Algorithmic Persuasion and Political Campaign Ethics on TikTok: Challenges of Misinformation, Polarization and Influencer Disclosure

Abstract

The rise of TikTok is giving political campaigns a new spice. TikTok\'s short-video format, personalization algorithm, and interaction features allow political messages to be disseminated at a high speed. Nevertheless, the same features enabling the fast spread of political messages can create ethical problems when motivations of engagement algorithms come into play. The objective of this paper is to analyze algorithmic persuasion, disinformation, political polarization and disclosure from a social responsibility perspective and the TARES test. By using a conceptual literature-based approach and analyzing, we evaluate the ethical responsibilities of political actors, influencers, social media platforms and the audience. This article argues that ethical issues occur when campaign tactics emphasize attention rather than communicating truthfully, when algorithmic amplification heightens exposure to false or polarizing information, and when political relationships with influencers are not adequately disclosed. The article introduces an Ethical Political Campaign Communication Framework with principles of transparent sponsorship, responsible algorithmic amplification, content verification, equitable political persuasion, and media literacy for audience. The aim of the framework is to support ethical political communication on TikTok while enabling political participation and freedom of speech.

Introduction

The text examines the ethical challenges of political communication on TikTok and other social media platforms. Social media has transformed political communication from traditional media-controlled messaging into a more direct, interactive, and algorithm-driven process. TikTok is particularly influential because its recommendation algorithm can rapidly distribute political content beyond users who actively follow political accounts.

The main ethical concerns identified are algorithmic persuasion, misinformation and disinformation, political polarization, and lack of transparency among political influencers. Campaigns may create emotional or sensational content to increase views and engagement, while algorithms can amplify such content. False information can spread rapidly, and users may be repeatedly exposed to political messages that reinforce their existing beliefs. Political influencers create additional concerns when they promote campaigns without clearly disclosing financial or strategic relationships.

Literature Review

Previous research has studied:

• The transformation of political communication through hybrid media.
• The role of algorithms in determining political content visibility.
• The rapid spread of misinformation and disinformation.
• The growing influence of political influencers.
• The importance of transparency when influencers have political or financial connections.

However, existing studies often examine these issues separately. The research identifies a gap by analyzing algorithmic persuasion, misinformation, polarization, and influencer disclosure together as interconnected ethical issues on TikTok.

Theoretical Framework

The study uses two major ethical frameworks:

1. Social Responsibility Theory – argues that freedom of communication must be accompanied by responsibility toward society. Political actors, influencers, and platforms should prioritize truth, fairness, public interest, and social consequences, rather than simply maximizing views and engagement.
2. TARES Test – evaluates persuasive communication according to five principles:
   • Truthfulness
   • Authenticity
   • Respect
   • Equity
   • Social responsibility

These principles help determine whether political messages on TikTok are ethically acceptable.

Critical Ethical Issues

• Algorithmic persuasion: TikTok's recommendation system can make political content highly visible based on user behavior. Content that is emotional, controversial, or sensational may receive greater exposure, potentially encouraging campaigns to prioritize engagement over accurate and balanced information.
• Misinformation and disinformation: False or misleading political content can spread quickly through short videos, edited visuals, and emotionally appealing messages. Political organizations therefore have a responsibility to verify important claims before publishing them.
• Influencer transparency: Influencers who have financial or strategic relationships with political campaigns should disclose these connections so audiences can distinguish independent opinions from sponsored political persuasion.
• Platform responsibility: TikTok and other platforms also have ethical responsibilities because their algorithms, moderation systems, and recommendation mechanisms influence the information people encounter.

Conclusion

TikTok has altered the terms upon which political actors can communicate with citizens. Its short-form video format, personalized feed algorithm and interactivity all boost the likelihood that political messages will be seen and therefore increase chances for political engagement. But those same features pose ethical concerns when political campaigns are incentivized to prioritize engagement over other forms of communication. This can lead to the promotion of overly emotional political content, the viral spread of false information, the escalation of political polarization through hostile political rhetoric, and political endorsement by TikTok influencers who fail to disclose their financial ties to the political message they’re promoting. In this paper I have applied Social Responsibility Theory and the TARES Test to explore these issues. Through this application, I have shown that to assess the ethics of political communication, one cannot only measure reach, engagement or campaign effectiveness. Political communicators should instead consider truthfulness, authenticity, respect, equity and social responsibility. In addition, I have created the Ethical Political Campaign Communication Framework which brings together campaign message production, algorithmic amplification, ethical screening and responsible political participation. This framework offers an actionable model for political organizations, influencers, platforms and audiences to navigate their ethical responsibilities in digital political communication. Ethical rules are meant not to prohibit political persuasion or end political disagreement, which are essential parts of democratic discourse. Rather, ethical rules are meant to stop persuasion from turning into manipulation, and to stop technological visibility from serving as an excuse for irresponsible communication. Empirical studies could next investigate how Malaysian TikTok users perceive political influencers’ disclosures, the extent to which recommendations by the TikTok algorithm affect exposure to opposing political arguments, and how the content of different political campaign messages influences political trust and political engagement. These empirical findings would provide additional support to develop ethical guidelines for new modes of digital political communication.

References

[1] A. Chadwick, The Hybrid Media System: Politics and Power, 2nd ed. New York, NY, USA: Oxford University Press, 2017. [2] P. M. Napoli, social media and the Public Interest: Media Regulation in the Disinformation Age. New York, NY, USA: Columbia University Press, 2019. [3] S. Vosoughi, D. Roy, and S. Aral, “The spread of true and false news online,” Science, vol. 359, no. 6380, pp. 1146–1151, 2018, doi: 10.1126/science. aap9559. [4] C. Wardle and H. Derakhshan, Information Disorder: Toward an Interdisciplinary Framework for Research and Policy Making. Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe, 2017. [5] M. J. Riedl, J. Lukito, and S. C. Woolley, “Political influencers on social media: An introduction,” social media + Society, vol. 9, no. 2, 2023, doi: 10.1177/20563051231177938. [6] M. J. Riedl, B. D. Horne, M. J. A. Craig, M. R. Kotowski, and C. A. Luther, “Antecedents of disclosure: What transparency measures social media users in the United States want from paid political influencers,” social media + Society, vol. 12, no. 3, 2026, doi: 10.1177/20563051261480944. [7] D. Harff, “Political content from virtual ‘friends’: How influencers arouse young women’s political interest via parasocial relationships,” The Journal of social media in Society, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 97–121, 2022. [8] C. G. Christians, M. Fackler, K. B. Richardson, P. J. Kreshel, and R. H. Woods, Media Ethics: Cases and Moral Reasoning, 9th ed. New York, NY, USA: Routledge, 2020. [9] S. Baker and D. L. Martinson, “The TARES test: Five principles for ethical persuasion,” Journal of Mass Media Ethics, vol. 16, nos. 2–3, pp. 148–175, 2001, doi: 10.1080/08900523.2001.9679610. [10] J. H. Kietzmann, K. Hermkens, I. P. McCarthy, and B. S. Silvestre, “social media? Get serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media,” Business Horizons, vol. 54, no. 3, pp. 241–251, 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.bushor.2011.01.005. [11] C. R. Sunstein, #Republic: Divided Democracy in the Age of Social Media. Princeton, NJ, USA: Princeton University Press, 2017. [12] W. L. Bennett and S. Livingston, “The disinformation order: Disruptive communication and the decline of democratic institutions,” European Journal of Communication, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 122–139, 2018, doi: 10.1177/0267323118760317.

Copyright

Copyright © 2026 Zhang Junhao, Mohd Haizra. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.