The Algorithmic Literary Canon: Reconstructing the English Literary Canon through Streaming Platforms and BookTok among Generation Z Readers
Keywords:
Algorithmic Canon, BookTok, Generation Z, English Literary Canon, Streaming Platforms, Digital Reading Culture, TikTokAbstract
The emergence of digital platforms, particularly TikTok's BookTok community and audiobook streaming services, has fundamentally disrupted the traditionally gatekept institutions that have long defined the English literary canon. This article investigates how algorithmic curation, peer-driven recommendations, and parasocial engagement on streaming platforms are reconstructing canonical literary taste among Generation Z readers (born 1997-2012). Purpose: This study examines the mechanisms through which digital platforms challenge or reinforce traditional canon formation, and explores the extent to which Generation Z readers are constructing an alternative, algorithmically mediated literary canon. Methods: A mixed-methods approach was employed, combining quantitative content analysis of 1,200 BookTok posts (collected via purposive sampling from TikTok, January-June 2024) with semi-structured interviews of 24 Generation Z readers aged 18-25 recruited from three Indonesian, British, and Singaporean universities. Thematic analysis and descriptive statistical analysis were applied to triangulate findings. Results: Results reveal three dominant patterns: (1) canonical texts are selectively resurged through affective, identity-based framing rather than scholarly legitimation; (2) algorithmically amplified texts form an 'emergent digital canon' that overlaps only partially with institutionally validated lists; and (3) Generation Z readers actively negotiate tensions between algorithmic discovery and cultural prestige. Implications: These findings suggest that educational institutions and publishers must reconsider canonical authority in an era of participatory digital culture. Conclusion: The algorithmic literary canon represents neither a complete democratization nor a simple replacement of the established canon, but rather a dynamic, contested negotiation of literary value in digital modernity.
References
Bloom, H. (2015). The Western Canon: The Books and School of the Ages. Harcourt Brace.
Bourdieu, P. (2016). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education (pp. 241-258). Greenwood Press.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2016). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 13(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Fiske, J. (2017). The cultural economy of fandom. In L. A. Lewis (Ed.), The Adoring Audience: Fan Culture and Popular Media (pp. 30-49). Routledge.
Flynn, G. (2015). Gone Girl. Crown Publishers.
Gillespie, T. (2015). The relevance of algorithms. In T. Gillespie, P. Boczkowski, & K. Foot (Eds.), Media Technologies: Essays on Communication, Materiality, and Society (pp. 167-194). MIT Press.
Guillory, J. (2016). Cultural Capital: The Problem of Literary Canon Formation. University of Chicago Press.
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2016). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59-82.
Hoover, C. (2016). It Ends with Us. Atria Books.
Jenkins, H. (2016). Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York University Press.
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (2017). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159-174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310
Machado, C. M. (2019). In the Dream House: A Memoir. Graywolf Press.
Mangen, A., Hoel, T., Jernes, M., & Moser, T. (2019). Shared reading with a paper picturebook and an e-picturebook: A comparative study with first-grade children. Literacy, 53(3), 175-184. https://doi.org/10.1111/lit.12186
Morrison, T. (2015). Beloved. Alfred A. Knopf.
Murray, S. (2018). The Digital Literary Sphere: Reading, Writing, and Selling Books in the Internet Era. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. New York University Press.
O'Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of Math Destruction: How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threatens Democracy. Crown Publishers.
Orange, T. (2018). There There. Alfred A. Knopf.
Plath, S. (2015). The Bell Jar. Heinemann.
Ramdarshan Bold, M. (2019). The eight percent problem: Authors of colour in the British Young Adult market (2006-2016). Publishing Research Quarterly, 35(2), 385-406. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-019-09636-4
Ramdarshan Bold, M. (2021). Inclusive Young Adult Fiction: Authors of Colour in the United Kingdom. Palgrave Macmillan.
Rooney, S. (2018). Normal People. Faber and Faber.
Steiner, A. (2019). The global book: Micropublishing, creative labour, and the work of 2.0. In M. Weber & P. Ralph (Eds.), Subculture, Pop Music and Politics (pp. 152-168). Routledge.
Striphas, T. (2015). Algorithmic culture. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 18(4-5), 395-412. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367549415577392
Thomas, B. (2017). Canons and fanons: Literary fanfiction online. Dichtung Digital, 37. Available online: http://www.dichtung-digital.com/2017/Thomas/thomas.htm (accessed on 15 January 2025).
Twenge, J. M. (2017). iGen: Why Today's Super-Connected Kids Are Growing Up Less Rebellious, More Tolerant, Less Happy - and Completely Unprepared for Adulthood. Atria Books.
Yanagihara, H. (2015). A Little Life. Doubleday.
Yarros, R. (2023). Fourth Wing. Entangled: Red Tower Books.
Zucker, A. (2022). BookTok has taken over. The New York Times, 2 March. Available online: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/02/books/booktok-tiktok-books.html (accessed on 20 January 2025).
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 International Journal of Global Education, Research, and Innovation in Studies (INGGERIS)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
