There is no industry that can resist the changes that come along with the digital revolution, especially with the popularity of social media platforms. Reading, known in its traditional format as an archaic and primitive hobby, is no exception. With the influence of TikTok and Instagram, modern popular literature is now heavily promoted and finding your favorite authors in this generation via social media has become commonplace. A widely used term, BookTok and Bookstagram emerged as readers around the world started to create shortform videos and posts for book recommendations, reviews and interpretations, often adding an aesthetic vibe to the account to attract viewers.
However, many readers are heavily critical of the BookTok and Bookstagram phenomenon. They argue that these new developments are creating a toxic culture demonizing the art of literature. The promotion of only a few overrated and similar books, while overshadowing more deserving works, is an obstacle for book-related content. Others criticize BookTok and Bookstagram for promoting overconsumption and having a terrible reputation for creating toxic fandom wars and destructive criticism.
Nevertheless, I believe that BookTok and Bookstagram have more merit than the failing notoriety it currently holds. In fact, readers and writers that are actively utilizing social media platforms are cultivating a vibrant community for current and future readers.
First, although Instagram and TikTok are, in most cases, not known to produce deep content and conversation, BookTok and Bookstagram culture has added depth to the literature. Through the comment section of the pretty posts and reels, you can find passionate readers all over the world sharing their own thoughts about a book. Many readers have strong opinions about what they liked about the characters, the dialogue, the literary style and much more. Often, there are serious debates on character development and topics brought up throughout the plot, even in popular modern literature.
The idea that BookTok and Bookstagram only promote cheesy romance novels and cringe-worthy fantasy series is a misconception. Just as pop singers top the Spotify charts more compared to classics and jazz music, high rankings for certain genres and audiences are inevitable. In fact, there is nothing wrong with enjoying a few selected genres, whether they are considered valuable literature or simply entertainment. I remember when book-related content first appeared on my Instagram feed, and it was mostly popular smutty romance series that had high views and popularity. Nonetheless, once I started discovering more books online, the algorithm began showing me a wide range of book content, including stories by authors like Franz Kafka and Fyodor Dostoevsky. Therefore, it only takes one or two well-known books to cultivate a community of bookworms, which can also benefit writers of subgenres.
Second, overconsumption is an issue in all areas of content creation, but it is less severe in the realm of book-related content. A severe problem with overconsumption on social media would be in the beauty influencer realm, where we can easily find influencers receiving boxes of PR packages from numerous brands. Even though they claim to hold giveaway events for loyal followers and gift unused products to friends and family to avoid waste, many still have closets full of makeup products that will expire before they even use a quarter of the contents. At least for books, there is no expiration date and books can be consumed for life. In terms of overconsumption of physical books, nobody has ever had a problem with scholars having shelves full of books, but the moment a young reader on TikTok decided to share their collection with the world, it’s an environmental hazard. Even if someone decides to buy multiple limited editions of the same book, they would likely do so for only a few of their favorite selected titles. Additionally, many mindful book influencers have incorporated e-books and library books into their content as a more cost-effective and eco-friendly option for their audiences.
Third, toxic fandoms and passionate readers spewing negativity on authors, series and the people who have different reading taste has become a serious issue. Online readers have acted as a form of censorship, restricting writers’ freedom of expression in order to avoid backlash and ensure their books sell. I strongly believe that this is a threat to writers and can be considered a serious form of cyberbullying. However, the benefits of social media in promoting reading as a hobby and boosting market sales for publishing companies are too significant to discourage BookTok and Bookstagram altogether. With proper restrictions on language usage and promoting a culture of constructive criticism rather than mockery, TikTok and Instagram can be a healthy way of sharing ideas and inspirations. Book influencers should take greater responsibility in creating respectful content and fostering an environment where thoughtful reading and constructive criticism can flourish.
While BookTok and Bookstagram have their flaws, their role in spreading the art of reading and keeping stories alive across generations is significant. If TikTok and Instagram can contribute to this cause, we should embrace these platforms as tools for literary engagement.
Booktok sucks because it DOES promote porn to children. There was a girl at the summer camp I worked at who loved those booktok classics of Icebreaker, and her parents let her read them because they looked so child friendly. Also, have you seen the “booktok” section at Barnes n Noble? It is this porn slop that has covers akin to those at the Scholastic Fair. Vapid books with the same plot and heroine who “can’t fall in love with this boy… she just can’t!” The death of well written literature will come at the hands of these popular, vapid, porn obsessed books. Book-based communities do exist, and that is not Booktok. I’m surprised an article written with such a baiting headline and moot points got in here. The DC must be running out of things to talk about.