Auditing Differential Visibility of Political Content on TikTok

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.17356v1
• Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2026 17:48:37 GMT
• Title: Auditing Differential Visibility of Political Content on TikTok
• Abstract summary: We find no evidence of moderate-to-large reach suppression on any topic.<n>Oppositional content earns more engagement per view rather than less reach.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Allegations that TikTok shadow bans political content shape what creators post, what advertisers fund, and how regulators act, yet they are hard to adjudicate because platforms do not disclose how content is ranked. We test the claim with a dense hourly panel of 556,946 follower-normalized views across 2,753 videos from 67 accounts curated into pro and anti sides of three contested topics (U.S. immigration enforcement, Trump coverage, and Israel/Palestine). On-topic videos are identified by a multi-step classifier, and stance is taken from each account's curated side. The conventional analysis appears to answer yes. Pooling the hourly snapshots, the topic-conditional reach gap reaches p < 10^-140. Analyzed at the account level, the independent unit at which we sample and assign stance, the gap disappears. Every account-level reach contrast is null after correction (BH-FDR q near 0.9). We find no evidence of moderate-to-large reach suppression on any topic. The null is informative. Account-level confidence intervals and a power analysis rule out such effects. As a design check, the same framework detects a clear asymmetry on a different outcome. Oppositional content (anti-Trump, pro-Palestine) earns more engagement per view rather than less reach (Cliff's delta = -0.51 and -0.64; q < 0.03). Higher engagement does not by itself rule out suppression, but shows the design can detect effects of this magnitude. The apparent reach gap is an artifact of two factors. The first is pseudoreplication, which counts tens of thousands of autocorrelated video-hours as independent observations; the second is confounding, since the side that looks suppressed is larger and, on Israel/Palestine, posts mostly in Arabic. In this corpus, what is taken for a shadow ban is better explained by a more engaged audience than by a suppressed one. We close with what a credible visibility audit requires.

Related papers

• Using AI Agents to Automate Black-Box Audits of Personalization Algorithms at Scale [76.72846830885882]
  Personalization algorithms determine what content users encounter on online platforms.<n> auditing these systems is difficult because independent auditors have only black-box access to the algorithms.<n>We introduce a framework for black-box audits of personalization algorithms using generative AI agents as behavioral engines for synthetic accounts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-29T18:25:09Z)
• VideoZeroBench: Probing the Limits of Video MLLMs with Spatio-Temporal Evidence Verification [73.02304272829785]
  VideoBench is a hierarchical benchmark for long-video answering that rigorously verifies evidence.<n>It comprises 500 manually annotated questions across 13 domains, paired with temporal intervals and spatial bounding boxes as evidence.<n>Experiments show that even GeminiPro-3-Pro correctly answers fewer than 17% of questions under the standard end-to-end QA setting.<n>Results expose a significant gap between surface-level answer correctness and genuine evidence-based reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-02T03:29:43Z)
• Auditing Algorithmic Personalization in TikTok Comment Sections [4.784448295763737]
  We trained sock-puppet accounts to exhibit left-leaning or right-leaning preferences and validated 17 of them by analyzing the videos recommended on their For You Pages.<n>We then scraped the comment sections shown to these trained partisan accounts, along with five cold-start accounts, across 65 politically neutral videos.<n>We find that while the composition of top comments remains largely consistent for all videos, ranking divergence between accounts from different political groups is significantly greater than that observed within the same group for some videos.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-26T05:52:41Z)
• TikTok's recommendations skewed towards Republican content during the 2024 U.S. presidential race [1.340487372205839]
  TikTok is a major force among social media platforms with over a billion monthly active users worldwide and 170 million in the U.S.<n>Despite concerns, there is scant research investigating TikTok's recommendation algorithm for political biases.<n>We fill this gap by conducting 323 independent algorithmic audit experiments testing partisan content recommendations in the lead-up to the 2024 U.S. presidential elections.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-29T18:24:20Z)
• Optimal bounds for dissatisfaction in perpetual voting [84.02572742131521]
  We consider a perpetual approval voting method that guarantees that no voter is dissatisfied too many times.<n>We identify a sufficient condition on voter behavior under which a sublinear growth of dissatisfaction is possible.<n>We present a voting method with sublinear guarantees on dissatisfaction under bounded conflicts, based on the standard techniques from prediction with expert advice.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-20T19:58:55Z)
• A User-Driven Framework for Regulating and Auditing Social Media [94.70018274127231]
  We propose that algorithmic filtering should be regulated with respect to a flexible, user-driven baseline. We require that the feeds a platform filters contain "similar" informational content as their respective baseline feeds. We present an auditing procedure that checks whether a platform honors this requirement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-20T17:53:34Z)
• Modeling Content Creator Incentives on Algorithm-Curated Platforms [76.53541575455978]
  We study how algorithmic choices affect the existence and character of (Nash) equilibria in exposure games. We propose tools for numerically finding equilibria in exposure games, and illustrate results of an audit on the MovieLens and LastFM datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-27T08:16:59Z)
• Algorithmic Amplification of Politics on Twitter [17.631887805091733]
  We provide quantitative evidence from a massive-scale randomized experiment on the Twitter platform. We studied Tweets by elected legislators from major political parties in 7 countries. In 6 out of 7 countries studied, the mainstream political right enjoys higher algorithmic amplification than the mainstream political left.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-21T09:25:39Z)
• News consumption and social media regulations policy [70.31753171707005]
  We analyze two social media that enforced opposite moderation methods, Twitter and Gab, to assess the interplay between news consumption and content regulation. Our results show that the presence of moderation pursued by Twitter produces a significant reduction of questionable content. The lack of clear regulation on Gab results in the tendency of the user to engage with both types of content, showing a slight preference for the questionable ones which may account for a dissing/endorsement behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-07T19:26:32Z)
• High-level Approaches to Detect Malicious Political Activity on Twitter [0.0]
  We investigate a data snapshot taken on May 2020, with around 5 million accounts and over 120 million tweets. The analyzed time period stretches from August 2019 to May 2020, with a focus on the Portuguese elections of October 6th, 2019. We learn that Twitter's suspension patterns are not adequate to the type of political trolling found in the Portuguese Twittersphere.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-04T22:54:44Z)
• Setting the Record Straighter on Shadow Banning [3.9103337761169943]
  Shadow banning consists for an online social network in limiting the visibility of some of its users, without them being aware of it. Twitter declares that it does not use such a practice, sometimes arguing about the occurrence of "bugs" to justify restrictions on some users. This paper is the first to address the plausibility or not of shadow banning on a major online platform, by adopting both a statistical and a graph topological approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-09T15:17:33Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.