TikTok is banning #SkinnyTok. Will it make a difference?
TikTok announced it was banning content under the “SkinnyTok” hashtag, a move heralded by some as a step toward curbing eating disorder content online. The hashtag is used in posts that idolize extreme thinness, tying people’s worth to their weight and putting people’s health in danger, according to the US National Alliance for Eating Disorders.
The coverage has been predictably positive. Media headlines frame the ban as a “win” in the fight for digital safety, and TikTok gets to claim it’s taking action to protect users. But as anyone who’s looked under the hood of these platforms knows: this is cosmetic.
Let’s be clear, TikTok banning #SkinnyTok is less about protecting users and more about releasing public pressure on a topic it was getting flack for, offering a PR-friendly gesture in place of structural, lasting change.
TikTok’s Failure
CCDH has investigated how platforms like TikTok and YouTube serve eating disorder content to young users. The findings should be sobering. Our Deadly by Design report exposed how TikTok’s algorithm pushes content related to eating disorders and self-harm to teens within minutes of signing up. A standard 13-year-old user was recommended suicide content within 2.6 minutes and eating disorder content within 8 minutes. For accounts identified as vulnerable (using terms like “loseweight” in usernames), that exposure skyrocketed: those teens were served self-harm content 12 times more often than the average user.
The problem isn’t just harmful hashtags. It’s the recommendation systems themselves; systems that prioritise watch time and engagement over user safety. TikTok’s algorithm isn’t an innocent matchmaker of interests. It’s a system designed to hook users by any means necessary, even if that means feeding them a steady diet of thinspo, pro-ana content, and videos romanticising self-harm.
A Bigger Problem
It’s not just TikTok. Our investigation into YouTube revealed that 1 in 3 videos recommended by the platform to a 13-year-old girl who watched eating disorder content for the first time were actively harmful. Nearly two-thirds were about eating disorders or weight loss. Some of these videos shared “Anorexia Boot Camp” diets of 0-500 calories per day. Others glamorized skeletal imagery. Disturbingly, ads from major brands like Nike, Grammarly and HelloFresh were shown alongside these videos, making clear that it’s a business model, not just a failure of moderation.
These systems are not broken; they are working exactly as designed. And until regulators recognise that, children will remain exposed. That’s why CCDH developed the STAR Framework for social media platforms’ accountability: Safety by design, Transparency of systems and incentives, Accountability for failure, and Responsibility for enforcement. It’s a roadmap for regulators who are serious about protecting the public, especially children, from algorithmic harms.
A Wake-Up Call for Policymakers
This should be a wake-up call for policymakers. The UK’s Online Safety Act and Ofcom’s Children’s Code are premised on the idea that tech companies must embed safety by design. So far, TikTok and YouTube are failing that test.
The EU, too, has placed the protection of minors at the heart of its Digital Services Act. In recent months, the European Commission has issued guidance and information requests aimed at platforms’ recommender systems and their impact on young users. Our findings should add urgency to that process.
TikTok banning #SkinnyTok might generate some good press, but it doesn’t fix the algorithm. It doesn’t change the incentives, and it doesn’t stop the endless scroll of toxic content. Only meaningful transparency, accountability, and a new design ethos can do that.
It’s time for regulators to act. Because while the platforms drag their feet, the algorithms are still running, and kids are still watching.
Agree? Demand governments and regulators hold social media companies accountable and create safer and better digital spaces.