For general knowledge, Booktok is a hashtag on the social media app Tiktok that has over 4 million videos under it and has been under speculation. Whilst it has had many controversies it’s reached the point that credited magazines such as British GQ, New York Times and The Guardian have commented on it. Essentially it is a marketing term made by influencers on Tiktok to promote books both old and new by different authors, and has become so widespread that many bookstores in the UK are putting stickers on books that say “Tiktok loves me” or “a booktok fav”.
Now you may be wondering what the issue is? Well recently the criticisms that have been brought up are that booktok has watered down the publishing industry's standard. It is “the worst thing to happen to readers?” as British GQ themselves have posted, and a “shallow world” where being a reader is more important than actually reading.
My criticism with this is in the fact that the algorithm of Tiktok is coded so that it brings you content based upon what you choose to interact with and which content creators you follow. By claiming, as many users of the app do, that the books Booktok recommends hop onto whichever bandwagon is most popular, they deceive their followers. Because the algorithm is designed to cater to you.
Whichever genre of books and content creators you choose to follow on the app is who will pop up most often on your phone: it is designed to generate more content based off of which videos with specific hashtags you like and repost. As we have seen over the years as booktok has risen in popularity it has allowed a less restrictive gateway into the world of publishing. We have seen an increase of authors in marginalised groups gaining access to the public through the app. Whilst there is still a large disparity in the publishing industry within books and amongst authors and the team behind the making of the books, we have seen a large amount of opportunities appearing from Booktok for a more diverse range of authors, for example LGBTQIA+ authors, people of colour, and disabled authors.
Most arguments against Booktok also often have a misogynistic subtext to them. According to statistics women outpace men in reading in every genre, from non-fiction to fiction, and romance to horror. In fact, 76% of women would call themselves readers on average, whereas only 43% of men would. Yet, in the the top 10 bestselling books 8 on average are written by men, when 55% percent of people who would read these books are men and 45% are women. On the other hand, only 18% of men would read books written by female bestselling authors, and even less if the protagonist is a woman. There is very clearly a bias that is inherently misogynistic in that world even though women make up the majority of readers.
Booktok at its core is a large book club with many denominations; tearing it down and calling it the worst thing to happen to readers is quite a diminutive view of it. Social media is a double-edged sword. Through connecting people with booktok, it’s caused the largest amount of international translation of books and the greatest interest in international authors we have ever seen.
Moreover, an accredited news source like British GQ choosing to call out the obsession with the aesthetics of a reader found in Booktok is hypocritical, bearing in mind the large proportion of Booktok are teenage girls who are still discovering themselves. On the other hand, we take a male fan of a sport or video game who buys posters for rugby, collects merchandise of his favourite football team, and creates content in terms of fanart around his favourite video game. Instead of continuously watching a football match, he listens to a podcast analysing the game or the assets of the players. This is not seen as performative fan behaviour, and is not criticised as Booktok is, but is seen as genuinely supportive of the media that they are choosing to consume. Yet, saying that the community of Booktok is more worried about aesthetics and is ‘shallow’ for being ‘performative’ rather than reading for the sake of reading is a justified argument?
There’s an aspect of internalised misogyny within the community too, as I’ve mentioned before. Booktok is not just an excellent marketing device for new books, international books, or books from marginalised authors, but also older books, whether they be the ‘typical’ classics or less known classics from another culture, but simply put books from 10-30 years ago that simply didn’t get the reception they deserved. One of the big authors that Booktok has propelled is Donna Tartt, though it's not all positive. There has always been an environment of elitism and snobbery around the literature sect, whether you choose to study the canon, non-fiction, fiction, or even creative writing, and that attitude has carried over online. I would say it’s actually inflated into something a little more sinister because of the ability to hide behind a screen becoming available. ‘Fans’ of The Secret History by Donna Tartt had an entire remonstrance about books on Booktok never being of quality, and real literature is dying because of Booktok. Which is baffling because if we look at one of the central themes of The Secret History, it speaks of elitism, and the satirical perspective it gives on the highbrow attitudes of those who believe themselves over others based on what they are educated in.
Literature is objective to a certain extent - it matters what kind of grammar or prose is used - but policing what genres are published and what are ‘worth reading’ is an extremely dangerous rabbit hole into censorship. The arts have always evolved with its audience, and it has always adapted to the contemporary culture we see in society, but it is not to be restricted. It is impossible to pit genres against each other because of how varied they are. You can have personal favourites, a subjective opinion that perhaps changes or stays the same over time, but under no circumstances does it make sense to force it upon others.
Furthermore, the idea that booktok is killing literature is antithetical to the reality, as we have literally seen it revive bookstores, and even major corporations like Waterstones, or Barnes and Nobles, whose popularity were decreasing at alarming rates before Booktok came along and stirred up this frenzy and excitement about books once again.
That being said, with all these positive influences that booktok has had, does not mean it lacks flaws. At the end of the day it is still a business tool on social media that can very easily spiral out of control based upon how it’s used.
Firstly, in the era of social media where everything has become more accessible, we see influencers whose entire jobs are to promote a product, and books have also become a product to be sold. This is a dangerous gateway into overconsumption, which we have already begun to see on Booktok, in particular where they set challenges like thriller week, or how many books can you read in a month to increase your annual reading goal. In addition, popularising authors means they’ve released merchandise like collectable book editions, and we see a consumerist view upon buying and reading books.
However, like many issues, Booktok has layers. Influencers having a large collection of books is partially because it’s their job. They are sent many of these books in PR packages; however, it still creates an impression upon their audience that there is a ‘correct way’ to be a reader - with a collection of books of all genres and eras. That’s often a big issue with social media: it leaves an impression of what you should have, as well as a sense of envy for what others have that you don’t. It is a matter of creating a healthy environment on the internet as a whole, rather than solely a problem that Booktok has, because this influencer culture carries over to the unrealistic beauty markets and affluent lifestyles of influencers.
Secondly, as previously mentioned, the consumer culture has increased in our generation because of the socio-economic situation of our lives. It causes us to indulge materialistically, resulting in us ignoring greater issues, and is largely due to influencer culture. They edit and display only the best parts of their lives, and so we believe this perfect life is attainable, but only if we have the same material things.
This pattern is repeated on Booktok where, while we see a revival of bookstores, we should question the ethics of the publishing industry and major corporate stores which are known to buy smaller owned book businesses and take over, as well as causing fundamental damage to local libraries. This is especially damaging for those who may not be as fortunate to be able to buy whichever books they want. This once again brings up this concept that Booktok is a double edged sword. While it has these issues, it has evolved to have such a large audience that when issues about the problematic business ethics of conglomerates are brought up action can be taken. We’ve seen people on Booktok raise awareness and actively promote small book stores and not just revive big chain stores, but these small businesses too. It’s also brought attention to the crises libraries face internationally, and we see movements and protests growing loud enough to reach government bodies, forcing them to acknowledge the importance of available education found through books.
To conclude, I would say Booktok is a powerful platform as it has shown that it can have real life impact, but it really depends on how it is used and how people choose to act on the public platform.