YouTube, Village Life and Digital Cultures in South India. In TrandafoiuR. (Ed.), Border Crossings and Mobilities on Screen (pp. 89-100). Abingdon, Oxon; New York, NY: Routledge.
34.
Ollier-MalaterreA.JacobsJ. A.RothbardN. P. (2019). Technology, work, and family: Digital cultural capital and boundary management. Annual Review of Sociology, 45(1), 425–447. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-073018-022433
PunathambekarA.MohanS. (2019). Introduction: Mapping global digital cultures. In PunathambekarA.MohanS. (Eds.), Global digital cultures perspectives from South Asia (pp. 1-34). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
TanC. K.WangJ.WangzhuS.XuJ.ZhuC. (2020). The real digital housewives of China’s Kuaishou video-sharing and live-streaming app. Media, Culture & Society, 42(7–8), 1243–1259. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443719899802
TurnerG. (2010). Ordinary people and the media the demotic turn. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC: Sage.
54.
UdupaS.VenkatramanS.KhanA. (2020). “Millennial India”: Global digital politics in context. Television & New Media, 21(4), 343–359. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476419870516
YangY. (2021). Smartphone photography and its socio-economic life in China: An ethnographic analysis. Global Media and China, 6(3), 259–280. https://doi.org/10.1177/20594364211005058
58.
ZengJ.AbidinC.SchäferM. S. (2021). Research perspectives on TikTok and its legacy apps: Introduction. International Journal of Communication, 15, 3161–3172.
59.
ZhangZ. (2021). Infrastructuralization of Tik Tok: Transformation, power relationships, and platformization of video entertainment in China. Media, Culture & Society, 43(2), 219–236.
60.
ZulliD.ZulliD. J. (2020). Extending the Internet meme: Conceptualizing technological mimesis and imitation publics on the TikTok platform. New Media & Society, 24(8), 1872-1890.
