Why Americans Get Their News From Influencers, Not Experts

But here’s the thing about influencers—they’re not journalists, historians, or scientists. Most didn’t spend years studying the topics they now explain to millions of followers. Yet their voices hold more weight than ever before. Why is that? It might be because influencers feel accessible. They post memes, share behind-the-scenes snippets of their lives, and speak in a personal, even conversational tone. Unlike traditional news outlets, they don’t appear distant or overly polished. This relatability makes them seem trustworthy, even if their expertise is questionable.

And let’s be honest: people don’t just follow influencers for information—they follow them for validation. It feels good when an influencer echoes your views or simplifies a complex issue into an easy-to-digest take. It’s comfortable. But comfort isn’t the same as accuracy. Relying on influencers for opinions on politics, social justice, or public health can create an echo chamber where facts take a backseat to popular opinions.

This dependence on influencers is a symptom of something bigger: the erosion of trust in traditional sources of authority. It’s no secret that institutions like the media, government, and even academia have faced increasing skepticism. Influencers have stepped into this void, providing the connection and clarity people feel are missing elsewhere. But that’s where the problem lies—not the influencers themselves, who are not inherently bad, but the level of reliance placed on them.

There’s a fine line between using influencers as a supplement to understanding the world and using them as the sole source. Influencers are helpful because they simplify complex topics, and their accessibility can help draw attention to important issues like shedding light on social injustices, amplifying marginalized voices, and encouraging civic engagement. However, the qualities that make influencers effective at spreading messages can also make them dangerous when misinformation or personal bias slips into the mix.

And let’s not forget, this reliance isn’t limited to news. The same logic applies to the rise of influencer marketing. People no longer just want a product—they want a product endorsed. A skincare routine isn’t just effective because it works; it’s effective because someone with glowing skin and a massive following says so. People trust influencers to curate their newsfeeds, shopping lists, and values. Why? Because influencers offer certainty in a world that feels anything but certain.

However, by outsourcing opinions and decision-making to influencers, people risk losing something vital—their own agency. Researching topics, forming opinions, and making independent choices take time and effort; the process is not easy. But relying on someone else to do all the thinking, whether about politics, consumer goods, or personal beliefs, is a slippery slope.

To be clear, influencers aren’t the villains here. Many use their platforms responsibly and have sparked important conversations that might not have reached a broader audience. The issue isn’t their existence—it’s the pedestal they’ve been placed on. They’re not experts on everything, nor should they be expected to be. Yet their voices often carry more weight than those who have dedicated their lives to understanding the subjects at hand.

The question is, where does this end? It’s no longer just about trends or products—this reliance shapes how people vote, protest, and engage with society. And while it’s tempting to blame influencers for this cultural shift, they’re only filling a void. They exist because traditional institutions, whether the media, government, or academia, have failed to meet people where they are. 

At the heart of this conversation is a need for balance. Influencers can offer valuable perspectives but shouldn’t replace critical thinking or proper research. As society leans more on influencers for guidance, it’s worth asking: are we comfortable letting these voices shape how we view the world? Or is it time to step back, reassess, and reclaim the ability to navigate information on our terms?