Media and the Formation of Public Thought Among Youth
Analyzing media influence during international crises
Why this case?
The choice behind this topic couldn’t be more relevant today. What began as a project during a period of regional crises has, arguably, escalated into full-scale war. The immediacy, the scale, and the intensity of these developments, especially as the escalation involving Iran pushed the region further into open conflict (see war), only reinforce the core argument of this project rather than weaken it.
In this context, the role of media becomes impossible to ignore. Not just media as a system, but also those who operate within it: the actors, the narrators, and, primarily, the propagandists. Equally important is the role of young people, who now dominate social media and shape how information is consumed, interpreted, and circulated. Their interaction with these narratives and their relationship to both traditional and digital media will be examined in depth below.
Opinion among younger generations, particularly Gen Z and, increasingly, Gen Alpha, as they approach an age of conscious political awareness, is often marked by a sharper, more reactive, and at times more radical edge. This is not happening in a vacuum. It is the result of a media environment that prioritizes speed, emotion, and visibility, where complex geopolitical events are reduced to fragments, slogans, and highly charged visuals.
In this context, the role of media becomes impossible to ignore. Not just media as a system, but also those who operate within it: the actors, the narrators, and, primarily, the propagandists. Equally important is the role of young people, who now dominate social media and shape how information is consumed, interpreted, and circulated. Their interaction with these narratives and their relationship to both traditional and digital media will be examined in depth below.
Opinion among younger generations, particularly Gen Z and, increasingly, Gen Alpha, as they approach an age of conscious political awareness, is often marked by a sharper, more reactive, and at times more radical edge. This is not happening in a vacuum. It is the result of a media environment that prioritizes speed, emotion, and visibility, where complex geopolitical events are reduced to fragments, slogans, and highly charged visuals.
Hypothesis 1: Youth Divisions in Media Consumption
PART A: AGE AND GENERATIONAL DIFFERENCES
Building on this, our first hypothesis is that divisions in public opinion during crises are not random. They rather reflect generational differences in how people consume media.
If we look at the graph just below, the pattern we’re referring to becomes clear. It shows a clear and growing divide.
Younger audiences, particularly those aged 18 to 24, rely far more heavily on social networks and video platforms for news, reaching around 44%. Older groups, in contrast, remain more attached to television, while websites and news apps play a stronger role among those aged 25 to 44.
Building on this, our first hypothesis is that divisions in public opinion during crises are not random. They rather reflect generational differences in how people consume media.
If we look at the graph just below, the pattern we’re referring to becomes clear. It shows a clear and growing divide.
Younger audiences, particularly those aged 18 to 24, rely far more heavily on social networks and video platforms for news, reaching around 44%. Older groups, in contrast, remain more attached to television, while websites and news apps play a stronger role among those aged 25 to 44.
Youth Divisions in Media Habits Across Generations
This graph, beyond showing each generation’s preferred medium of consuming content, also highlights how they enter the public sphere through entirely different media environments. For younger audiences, news is embedded in fast, algorithm-driven feeds, where political information competes directly with entertainment, personal content, and influencer commentary. For older audiences, the information space tends to be more structured, slower, and more closely tied to established news institutions.
How does this translate in "plain English"? Simply, that the divide we’re seeing is not just about what people know, but about how they come to know it in the first place. And already, at this stage, a clear generational gap in news consumption, and, by extension, in perception, begins to emerge.
However, age is only part of the picture. The second dimension of this hypothesis is digital inequality.
How does this translate in "plain English"? Simply, that the divide we’re seeing is not just about what people know, but about how they come to know it in the first place. And already, at this stage, a clear generational gap in news consumption, and, by extension, in perception, begins to emerge.
However, age is only part of the picture. The second dimension of this hypothesis is digital inequality.
PART B: DIGITAL DIVIDE BY INCOME
As the slide shows, youth reliance on social media varies sharply by national income level: it is only 17% in low-income countries, rises to around 45% in lower-middle-income countries, peaks at 75% in upper-middle-income settings, and then falls slightly in high-income countries.
As the slide shows, youth reliance on social media varies sharply by national income level: it is only 17% in low-income countries, rises to around 45% in lower-middle-income countries, peaks at 75% in upper-middle-income settings, and then falls slightly in high-income countries.
Youth Social Media Use Across Income Levels
This demonstrates that youth media habits are shaped not only by generation, but also by access, affordability, and the broader condition of national media systems. In other words, digital inequality strongly influences how young people encounter information.
Our first conclusion, then, is that the youth information environment is divided in two ways at once: by age and by digital access. Both of these divides become especially visible during international crises, when people rely on media to make sense of fast-moving events.
This brings us to our second hypothesis: that this issue should be approached from a cross-disciplinary perspective.
Our first conclusion, then, is that the youth information environment is divided in two ways at once: by age and by digital access. Both of these divides become especially visible during international crises, when people rely on media to make sense of fast-moving events.
This brings us to our second hypothesis: that this issue should be approached from a cross-disciplinary perspective.
Hypothesis 2: Cross-disciplinary Audience & Methods
For this hypothesis, we’ve created a table that brings together multiple, complementary datasets to support our point.
We combine the Reuters Digital News Report 2025, UNICEF’s Changing Childhood study from 2023, the Attest Gen Z Study from 2026, the OECD Trust Dataset from 2024, and conflict deaths data from 2024 to provide a broader context of crises.
We combine the Reuters Digital News Report 2025, UNICEF’s Changing Childhood study from 2023, the Attest Gen Z Study from 2026, the OECD Trust Dataset from 2024, and conflict deaths data from 2024 to provide a broader context of crises.
Connecting the Dots: Cross-Disciplinary Data on Youth News Consumption and Trust
Together, these sources allow us to connect multiple dimensions of the same problem:
This cross-disciplinary approach also explains why the topic matters to different audiences. For researchers and educators, it highlights generational gaps and can help rethink media-literacy programs. For students, it develops critical media skills and awareness of bias. For journalists and media professionals, it underscores the need to adapt reporting to youth preferences while maintaining balanced narratives. And for sociologists and policymakers, it illuminates how digital activism shapes broader social and political processes.
Ultimately, this is not just a question of where young people get their news. It is also a question of how public thought is being shaped in a digital media system.
- Reuters shows that 44% of 18 to 24-year-olds rely on social media, compared with 38% of 25 to 34-year-olds.
- UNICEF adds that 60% of youth use social media, but only 23% trust it.
- The Attest study shows that 44% get daily news via social media, while 25% use TikTok as their primary platform.
- OECD data place this in a wider comparative perspective, showing that youth trust in news is higher than that of older groups in many countries.
This cross-disciplinary approach also explains why the topic matters to different audiences. For researchers and educators, it highlights generational gaps and can help rethink media-literacy programs. For students, it develops critical media skills and awareness of bias. For journalists and media professionals, it underscores the need to adapt reporting to youth preferences while maintaining balanced narratives. And for sociologists and policymakers, it illuminates how digital activism shapes broader social and political processes.
Ultimately, this is not just a question of where young people get their news. It is also a question of how public thought is being shaped in a digital media system.
Hypothesis 3: Trust & Emotional Engagement
PART A: THE TRUST PARADOX
At first glance, the data may seem surprising. As the graph shows, across countries such as the United States, Australia, Ireland, Germany, and the United Kingdom, younger adults consistently express higher trust in news than older groups. Yet the structure of credibility among younger audiences looks very different from traditional models.
At first glance, the data may seem surprising. As the graph shows, across countries such as the United States, Australia, Ireland, Germany, and the United Kingdom, younger adults consistently express higher trust in news than older groups. Yet the structure of credibility among younger audiences looks very different from traditional models.
Trust in News Across Countries and Generations
In older communication models, authority typically came from established institutions, meaning newspapers, television channels, or official experts. Among younger audiences, particularly Gen Z, this hierarchy flattens. Mainstream media, influencers, peer-shared content, and eyewitness material all compete for credibility within the same digital space.
This creates what we describe as a trust paradox. Only around 23% of youth say they trust social media as a source, yet more than half still trust the news they encounter there. Trust is not disappearing. Trust is being reorganized, increasingly shaped by emotional engagement, perceived sincerity, and platform logic.
This creates what we describe as a trust paradox. Only around 23% of youth say they trust social media as a source, yet more than half still trust the news they encounter there. Trust is not disappearing. Trust is being reorganized, increasingly shaped by emotional engagement, perceived sincerity, and platform logic.
Part B – Gen Z Media Usage & Trust
The second part of this hypothesis helps clarify this paradox.
Social platforms are now the dominant news environment for Gen Z: around 44% get daily news via social media, and roughly two-thirds consume news on these platforms several times per week. Additionally, one-quarter of Gen Z use TikTok as their primary news source.
The second part of this hypothesis helps clarify this paradox.
Social platforms are now the dominant news environment for Gen Z: around 44% get daily news via social media, and roughly two-thirds consume news on these platforms several times per week. Additionally, one-quarter of Gen Z use TikTok as their primary news source.
Gen Z News Habits and Trust Across Age Groups
What is especially striking is that, despite widespread concerns about manipulation and misinformation, a majority still trusts the news they encounter on social media, while only a minority actively distrusts it.
This suggests that young audiences may distrust platforms in general, but still trust specific formats, creators, and stories within them. Credibility is no longer determined solely by institutional authority. Rather, it is shaped by emotional tone, relatability, immediacy, and perceived authenticity.
A message that feels direct and sincere can therefore have a stronger impact than a formally correct but impersonal institutional report. This is particularly important during crises, where events are highly emotional: emotionally engaging content spreads faster and often feels more persuasive than conventional reporting.
This suggests that young audiences may distrust platforms in general, but still trust specific formats, creators, and stories within them. Credibility is no longer determined solely by institutional authority. Rather, it is shaped by emotional tone, relatability, immediacy, and perceived authenticity.
A message that feels direct and sincere can therefore have a stronger impact than a formally correct but impersonal institutional report. This is particularly important during crises, where events are highly emotional: emotionally engaging content spreads faster and often feels more persuasive than conventional reporting.
Hypothesis 4: Case Studies
Our fourth hypothesis is that mainstream, social, and alternative media produce divergent narratives during crises. To illustrate this, we turn to three case studies: Gaza, Iran, and Venezuela.
PART A: GAZA & IRAN
First, Gaza:
PART A: GAZA & IRAN
First, Gaza:
The Gaza case shows how youth narratives were shaped by a leaderless TikTok movement that translated conflict narratives for global audiences. Activists exposed misreporting and propaganda, including around the hospital explosion, and used platform tactics to evade censorship. This case also suggests that the divide is often generational rather than purely ideological, because mainstream and alternative narratives circulated in very different media environments.
Restrictions on journalists and concerns about biased coverage made local voices especially important. As a result, young audiences were not just receiving information passively—they were actively participating in the production and circulation of conflict narratives in real time.
Second, Iran:
Second, Iran:
Iran demonstrates a different but related mechanism.
Youth activism there is decentralized and network-based, rooted in universities and everyday life.
Movements continue through social media despite repression and internet shutdowns.
Youth activism there is decentralized and network-based, rooted in universities and everyday life.
Movements continue through social media despite repression and internet shutdowns.
Students document abuses and upload footage once connectivity resumes, preserving collective memory. At the same time, platforms such as Discord and WhatsApp function not only as communication tools but also as shelters, therapy spaces, and points of solidarity. The slide also highlights the scale of this environment, noting that around 14 million Iranians, or about 15% of the population, are Gen Z gamers using Discord. In this sense, digital spaces help unify the diaspora and sustain memory despite censorship.
PART B: VENEZUELA
Finally, Venezuela:
Venezuela illustrates the clash between external framing and local perception. As the slide states, mainstream outlets framed the US kidnapping of President Maduro as a “capture” or “arrest,” downplaying the issue of sovereignty. Inside Venezuela, however, reactions were marked by shock and anger, with both supporters and opponents condemning foreign interference.
Finally, Venezuela:
Venezuela illustrates the clash between external framing and local perception. As the slide states, mainstream outlets framed the US kidnapping of President Maduro as a “capture” or “arrest,” downplaying the issue of sovereignty. Inside Venezuela, however, reactions were marked by shock and anger, with both supporters and opponents condemning foreign interference.
The crisis also intensified repression. A state of emergency authorized arrests of those perceived to support the intervention, while simultaneous pro- and anti-government protests revealed sharp divisions in youth narratives.
The chart below places Venezuela within a broader 2024 conflict context by showing death tolls across different countries. This matters because it reminds us that crisis narratives do not emerge in isolation—they are interpreted against a wider global background of violence, media comparison, and competing political frames.
The chart below places Venezuela within a broader 2024 conflict context by showing death tolls across different countries. This matters because it reminds us that crisis narratives do not emerge in isolation—they are interpreted against a wider global background of violence, media comparison, and competing political frames.
Conflict Death Tolls Across Countries in 2024: A Global Comparison
In this case, Venezuela shows how crisis narratives become fragmented when different media systems assign different meanings to the same event.
Taken together, these three cases support our fourth hypothesis. They show that media do not simply transmit information about crises; they actively shape the narrative field in which those crises are understood.
Taken together, these three cases support our fourth hypothesis. They show that media do not simply transmit information about crises; they actively shape the narrative field in which those crises are understood.
In Conclusion...
To conclude, our research supports all four hypotheses.
Hypothesis #1 is confirmed: clear generational divides in media habits mirror the divisions we see during crises.
Hypothesis #2 is supported: understanding and addressing youth opinion formation requires a cross-disciplinary perspective.
Hypothesis #3 is confirmed: emotional engagement and trust correlate closely with the media sources young people rely on.
And Hypothesis #4 is confirmed: mainstream, social, and alternative media produce divergent narratives, as we have seen in the cases of Gaza, Iran, and Venezuela.
The practical implications of these findings are equally evident. Comprehensive media‑literacy programmes are needed for youth and communities alike. Independent local voices and professional fact‑checking initiatives must be supported to ensure that accurate information reaches audiences.
Cross-platform engagement should be encouraged, alongside greater algorithmic transparency, to help young people navigate the complex digital media landscape. Inclusive reporting that elevates diverse youth perspectives is equally essential, ensuring that a variety of voices shape the narratives that circulate.
Traditional models of communication remain relevant, but they are no longer sufficient on their own to explain how public thought is formed among younger generations. In a world dominated by fast-moving digital platforms, emotionally resonant content, and highly personalized information flows, understanding youth media consumption requires a holistic approach—one that accounts not just for what people see, but how they see it, where they see it, and the trust they place in it.
Hypothesis #1 is confirmed: clear generational divides in media habits mirror the divisions we see during crises.
Hypothesis #2 is supported: understanding and addressing youth opinion formation requires a cross-disciplinary perspective.
Hypothesis #3 is confirmed: emotional engagement and trust correlate closely with the media sources young people rely on.
And Hypothesis #4 is confirmed: mainstream, social, and alternative media produce divergent narratives, as we have seen in the cases of Gaza, Iran, and Venezuela.
The practical implications of these findings are equally evident. Comprehensive media‑literacy programmes are needed for youth and communities alike. Independent local voices and professional fact‑checking initiatives must be supported to ensure that accurate information reaches audiences.
Cross-platform engagement should be encouraged, alongside greater algorithmic transparency, to help young people navigate the complex digital media landscape. Inclusive reporting that elevates diverse youth perspectives is equally essential, ensuring that a variety of voices shape the narratives that circulate.
Traditional models of communication remain relevant, but they are no longer sufficient on their own to explain how public thought is formed among younger generations. In a world dominated by fast-moving digital platforms, emotionally resonant content, and highly personalized information flows, understanding youth media consumption requires a holistic approach—one that accounts not just for what people see, but how they see it, where they see it, and the trust they place in it.
Stories are what remain when the world tries to erase us. — Refaat Alareer
Refaat Alareer
Writer, Poet, Palestinian.
