TikTok quietly rolled out significant algorithm changes last month, and publishers who haven’t noticed are about to feel the pain. I’ve been digging into the data and talking to social media editors, and the picture is concerning for news organizations that went all-in on the platform.

The short version: TikTok is deprioritizing news content in favor of entertainment. And the changes are more aggressive than most publishers realize.

What Actually Changed

TikTok has always been cagey about its recommendation algorithm—the infamous “For You” page remains a black box. But we can observe the effects.

Several major news publishers have reported reach declines of 30-50% since mid-January. That’s not a statistical blip. Something fundamental shifted.

From what I can piece together, TikTok has implemented stricter classification of “hard news” content and is serving it to fewer users who haven’t explicitly sought it out. The algorithm now seems to interpret news consumption as a negative signal in some contexts, reducing follow-up recommendations.

This tracks with TikTok’s broader strategic direction. They’re facing regulatory pressure globally over misinformation and political content. Reducing news amplification reduces risk. It also happens to make the platform more advertiser-friendly—brands have always been squeamish about appearing next to hard news.

The Numbers Don’t Lie

I’ve collected data from six Australian news publishers willing to share their TikTok analytics (anonymously, obviously).

Average video views across these outlets dropped 41% comparing December 2024 to January 2025. Follower growth stalled—four of the six actually saw net follower losses for the first time since joining the platform.

The most telling metric: “suggested” views (content served via the algorithm rather than direct follows) dropped by an average of 58%. TikTok isn’t just deprioritizing news in the For You feed—they’re barely showing it at all.

One social editor summed it up perfectly: “We went from feeling like we’d cracked the code to wondering if anyone can see our content.”

Publishers Who Are Adapting

Not everyone is suffering equally. The outlets that positioned themselves as entertainment-first, news-second are holding steady.

The Washington Post’s TikTok strategy has always leaned toward personality-driven humor with a news angle. Their reach appears relatively stable. Same with NowThis, which treats news as a vehicle for emotional storytelling rather than information delivery.

The ABC’s youth-focused accounts have actually grown through the changes, likely because they’ve invested heavily in explainer content that reads as educational rather than breaking news.

The common thread: these accounts don’t look like traditional news. They’ve adopted the platform’s native aesthetic so thoroughly that the algorithm categorizes them differently.

The Strategic Question

This leaves publishers with an uncomfortable choice.

You can continue producing traditional news content for TikTok and accept dramatically reduced reach. Some organizations will make this call—their brand doesn’t permit the informal, personality-driven approach that performs well.

Alternatively, you can adapt your content to match what the algorithm rewards. This means more entertainment value, more personality, more emotion, less straight reporting. Some editors bristle at this suggestion, but it’s worth remembering that every platform has its own grammar. Newspapers don’t read like radio scripts.

Or you can reduce investment in TikTok and redirect resources elsewhere. YouTube Shorts hasn’t implemented similar restrictions (yet). Instagram Reels remains neutral toward news. Threads is explicitly courting news publishers.

My take: don’t abandon TikTok entirely, but don’t keep investing at current levels either. The platform has shown it will prioritize its own interests over publishers’ needs. That’s not evil—it’s just business. But it should inform your decisions about where to allocate limited resources.

The Broader Platform Reality

What’s happening on TikTok is a preview of a larger trend. Social platforms are increasingly hostile to news content.

Facebook’s deprioritization of news has been well documented. Twitter/X has become unreliable for news distribution. LinkedIn remains viable but serves a narrow audience. Google’s algorithm updates have crushed many publishers’ search traffic.

We’re entering an era where platforms view news as a liability rather than an asset. Publishers who built their digital strategies on platform distribution need to reconsider.

Direct relationships with readers—newsletters, apps, memberships—matter more than ever. It’s harder than viral social growth, but it’s something you actually control.

Practical Steps for Media Teams

If you’re running social strategy for a publisher, here’s what I’d do this quarter:

Audit your TikTok analytics honestly. Compare the last three months to the previous three. If you’re seeing the declines I’ve described, adjust your expectations and resource allocation accordingly.

Test the entertainment-forward approach if it fits your brand. Some newsrooms can pull this off; others can’t. Don’t force it if it compromises your credibility.

Diversify platform investment immediately. If TikTok was 40% of your social effort, cut it to 20% and redistribute to channels where news content isn’t being actively suppressed.

Accelerate your first-party data strategy. Email subscribers, app downloads, registered users. These audiences can’t be taken away by an algorithm change.

And keep watching. Platforms change their minds. TikTok might reverse course in six months. But you can’t build a sustainable strategy on hope.

The publishers who thrive will be those who recognize that social platforms are rented land. Build your house on ground you own.