TikTok users spend an average of 97 minutes scrolling on the app every day, meaning users consume hundreds to thousands of videos, opinions, recipes and thoughts daily.
TikTok has been my go-to platform for years and I use it more than I’d like to admit. Scrolling to pass time, picking out my next read or seeing what my friends are up to, it has always been easy to weed out content I don’t agree with or enjoy.
TikTok’s algorithm is truly impressive, monitoring what you share, favorite, report, create and watch all the way through to craft your perfect For You Page.
Despite this algorithm that has pushed content I love and learned from my clicks for years, I’ve found myself blocking creators and clicking the “not interested” button more than ever. A different type of content has begun appearing on my For You Page — "think pieces” that make me hate the app more than ever.
Think pieces, defined as “an article that presents news analysis, background material, and the author's opinions,” are nothing new on social media. Traditional commentary-style creators, reaction videos and video essays have been around forever, combining analysis and opinion. However, TikTok think pieces take a different approach: a performative and emotional analysis of hot topics for engagement. TikTok think pieces are a new way to declare moral superiority, feigning outrage for views and leaving no room for disagreement.
Think pieces aren’t ideal as short-form content because they rely on quick, snappy and sometimes offensive or egregious claims to offend or surprise viewers into engaging with their videos. They compress complex topics into short videos that lack nuance or context.
Unlike typical think piece or video essay content, some of which are almost an hour long, TikTok thrives on short phrases and trigger words like “unpopular opinion” or “hot take” and video lengths under 10 minutes.
TikTok think pieces are the newest form of rage-bait on social media, designed to “provoke anger or outrage, as a means of gaining attention or making money.”
“Algorithmic processes on TikTok and other social media sites target people’s vulnerabilities – such as loneliness or feelings of loss of control – and gamify harmful content," says Dr. Kaitlyn Regehr, a principal investigator from University College London. Algorithms are designed to keep you engaging with content, and the best way to do this is with anger.
Research from Tulane University found “people are more likely to interact with content that challenges their views than those that align with them.” TikTok think pieces are angry people using big words to make inflamed statements that will anger others, which creators know will get more engagement because of this “confrontation effect.”
I recently saw a video of a creator mocking TikTok think pieces. The creator opens the video saying, “I’m so happy,” transitioning to another version of herself that says, “What about the people who aren’t happy?” followed by, “My cousin literally got her smile cut off.”
The post is obviously a dramatization, but it still rings true. People are incredibly dramatic and want to feel morally superior, so they use "whataboutism" in their think pieces or comment sections to deflect criticism or ignore counterarguments. This cycle of deflection makes think pieces even more exhausting.
TikTok is no longer a safe or inviting place to have conversations or disagreements. I could probably make a post right now stating, “Drink more water and go on a walk, it makes you feel better,” and get multiple think piece response videos telling me “What about people who can’t walk?” or “What about people who don’t like water?”
Disagreement is normal and healthy on and off social media. The issue is every take, every comment, every event triggers multiple think pieces where people can’t sensibly discuss and agree. Although they look like harmless, analytic videos, think pieces are the newest form of rage-bait designed to keep users watching, commenting and arguing, which the algorithm will continue to reward.
Abby Shriver is a sophomore studying journalism at Ohio University. Please note the opinions expressed in this column do not represent those of The Post. Want to talk to Abby about their column? Email/message them at as064024@ohio.edu / @abbyshriver_
