The Algorithm Isn’t Neutral

When I first examined TikTok misinformation related to mental health tips in a past MindWatch edition, the focus was on the lack of content quality and accuracy within the platform.

Short form videos were spreading oversimplified and often misleading ideas about mental health diagnosis, treatment, and lived experience.

That concern still stands. A large chunk of TikTok mental health content is misinformation though the platform does seem to be addressing the problem (at least somewhat). Read more about that here.

But new reporting shows the deeper issue is not just what people see.
It is how long they see it and how hard it is to leave.

A recent FlowingData recap, summarizing a Washington Post investigation, explains why mental health content on TikTok does not just appear. It sticks.

Here is the summary of the report.

Researchers analyzed viewing histories from nearly 900 U.S. users. Once someone engaged with mental health content, TikTok’s algorithm was more likely to continue serving it than many other topics.

My first thought was that TikTok has over 1 billion active monthly users. 900 users is a very small sample compared to the platform’s large reach so these results may need to be taken with a grain of salt.

Even so, researchers found that users who tried to exit the mental health loop required significantly more skipping than normal. The algorithm does not just respond to interest. It reshapes the environment.

That matters.

Because repetition changes how information feels.
It stops feeling like content and starts feeling like truth.

Repetition Shapes Belief

Algorithms reward engagement, not accuracy. Content that triggers recognition, emotion, or validation travels farther and lasts longer.

In mental health spaces, that often looks like:
- Broad symptom lists
- Simplified diagnostic explanations
- Confident claims without boundaries

Over time, repetition creates familiarity. Familiarity becomes credibility.

This is where stigma forms quietly.

Not through mockery or dismissal, but through narratives that flatten complexity and suggest mental health has a single look, path, or outcome.

Nuance fades. Differences feel wrong. Complexity gets mislabeled.

When Identity Meets the Algorithm

Mental health content is personal. It shapes how people understand themselves.

When similar narratives repeat, users may interpret the feed as social proof.
This must be common.
This must explain me.
This must be how it works.

The platform is not diagnosing, but the feed starts to feel explanatory.

That is not empowerment.
That is compression.

Compressed stories leave little room for individuality, context, or growth. They create fertile ground for stigma, especially self-stigma.

The Exit Problem

Many users enter mental health content casually or during moments of stress. They are not looking for immersion. They are looking for clarity.

What they often encounter instead is saturation.

The investigation found that shifting away from mental health content required disproportionate effort. The system resisted recalibration.

When exposure outpaces understanding, confusion replaces insight.

Stigma thrives in that confusion.

What This Means for Stigma

Stigma is not only misinformation.
It is repetition without context.

It is confidence without qualification.
It is exposure without education.

Another thought is this: Could this mental health loop have a positive effect upon stigma for some people? What if they found accurate information about mental health and happened to view a more accurate loop of information? For some, this could be helpful, but my guess is they would be fall in a fortunate minority considering the majority of mental health content on TikTok is misguided.

Even so, algorithms do not create stigma on purpose. But they can reinforce it by rewarding the simplest stories and sidelining complexity.

That does not make social media useless.
It makes it incomplete.

What You Can Do

1. Be intentional. Notice when your social media browsing repetition is shaping belief rather than informing it.

2. Choose longer contexts over snippets of information. Think more longer form YouTube interviews vs. 30 second opinions.

3. Verify, verify, verify (with known leaders and experts).

4. Balance stories with evidence. Lived experience matters. Research matters too.
   
   

Thank you all for coming along this journey.

Until next Friday morning, come back…be here.

Keith