Essay Question no. 12:
“‘We are today at the mercy of media that drive constant change and celebrate
disruption’. (Frost, 2016, p.284). What does Frost mean by this and, illustrating your
argument with reference to an example of your own choosing, do you agree?”
Introduction
Catherine Frost, in her insightful analysis, posits that we are “at the mercy of media that drive
constant change and celebrate disruption” (Frost, 2016, p. 284). This perspective underscores
the transformative, yet often disruptive role that digital media play in shaping political
engagement. Frost argues that modern digital platforms complicate traditional political
processes by accelerating the spread of information, personalizing user experiences, and
fostering environments where misinformation can proliferate rapidly. These media platforms
not only enhance visibility and mobilization but also introduce new challenges for
maintaining the integrity of political discourse and foundational democratic processes.
The structure of this essay is designed to explore these themes thoroughly. Firstly, media
ecology theory will be introduced in the essay to serve as a basis for understanding how the
media exerts a massive influence in socio-political environments. Then, by examining Frost’s
viewpoints on the disruption media might cause set against those of Hannah Arendt and
Harold Innis, we will delve deeper into the subject aiming to shed more light on the role of
media in political change.
Finally, the study shall be conducted on the utilization of TikTok in the 2020 and 2022
Elections in the United States. TikTok, which is the major platform for the youth, would be a
good example of the rapid spread of political content in entertaining and easy-to-understand
formats. This format, in turn, may lead to some content being over-simplified but at the same
1
time attract the youth. TikTok’s case study will present how TikTok had been used to affect
electoral politics including the spread of information, mobilization efforts, and controversies
around misinformation and external interference it had invited, particularly. The article will
furnish the account of the real usage of TikTok during the elections including examples such
as the #TokTheVote campaign and the transmission of the themed political content that
influenced voters and their participation. We will also strive to debunk misinformation and
provide solutions for the algorithm-based platforms which may be engines for echo chambers
and influence political polarization.
The focus of this analysis is on the role of TikTok as a digital platform that is responsible for
the new politics of online engagement, exploring its impacts on democratic communication
and political environment. In the process, the article shall examine Frost’s statement that the
transformation and celebration of disruption is carried by media technologies of today and
deduce what the future would hold for democracies.
Analysis of Frost’s Argument
In her article, Catherine Frost contends that modern society is “at the mercy of media that
drive constant change and celebrate disruption” (Frost, 2016, p. 284). This concept aligns
with the media ecology theory, which posits that media environments play a central role in
shaping human affairs (Postman, 1970). Frost posits that while digital media, particularly
social platforms, have the power to mobilize and create visibility, they also complicate the
foundational processes necessary for the establishment of stable political authority. She
emphasizes that “a personalized media dynamic complicated the Egyptian effort” during the
Arab Spring of 2011 but also acknowledges that “new forms of visibility may prove
promising” (Frost, 2016, p. 271). This encapsulates the primary tension in Frost’s argument—
the capacity of media to simultaneously empower and undermine political founding.
2
Theoretical Underpinnings: Arendt and Innis
By integrating Hannah Arendt’s and Harold Innis’s theories, Frost enriches her critique of
media’s impact on political dynamics. Arendt’s focus on the “sharing of words and deeds”
(Frost, 2016, p. 271) in intimate settings underscores the challenges posed by the impersonal
and broad reach of new media, which often lacks the depth and commitment found in face-to-
face interactions (Arendt, 1963). Arendt describes the initial phase of founding, the
‘beginning,’ as one fraught with existential and philosophical dilemmas, stating that it brings
one close to “unthinkable” realities and involves an unsettling amount of freedom —
“nothing whatsoever to hold on to; it is as if it came out of nowhere in either time or space”
(Arendt, 1971, p. 198). In the context of this essay, it would capture the disorientation that
digital media can exacerbate; the rapid dissemination and the overwhelming volume of
information can lead to a form of temporal and spatial dislocation, where the sequence of
events feels disrupted or manipulated. Arendt’s notion of authority as a stabilizing force that
must balance freedom is particularly poignant in the age of digital media. She argues that true
political authority relies not just on power but on the recognition of shared beginnings and
mutual promises — “auctoritas” not as dominion but as an agreed upon starting point for
political interaction (Arendt, 1963). Frost points out that digital media often undermines this
by promoting extremes and sensationalism, while the personalized dynamic of digital media
complicates the ability to form a collective sense of authority that respects the nuances of
political freedoms. In the author’s view, “The issue under contention is whether social media
increases political polarization by encouraging…the tendency of people to gather with others
like them, or form connections among those with similar views” (Frost, 2016, p. 279).
Subsequent literature on echo chambers in social media, especially the ones related to the
context of the U.S. elections of 2016 and 2020, would further underscore the urgency of this
discussion (see, e.g., Ferrara et al., 2016; Rhodes, 2022; Boulianne et al., 2020).
3
Meanwhile, Innis’s concept of media biases towards time and space provides a framework to
understand how media can shape political outcomes—time-biased media fostering lasting,
community-focused structures, and space-biased media promoting expansive, less durable
forms of social organization (Innis, 1991). In her analysis, Frost reflects on how digital
media, a quintessential form of space-biased communication, has radically shifted this
balance, often overwhelming the time-biased media’s influence. She notes, paraphrasing
Innis, that modern communication “proliferated words and deeds beyond all reasonable
scope, while undermining the common understanding crucial to their meaning” (Frost, 2016,
p. 277). This proliferation has led to a fragmented political discourse where the rapid
dissemination of information sacrifices depth and context, undermining the stability needed
for political founding (Innis, 1946; Babe, 2009). Frost further elaborates on Innis’s
observation of modern society’s lack of interest in the problems of duration, which suggests a
disturbed balance between time and space, leading to a societal structure that is ill-equipped
to handle the demands of founding stable political systems (Innis, 1991, p. 76). Thus, the
quick, ephemeral nature of digital communications foreshortens societal attention spans and
diminishes the capacity for the long-term thinking necessary in political founding.
Critical Evaluation of Frost’s Perspective
Frost’s analysis is compelling, particularly in its nuanced approach to the “new narrative”
(Frost, 2016, p. 272) of digitally enabled revolutions. However, it could benefit from a
broader consideration of additional theoretical perspectives. For instance, Jürgen Habermas’s
concept of the public sphere might offer insights into how digital media could potentially
support deliberative democracy, despite its challengesOverall, Habermas asserts that strong
public spaces that offer divergent and holistic media outlets are a crucial component of
democracy, which can address some of the problems Frost expresses about media’s
impersonality and superficiality of online interactions (Habermas, 1989). Furthermore, the
4
theory of network society by Manuel Castells would probably complement Frost’s
perception. Castells argues that network structure of modern society, motivated by digital
technology, result on changes of organizational forms and social movements that at the same
time are complementary with Frost’s claim about visibility and mobilization provided by
digital media (Castells, 2012).
To elaborate on the critique, one can delve into the bearing of Frost’s dependence on the
fundamentally unstable and unstable nature of digital media narratives. Even social
networking is used for both spreading the revolution fire and causing disorder in movements;
thus, there should be a “conscious media diversification” to overcome those effects (Frost,
2016, p. 272). This idea could be expanded by exploring Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari’s
concepts of rhizomatics, which embrace multiplicity and chaotic networks as sources of
strength rather than vulnerabilities, potentially offering a different perspective on the
challenges Frost identifies (Deleuze & Guattari, 1987). In the context of social media and
political movements, rhizomatic structures can be seen in the spontaneous, grassroots
organizing where no single node (or leader) is in control, and information spreads across
multiple pathways. From the perspective of Deleuze and Guattari, these networks exemplify
strength because their lack of centralization makes them more resilient and adaptive to
external pressures. They argue that in a rhizomatic structure, “any point of a rhizome can be
connected to anything other, and must be” (Deleuze & Guattari, 1987, p. 7). This adaptability
is crucial in political movements, where circumstances can change rapidly and unpredictably.
With that said, as opposed to Frost, Deleuze and Guattari might argue for a rethinking of how
chaos and order are perceived and utilized within political processes.
5
Theoretical Framework: Media Ecology
Media Ecology is a theoretical framework that explores how media and communication
technologies affect human perception, understanding, feeling, and value, and how
interactions with media facilitate or obstruct our chances of survival. The term was first
coined by Neil Postman in 1968, encapsulating the study of media environments and the idea
that technology and techniques, modes of information, and codes of communication play a
leading role in human affairs. Postman argued that the medium is the metaphor, which shifts
focus from the content delivered to the characteristics of the medium itself and its impact on
society (Postman, 1985). In the context of TikTok, its rapid, visually engaging, and bite-sized
content format represents a significant shift from traditional, long-form media consumption,
thereby influencing the political discourse and participation patterns among its users.
TikTok, which is used widely by younger demographics, is a representation of the speedy
distribution of political information using entertaining formats that can oversimplify political
messages. Users’ engagement levels and understanding of political issues may be affected as
a consequence. As proven throughout several social movements and election seasons, TikTok
videos can surprisingly gain momentum and result in real-life actions, which include peaceful
protests and voter registration drives (Lopez et al., 2021). As mentioned by the basis of
Bennett et al. (2014), the use of TikTok and other platforms like it can reduce the barriers to
political participation by way of the simplification of the points of engagement through the
means of easy to consume and share content. For one thing, such simplification could cause
shallow comprehension of political issues because multi-layered issues would be condensed
to mere moments of content. Tufekci (2017) in her research links “minimalist politics” to
social media that may empower engagement but does little to deepen understanding of
political realities. Vaterlaus and colleagues (2016) provide research on how apps like
Snapchat is not only engaging but also personally tailored and easy to digest. The increased
6
sharing of the complex political topics in a simplified and speed manner might not only affect
the political socialization of young societal groups, but also those who frequently use the
application.
Linking Media Ecology with Frost’s Arguments
From a Media Ecological perspective, TikTok accelerates and personalizes political content,
thereby shaping user experiences and expectations about political participation. Sunstein
(2018) argues that a well-functioning democracy relies on citizens encountering materials that
they would not have chosen in advance; this unplanned exposure can prevent fragmentation
and extremism, which are risks within highly personalized information silos. TikTok’s
algorithm, by potentially reducing such unplanned encounters, might contribute to what Frost
describes as a complication in the democratic process—where the richness of diverse debate
is diminished.
TikTok’s algorithm, which is customized based on user responses to content, demonstrates
Marshal McLuhan’s (1964) notion that media controls the way people think. According to
Pariser's The Filter Bubble (2011) the personalized algorithms can cause a kind of isolation of
users in the bubble of the same opinions, in fact, the diversity of the viewpoints will be
reduced. This isolation ranks the most among the political sphere where being exposed to a
broad range of thoughts and a strong disagreement are crucial for informed policies.
According to Rhodes (2022), algorithmic personalization on social media is a key factor
which causes ideological segregation online. Consequently, users are less likely to encounter
more dissenting opinions which play a pivot role in public opinion. This segregation can give
rise to polarization, which is a process that involves the shrinking political middle ground and
the growth of extremes at the two sides of the political spectrum.
7
Establishing a Foundation for Analysis
Media ecology can contribute to the analysis of the effect of TikTok on young voters in the
recent U. S. elections as it not only allows us to take a closer look at what is being shared, but
also at how TikTok as a medium organizes user interactions and perceptions. This approach
underlines the importance of understanding the characteristics of a particular medium—be it
technological, algorithmic, or the user interface—as active components in the process of
socio-political change. In this way, it serves to reinforce and add to Frost’s (2016) line of
criticism on the media’s role in socio-political behaviour.
Case Study Analysis
2020 U.S. Elections
During the 2020 U.S. presidential election, TikTok observed a huge increase in the volume of
politically themed videos. The youngsters don’t just utilize the platform to speak out their
political views but also to participate in wider civic activities. Among the many strategies,
there was the #TokTheVote campaign that was essentially a grassroots movement that was
using TikTok’s huge reach among the youth audience for encouraging voter registration and
also educating the users about the voting process (Tok the Vote, n.d.). The campaign engaged
with the youth using engaging videos, challenges, and the platform's trend-driven culture to
make the civic participation attractive among the young voters. Particularly, TikTok users
from the general public produced videos about what and where vote, among other things, to
more in-depth deliberations on policy issues and candidates’ platforms. For instance, user
@howtovoteineverystate made state-specific guides by using TikTok platform. These videos
provided potent, concise instructions on registration deadlines, how to mark the ballots, and
the particulars of mail-in voting procedures (@howtovoteineverystate, n. d.).
8
For instance, a non-profit organization called When We All Vote took advantages of this
TikTok campaign to promote voter registration. Their method of work included co-working
with popular TikTokers who produced custom content that spoke to young people directly,
challenging them to register to vote (When We All Vote, n.d.). In the same way, the hashtag
videos about the Black Lives Matter movement have over a million views, thereby
connecting social justice issues to electoral politics and influencing young voters. One
striking account was a video by Erynn Chambers, a primary school music teacher who
created her TikTok channel @Rynnstar to highlight the real American Black story. In early
June 2020, Chambers was filmed singing by herself about how the overpolicing of Black
neighbourhoods is done and the undercharging of white perpetrators. The video with 2
million views spread like a fire the next day, (Rosenblatt, 2020). Also, a video of Minneapolis
police snipers pointing their weapons at the BLM protesters sitting atop the police station
became the top video on TikTok’s #BlackLivesMatter hashtag, having more than 43 million
views between 2014-2020 (Banjo, 2020). The music was from “This is America” by Donald
Glover who is highlighting the issue of race and gun violence.
But TikTok also experienced a lot of controversies specifically on misinformation and the
outside possibility of influencing. The platform tried to counter misinformation by employing
several measures. A major option was labelling videos connected to election on YouTube.
These labels were intended to alert viewers that the content was related to the elections and
recommended that they search for additional information from credible sources. As indicated
by the Stanford Internet Observatory's report (2021), the labels were one of the key tools in a
complex plan that aimed to provide digital literacy and to stop the proliferation of fake news
by making the users reconsider the credibility of the message they were about to share.
What is more, TikTok has been working with fact checking organizations to verify such
information that may be a source of misinformation during the election. If false information
9
was identified, TikTok would remove the content or hide it from public view, which in turn
limited its reach (Cavender, 2022). In addition, the platform guided users to the NASS, the
official website of the National Association of Secretaries of State, where users could find
accurate information regarding voting processes and election integrity (Wegmann, 2022).
However, since TikTok is owned by ByteDance, a Chinese company, there were concerns
about foreign interference in the election process. These worries got worse due to the United
States-China trade and technology disputes. Congressional hearings and intelligence
community reports tended to raise the question of independence of the company’s activities
from the control of the Chinese government (Wegmann, 2022).
2022 Midterm Elections
By the 2022 midterm elections, one might see a more strategic use of TikTok, with content
specifically designed to appeal to young voters’ values and concerns.
Grassroots campaigns: Numerous grassroots campaigns utilized TikTok to support specific
candidates or policies. For instance, content creators used TikTok to discuss topics like
climate change, healthcare, and education, areas of significant interest to younger audiences.
One notable example was Thao Nguyen, an Atlanta-based college student known as
@_nguyenthaoo to her circa 334,000 followers. In the days leading up to the election,
Nguyen created a series of #redflags videos, where she discussed warning signs in a person.
One of these red flags was being uninterested in politics or voting (Scola, 2023). This subtle
call to action was a deliberate way to encourage her young followers to take an interest in the
election and vote. Nguyen’s efforts were part of a larger campaign called “Give a F*ck About
Midterms,” run by Represent Us Now (RUN) AAPI, a left-of-centre U.S. nonprofit. The
campaign received a sudden influx of funding and decided to pour it into TikTok, turning to
10
five previously non-political creators with ties to key swing states. These creators, including
Nguyen, had a combined reach of 6.7 million viewers (Scola, 2023).
Political parties’ engagement: Recognizing TikTok’s influence, some political campaigns
began directly engaging with the platform. The report by the Alliance for Securing
Democracy (2022) described that both major political parties in U.S. used TikTok as a
campaign strategy which was a breakthrough in the way of crafting and disseminating
political messaging. This mode meant that they could alter their campaigns in ways that
resonated with the TikTok audience, which encompasses a majority of Gen Z and younger
millennials. These accounts would usually show content that was more relatable and informal
as compared to traditional political broadcasts. They would include aspects such as behind-
the-scenes looks of campaigns, Q&A sessions with candidates, as well as direct responses to
user comments, which would help the constituents bond with the candidates. Of the
Pennsylvania Senate race between Democrat John Fetterman and Republican Mehmet Oz
exemplified in a clear and direct way of using TikTok by the candidates who relied on the
platform differently. Dr. Mehmet Oz who was already popular on TikTok thanks to his
celebrity status as a TV personality used this platform to post ads which were formatted for
TikTok and direct-to-camera talks. His content often contained criticisms of his rival as well
as further Democratic policies:
“@dr_oz
Liberal leaders like Joe Biden and John Fetterman’s policies are sending America spiraling
in the wrong direction. We need change.!#recession!#fyp!#joebiden
♬ original sound – Dr. Oz ”
Despite his large following, Oz’s political content received less engagement compared to his
non-political posts, indicating that his transition from a television personality to a political
11
figure might have influenced how users interacted with his content (Alliance for Securing
Democracy, 2022).
In stark contrast, John Fetterman’s approach embraced TikTok’s culture by utilizing memes,
music, and quick edits that could resonate with the platform’s younger audience. Fetterman
effectively used TikTok’s features to engage in political discourse, often using humour and
popular TikTok trends to critique Oz. For example, a video posted by Fetterman highlighted
inflation by altering a video of Oz shopping for vegetables, using comical music and text to
paint Oz as out of touch – a tactic that apparently played well with the TikTok audience
looking for engaging and relatable content (Alliance for Securing Democracy, 2022)
Fetterman also creatively used an Oz dance video to comment on the national abortion plan
issue, one of key controversies during the 2022 midterms, showcasing his agility in using
TikTok’s language to connect with voters: “Yes or No @Dr. Oz?” – juxtaposing a light-
hearted dance video with serious political questions to engage viewers on issues like national
abortion policies.
“@dr_oz
I’m back.!#HealthyDance!#DrOz!Credit to: @reesewitherspoon
♬ Move Your Feet – Junior Senior
@johnfetterman
Yes or No @Dr. Oz ?
♬ Just answer the question ok – hi lol ”
Other candidates running in various U. S. districts also used TikTok to take advantage of the
platform’s distinct environment. For instance, Jeff Jackson as a North Carolina House
candidate used the meme culture of TikTok to create relatable and interactive content in a
12
way that is less common among political leaders who still favour formal communication
styles. In turn, Stacey Abrams’ TikTok strategy included celebrity endorsements to amplify
her get-out-the-vote messages, highlighting the crossover appeal and the blending of pop
culture with political campaigning:
“@staceyabrams
Thank you Jason Alexander! Early Voting starts October 17 and there’s only 33 days until
Election day! Make your plan to commit to vote the FIRST WEEK today:
staceyabrams.com/vote
♬ original sound – Stacey Abrams ”
Evaluating TikTok’s Misinformation-Related Controversies
During the 2020 US elections, many inaccurate or misleading posts went viral on TikTok,
reflecting the trend of TikTok as the new source of misinformation at the time. Take, for
instance, an instance report that has documented 11 examples of election misinformation on
TikTok that attracted more than 200,000 combined views before removal (Paul, 2020).
Videos which had QAnon related ballots conspiracy theory posted went viral and in a few
hours they had collected over 200,000 views before TikTok removed them for violating their
disinformation policy (Paul, 2020). Amongst these videos were cases of misinformation such
as the false assertion that ballots being counted for Joe Biden portrayed fraud, and that Trump
voters were given markers that their ballot would not be counted.
By the 2022 midterm elections, the influence of TikTok on the U.S. politics had spread even
wider, while misinformation on the platform had become ever more spread out as well.
Global Witness team at the University of New York found that TikTok granted approval to
13
90% of ads with election misinformation submitted by researchers (Global Witness, 2022;
Ortutay, 2022). The adverts contained mistaken election dates, unsubstantiated assertions
about voting regulations, and rhetoric that discouraged people from voting (Global Witness,
2022). Despite the TikTok policy regarding prohibition of political ads since 2019,
misinformation ads still managed to get through raising concerns about the capacity of the
platform to contain election falsehoods (Ortutay, 2022).
With almost 80 million active users in the US and large numbers of young Americans stating
the platform is their main source of news, the posts from such users could impact many
people (Segers, 2023). For example, Chris Mowrey, an American creator on TikTok that
publishes quite popular clips on politics claimed that TikTok had a “massive influence” on
young people’s participation in the 2022 midterm election, particularly Democratic young
voters living in “red states” and “red areas” (Segers, 2023). With all that said, the 2022
midterms indeed saw the second-highest turnout among young voters in three decades
(Andrade, 2023), and, while it is difficult to directly attribute this to TikTok’s impact, the
platform’s role in shaping political discourse among young voters is undeniable.
Discussion and Conclusion
Throughout the 2020 and 2022 U.S. elections, TikTok’s significant influence among young
voters illustrated the profound implications of digital media on political engagement,
mirroring Catherine Frost’s observations regarding media-driven societal change.
Media Ecology and TikTok’s Political Role
The Media Ecology framework posits that media environments shape human interaction and
societal structures (Postman, 1968). TikTok, characterized by its brief, engaging content
format, exemplifies this by influencing young voters’ perceptions and engagement styles. The
platform’s design and algorithms encourage a type of political content that is succinct and
14
emotive, often prioritizing virality over depth. Thus, during the 2020 U.S. elections, TikTok
became a significant arena for political expression, particularly among young voters. The
platform was used not just for broadcasting political opinions but also for engaging in broader
civic activities. The #TokTheVote campaign, for instance, harnessed TikTok’s extensive reach
among young audiences to encourage voter registration and educate users about the voting
process, utilizing the platform’s trend-driven culture to make civic participation appealing
and accessible, thereby boosting voter turnout among the youth. However, despite its
mobilizing power, TikTok faced significant challenges, particularly concerning
misinformation and the potential for foreign influence. This aligns with Neil Postman’s
theory that the medium shapes the conversation, suggesting that TikTok’s format inherently
encourages a reductionist approach to complex political issues, which can have both
mobilizing and misleading effects.
The Case Study and Frost’s Assertions
Frost contends that new media forms, exemplified by platforms like TikTok, drive constant
change and disrupt traditional political processes (Frost, 2016, p. 284). This assertion is
mirrored in the 2020 and 2022 U.S. elections, where TikTok was not just a platform for
sharing political content but became a significant arena for political engagement and
mobilization. Campaigns such as #TokTheVote capitalized on TikTok’s viral mechanics to
boost political participation, particularly among young voters, by making the process of
engagement more accessible and relatable through short, impactful videos that resonate with
a younger demographic.
However, the same features that enhance engagement also facilitate the rapid spread of
misinformation, exemplifying Frost’s concerns about the destabilizing effects of new media.
With the 2022 elections, TikTok became an even more recognizable tool for political
15
campaigns, reflecting the changes in how political messages are constructed and transmitted
to suit the speedy and feel of the digital media, which have fostered fast-paced, fragmented
attention spans. This instant transmission of images causes a dislocation in both space and
time, where interruption of cultural and historical continuum occurs, reflected by Arendt’s
comment about the uncertain future of political constructions (Frost, 2016).
Misinformation and Social Media’s Double-Edged Sword
The labelling of content and collaboration with fact checking organizations to control
misinformation are the examples of how TikTok is now fulfilling the role of both political
engagement facilitator and misinformation spreader. Most especially, this site is targeting to
educate users by adding labels on videos involving in elections that urge them to look for
other reliable information sources. This approach, therefore, puts a brake on information
consumption and makes users to critically analyze content before sharing it. Such labels are
an integral part of a broader strategy that aims to provide the necessary context and manage
the spread of false information, which makes them a perfect example of adaptive strategies
that correspond to the challenges of e- platforms as Frost calls for.
Tailoring its efforts, however, TikTok still struggles with the effectiveness of these strategies
and the platform’s susceptibility to external influences which prove the intricacies of modern
media systems Frost speaks about. This is especially concerning given the political nature of
China-U. S. relations, where ByteDance, the parent company of TikTok, is based. Frost
would most likely claim that such processes prove the failings of the existing governance
models to cope fully with the kind of challenge TikTok represents. Therefore, not only
technological but socio-political dimensions must be taken into account.
16
Conclusion
Following the statement by Catherine Frost, this essay shares her view, especially in the
framework of what has changed with platforms similar to TikTok during the last US
elections. The research has demonstrated that the proliferation of digital platforms facilitates
the transformation of political discussion to the younger people more than ever before despite
the new problems associated with it. They include simplification of complex political matters,
rapid and sometime uncontrolled spread of misinformation, and foreign influence, which can
result in the undermining of democratic processes and stability.
For Frost, the implication of TikTok on the U. S. political arena would showcase that the
modern world is highly dependent on media platforms which, like TikTok, fuel and glorify
continual change and disorder. Though TikTok’s influence on political discourse is
undeniable, it presents an array of problems. Through this, the danger of one-dimensional
comprehension of complex problems and making us prone to misinformation which results in
the deterioration of democratic participation. With no clear end in sight to digital media
evolution, it will be important to grow an understanding and critical examination of how
these tools affect democratic engagement. This can be achieved through a balancing act of
tapping into the potential upsides of platforms such as TikTok whilst dealing with their
downsides. The following strategies should be prioritized: the enhancement of digital literacy,
the adjustments in content moderation and the creation of an online environment that
supports a diverse and proper political discussion. Through this approach, a balance will be
assured, making it impossible for media to drive change at the detriment of democratic ethics.
17
References
@howtovoteineverystate. (n.d.). [online] Available at:
https://www.tiktok.com/@howtovoteineverystate [Accessed 15 May 2024].
Alliance for Securing Democracy. (2022). Not just dance videos: how candidates are
using TikTok in the US midterms. [online]. Available at:
https://securingdemocracy.gmfus.org/candidates-tiktok-us-midterm-elections-2022/.
[Accessed 15 May 2024].
Andrade, S. (2023). ‘The growing political power of TikTok’, The Nation [online], 25
January. Available at: https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/tiktok-election-gen-
z-voters/. [Accessed 15 May 2024].
Arendt, H. (1963). On Revolution. New York: Viking Press.
Arendt, H. (1971). The Life of the Mind. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Babe, R.E. (2013). Cultural Studies and Political Economy: Toward a New
Integration. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
Banjo, S. (2020). ‘TikTok embraces political content for Black Lives Matter’, Al
Jazeera, [online] 17 June. Available at:
https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2020/6/17/tiktok-embraces-political-content-for-
black-lives-matter. [Accessed 15 May 2024].
Bennett, W.L., Segerberg, A., and Walker, S. (2014). ‘Organization in the crowd: peer
production in large-scale networked protests’, Information, Communication &
Society, 17(2), pp. 232-260.
18
Boulianne, S., Koc-Michalska, K., and Bimber, B. (2020). ‘Right-wing populism,
social media and echo chambers in Western democracies’, New Media & Society,
22(4), pp. 683-699.
Castells, M. (2012). Networks of Outrage and Hope: Social Movements in the Internet
Age. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
Cavender, E. (2022). ‘TikTok is launching an ‘Elections Center’ to combat midterm
misinformation’, Mashable [online], 17 August. Available at:
https://mashable.com/article/tiktok-midterm-elections-2022 [Accessed 15 May 2024].
Deleuze, G. and Guattari, F. (1987). A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and
Schizophrenia. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Ferrara, E., Varol, O., Davis, C., Menczer, F. and Flammini, A. (2016). ‘The rise of
social bots’, Communications of the ACM, 59(7), pp. 96-104.
Frost, C. (2016). ‘The revolution might be tweeted but the founding will not be:
Arendt and Innis on time, authority, and appearance’, Canadian Journal of
Communication, 41(2), pp. 271-286.
Global Witness. (2022). TikTok and Facebook fail to detect election disinformation in
the US, while YouTube succeeds. [online]. Available at:
https://www.globalwitness.org/en/campaigns/digital-threats/tiktok-and-facebook-fail-
detect-election-disinformation-us-while-youtube-succeeds/. [Accessed 15 May 2024].
Habermas, J. (1989). The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry
into a Category of Bourgeois Society. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Innis, H.A. (1946). Political Economy in the Modern State. Toronto, ON: The
Ryerson Press.
19
Innis, H.A. (1991). The Bias of Communication. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto
Press.
McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Ortutay, B. (20220. Report: TikTok bad at culling US election misinformation ads.
[online]. Available at: https://apnews.com/article/technology-business-government-
and-politics-misinformation-a18a35a2a2542eadfc3893983a818511. [Accessed 15
May 2024].
Pariser, E. (2011). The Filter Bubble: What the Internet is Hiding from You. London:
Penguin UK.
Paul, K. (2020). ‘TikTok: false posts about US election reach hundreds of thousands’,
The Guardian [online], 6 November. Available at:
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/nov/05/tiktok-us-election-
misinformation. [Accessed 15 May 2024].
Postman, N. (1970). ‘The Reformed English curriculum’, in A.C. Eurich (ed.), High
School 1980: The Shape of the Future in American Secondary Education. New York:
Pitman, pp. 160-168.
Postman, N. (1985). Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of
Show Business. New York: Viking Press.
Rhodes, S.C. (2022). ‘Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and fake news: how social
media conditions individuals to be less critical of political misinformation’, Political
Communication, 39(1), pp. 1-22.
20
Rosenblatt, K. (2020). ‘From the renegade to Black Lives Matter: how Black creators
are changing TikTok culture’, NBC News, [online] 30 July. Available at:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/renegade-black-lives-matter-how-black-
creators-are-changing-tiktok-n1235255. [Accessed 15 May 2024].
Scola, N. (2023). ‘Will politicians ban their best way of reaching young voters?’,
POLITICO, [online] 25 August. Available at:
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/08/25/tiktok-influencers-campaigns-
bowman-00111497. [Accessed 15 May 2024].
Segers, G. (2023). ‘Fear the wrath of the TikTok voter’, The New Republic, [online]
21 March. Available at: https://newrepublic.com/article/171281/tiktok-ban-backlash-
young-voters. [Accessed 15 May 2024].
Stanford Internet Observatory. (2021). The long fuse: misinformation and the 2020
election. [online]. Available at: https://cyber.fsi.stanford.edu/publication/long-fuse-
misinformation-and-2020-election [Accessed 15 May 2024].
Sunstein, C.R. (2018). #Republic: Divided Democracy in the Age of Social Media.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Tok the Vote. (n.d.). About. [online] Available at: https://www.tokthevote.com/about.
[Accessed 15 May 2024].
Tufekci, Z. (2017). Twitter and Tear Gas: The Power and Fragility of Networked
Protest. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Vaterlaus, J.M., Barnett, K., Roche, C., and Young, J.A. (2016). ‘“Snapchat is more
personal”: an exploratory study on Snapchat behaviors and young adult interpersonal
relationships’, Computers in Human Behavior, 62, pp. 594-601.
21
Wegmann, R. (2022) ‘White House defends TikTok outreach amid bipartisan security
concerns’, RealClearPolitics, [online] 5 November. Available at:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/11/05/white_house_defends_tiktok_o
utreach_amid_bipartisan_security_concerns_148433.html [Accessed 15 May 2024].
When We All Vote. (n.d.). Fight for Our Vote. [online] Available at:
https://whenweallvote.org/takeaction/advocacy/fight-for-our-vote/ [Accessed 15 May
2024].
22
