Social networks have revolutionised the way we communicate, both in the personal and institutional and political spheres. In the case of young people, they are the environment in which they obtain information and form their beliefs. This has a negative side, since being their main channels of information, they can promote the radicalisation of political positions and the spread of gender stereotypes, homophobic and racist ideas, as revealed by some demographic studies carried out in recent years that we analyse below.

Distrust in traditional media and new forms of socialisation linked to the internet have created a growing dependence on these platforms. Today they are the main influence on teenagers and young people, and they are the target of many of the emotional and extremist discourses that fill the internet with alternative facts .

Change in information sources

In 2023, 50% of Spanish youth aged between 18 and 24 said they distrusted news from the media. This growing distrust has led them to seek information from other sources, especially on social media.

We also know that in Spain, 60% of teenagers over 14 years of age prefer to get their information through social media , and 72% do so through friends or family. Not the media. Not even to follow them on social media: journalists and media are the interest group least followed by users on social media , with just 15.6%, far below family and friends (47.8%), actors or comedians (29.4%) and even influencers (22.6%).

Algorithms favor controversial and easily viral content

The shift in information sources has significant implications. Social media, unlike traditional media, do not have effective mechanisms to verify the veracity of the information being shared. Moreover, as demonstrated by the thorough research carried out by Jeff Horwitz , a journalist for The Wall Street Journal , their algorithms privilege content not for its quality, but for its potential to go viral, with which controversy, shouting and emotion (which fuel alternative facts) win out over the informative construction that the media try, in a regulated way, to carry out.

Relying solely on social media as a primary source of information has facilitated the spread of extremist ideologies and discriminatory attitudes among young people. Platforms such as X, YouTube, TikTok and Instagram allow influencers to spread messages that can question democratic values ​​and promote gender stereotypes, homophobia and racism. Young people aged 18 to 29 trust YouTubers as much as traditional media.

Effects on collective discourse

The spread of gender stereotypes from social media was demonstrated by the first survey by the Centre for Sociological Research (CIS) on perceptions of equality and gender stereotypes . Published in January 2024, it revealed that 44.1% of men believe that the promotion of equality has gone so far that they are now discriminated against. This feeling is most pronounced among 16-24 year-olds, reaching 51.8%.

Other recent surveys suggest that the dissemination of messages of hate, sexism and ultra-capitalism is taking hold among teenagers: only 35.1% of men from Generation Z (born between 1997 and 2012) considered themselves feminists in 2024.

Why is it worrying?

The influence of social media on the formation of beliefs and attitudes among young people has profound implications for social cohesion and democratic health.

Social media has not only transformed access to information, but it also profoundly shapes, as in the case of sexist imaginings, the political and social beliefs of young people.

For example, the fact that a quarter of people under 35 in Spain believe that an authoritarian government may be preferable to democracy is not a minor fact or a simple generational anecdote: it is evidence that the model of public conversation in which their opinions are formed can erode democratic principles from their foundation. The uncontrolled dynamics of the dissemination of disinformation and the systematic delegitimisation of institutions that abounds on social media have created an environment in which democracy is no longer an unquestionable value, but rather one option among others.

Yet the big tech platforms operate without effective regulation, and the media have lost the ability to speak to a generation that no longer trusts them.

Where is the exit?

The democratic future can only be sustainable if citizens (including young people) are informed in safe places created by information professionals. Places free from the misinformation that runs rampant on social networks under the false idea of ​​freedom of expression. Is it possible to convince young people that they are interested in including the work of professional journalists in their “information diet”?

Trying to fight disinformation on the battlefield itself, i.e. on social media, is not working, and it is not a profitable model for traditional media outlets either. The other option would be to abandon the networks and create and strengthen other access channels.

It’s not that hard. When Australia decided in 2020 that social media should pay media outlets for their content, Australian media suffered something like Facebook’s algorithmic blackout , and they didn’t cease to exist. On the contrary, they found alternatives and discovered that there is life beyond social media.

Subscription systems for quality information, similar to those of Netflix or HBO, which young people are familiar with, could be the alternative. But to do so, it is necessary to convince the generations that believe they are informed in exchange for nothing, that they are not informed, nor is it in exchange for anything.

Author Bios: Santiago Giraldo Luque is Professor of Journalism. Autonomous University of Barcelona at the ​​Autonomous University of Barcelona and Cristina Fernandez Rovira is Coordinator of the degree in Global Studies at the University of Vic – Central University of Catalonia