of 2025 for violating its community guidelines. This comes as the platform expands its use of automated monitoring systems to review and address content before users report it.

According to its "Community Guidelines Enforcement" report, covering the period from October to December 2025, the proactive removal rate in the Kingdom reached 99.9 percent, meaning the vast majority of videos were removed before users reported them. The platform also stated that 98.4 percent of the violating content was removed within 24 hours.

The number of deleted videos in Saudi Arabia decreased compared to the third quarter of the same year, when the platform recorded approximately 3.86 million removals. This figure alone does not clarify whether the decrease resulted from a decline in violating content, a change in posting volume, or modifications to the rating and enforcement systems.

In

addition to the removals, TikTok reinstated 146,314 videos in Saudi Arabia during the same period, following a review of removal decisions or the acceptance of related appeals.

These reinstatements highlight another aspect of the moderation system. While the increased reliance on automated systems allows for the rapid processing of large volumes of content, it also necessitates a mechanism for appeals and human review when account holders contest the decisions. The figure does not specify the percentage of reinstated videos out of the total appeals submitted in the Kingdom, nor does it clarify the types of violations that led to the reversal of the decisions. Globally, TikTok removed over 175.3 million videos during the fourth quarter of 2025, representing approximately 0.5 percent of all content posted on the platform during that period. Over 152.5 million videos were detected and removed using automated monitoring technologies, while over 8.3 million videos were reinstated after review decisions. The proactive removal rate globally reached 99.1 percent, while 93.4 percent of violating content

was removed within 24 hours. The platform relies on a model that combines automated software with human review teams. Technical systems are used to identify patterns and content that may violate policies, while specialists intervene in cases requiring broader contextual assessment or when appeals are filed.