Culture How Gen Z Became the Most Gullible Generation - The almighty algorithm is fueling conspiracy theories among young people and ruining their ability to tell fact from fiction on the internet.

How Gen Z Became the Most Gullible Generation
Politico (archive.ph)
By Catherine Kim
2025-04-23 11:16:00GMT

genz01.webp
Illustration by Seba Cestaro for POLITICO

The video starts with bold red letters blaring: “2016 Democrat Primary Voter Fraud CAUGHT ON TAPE.” A series of blurry security footage follows, showing blatant instances of ballot stuffing. The only problem: The clips actually depict voter fraud in Russia.

Would you have taken the bait?

A quick Google search would have easily revealed the dubious source of the video, along with news articles debunking its claims. But when researchers from Stanford studying young people’s media literacy — the ability to accurately evaluate information in the wilds of mass media — showed the video to 3,446 high school students, only three succeeded in identifying the Russian connection.

“There is this myth of the digital native, that because some people have grown up with digital devices, they are well equipped to make sense of the information that those devices provide,” says Joel Breakstone, who led the 2021 study. “The results were sobering.”

It’s a startling reality about Gen Z, backed up by multiple studies and what we can all see for ourselves: The most online generation is also the worst at discerning fact from fiction on the internet.

That becomes an issue when the internet — and specifically, social media — has become the main source of news for the younger generation. About three in five Gen Zers, from between the ages of 13 and 26, say they get their news from social media at least once a week. TikTok is a particularly popular platform: 45 percent of those between the ages of 18 and 29 said they were regular news consumers on the app.

While social media may make news more accessible, there’s also little quality control to the information on the platforms. And although people of all ages are bad at detecting misinformation — which is only getting harder amid the rise of AI — members of Gen Z are particularly vulnerable to being fooled. Why? There’s a dangerous feedback loop at play. Many young people are growing deeply skeptical of institutions and more inclined toward conspiracy theories, which makes them shun mainstream news outlets and immerse themselves in narrow online communities — which then feeds them fabrications based on powerful algorithms and further deepens their distrust. It’s the kind of media consumption that differs drastically from older generations who spend far more time with mainstream media, and the consequences can be grim.

genz02.webp
Gen Z is the most online generation but the worst when it comes to discerning fact from fiction on the internet. | Photo Illustration by Stefani Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images

I’ve seen it happen in my own social circles, where friends in their 20s will start to regurgitate what they see on TikTok as if it is fact. My friends and I often now make it a point to ask if the “source” someone has gotten their information from is a TikTok video, and whether they’ve at least looked it up on Google afterward. The answer is usually no.

The misinformation people see on TikTok and other social media ranges from nefarious to absurd: Famously, there was a period when some young people on the app seriously questioned the life story of Helen Keller, who found success despite being deaf and blind (“Did she get any kind of money for lying her way through life??” one user asks). Just last year, when Hurricane Helene and Hurricane Milton hit North Carolina and Florida, claims the government was “geo-engineering” the weather gained traction on social media, as people suggested that Democrats were behind the ravaging of Republican-dense areas. Beef tallow as skincare is the latest trend. If some teens next to you smell like fryer grease, they might have fallen victim to videos that claim beef fat is good for your face, despite warnings from dermatologists.

The common thread in all these viral conspiracy theories on TikTok is that they are fueled by distrust of institutions — from schools to the National Weather Service to the medical establishment. And that sentiment carries over to the media: Only 16 percent of Gen Zers have strong confidence in the news. It’s no surprise then that so many young people are shunning traditional publications and seeking their news on social media, often from unverified accounts that do little fact-checking.

The ramifications are potentially huge for American politics. Without some sort of course correction, a growing piece of the electorate will find itself falling victim to fake news and fringe conspiracy theories online — likely driving the hyperpolarization of our politics to new heights.



When it comes to fact-checking, Gen Z tends to have its own distinct method: Opening up the comment section.

“They tend to feel comfortable relying on aggregate trust, so they’ll rely on Yelp reviews or Amazon reviews,” says Daniel Cox, a pollster who surveys young people. “This sounds like a very similar thing, right? They’re seeing what other people are saying about an article or a product and basing their decisions on that.”

In the era of the almighty algorithm, however, the comment sections are often echo chambers. There are few countervailing notions there because the algorithm feeds the video to like-minded people who share the same perspective on the subject, regardless of its accuracy.

“[The algorithm] helps segregate people in ways that are profoundly concerning to me,” Cox adds. “We’re not sharing the same experiences online — we’re having very discrete, different experiences by our gender or sexual orientation or politics. … Everything that you’re experiencing, you can find some kind of validation online for it.”

And this is a bipartisan trend: President Donald Trump’s fans and haters are both just as likely to fall for fake information that already conforms to their worldview.

A prime example of this dynamic is a fake viral soundbite of Trump allegedly musing that the District of Columbia should be renamed the District of America. The audio has been debunked as AI-generated, but you wouldn’t know that when looking at the comment section of videos reacting in disbelief. In one video that’s gained over 250,000 likes, the comments don’t question the source of the audio clip but rather share the same horror. “Why do we have the dumbest president in American History??” reads the top comment. One must scroll far down the comment section to even spot a clarification from the video’s creator, who commented a day later: “I’m thinking it is AI.”

These echo chambers help explain Gen Z’s growing affinity for conspiracy theories. We’ve moved beyond the stereotype of the loner in the basement with the tin-foil hat; today it’s the TikTok addict enclosed in their political cocoon who is particularly vulnerable to misinformation.

Young people aren’t solely to blame for their lack of digital literacy.

In school, students are taught to read closely and carefully — which misinformation researchers say has unintentionally enforced the idea that students should drill into a single video and determine its accuracy with their eyes, rather than leave the page and open Google. The technology of misinformation is advancing rapidly, and it is becoming impossible to differentiate what’s true from what’s false with mere observation. For older generations, who came to the internet later in life, there’s still at least some natural skepticism toward what they see online. For the youth, it must be taught.

Gen Zers are uniquely vulnerable to misinformation compared to older age groups not just because of their social media habits, says Rakoen Maertens, a behavioral scientist at the University of Oxford, but because they have fewer lived experiences and knowledge to discern reality.

Maertens, who helped create a test that measures a person’s likelihood of being duped by fake headlines, says that while Gen Zers were most likely to fall for fake news now, there is hope that as time passes, they’ll become better at detecting falsities, just like the generations before them.

There’s also another, far more depressing alternative that may be just as likely — that the rest of the population will go the way of Gen Z.

After all, as the internet becomes ever more ingrained in people’s lives and more platforms adopt silo-fueling algorithms, even older generations that had held onto their skepticism may embrace the media consumption habits of the youth — and become just as susceptible to AI-fueled conspiracy theories and misinformation.

“It is a systematic issue,” Breakstone says. “The evidence is clear that folks of all ages struggle to make sense of the overwhelming amount of information that they encounter online, and we need to figure out ways to support people, to find better ways to make sense of the content that streams across their devices.”
 
It may seem that way to zoomers, and I'm not trying to tease you into powerleveling, but I don't really feel that way. I see zoomers in real life, and it's not that hard to clock from their presentation and demeaner what their political alignment is. Usually the fashion alone tells you from half a mile away.
That's fair, but going beyond political alignment and looking at religion, philosophy, cultural knowledge/consumption and their framing of historical timelines/events reveals (at least in my experience) an incredibly disjointed and centerless generation. This has always sorta been the case in the academy (hence the phrase "so stupid only an intellectual could believe it") but it seems that all of (zoomer) society is now like this.
 
How much is gullibility and how much of it is institutionalization?

If all you know is an overbearing parent, teacher, boss if you even have a job, and moderators on discord or Facebook or whatever, it's understandable you'd become a broke back faggot who can't think or know how to disagree with "authority."

Zoomers are so passive and hand wringing about anything critical that isn't top-down it's fucking baffling.
 
I actually feel this way about most generations. The bands are way too long. People will tell you someone born in 1964 is a boomer. That's obviously not true. You aren't part of a baby boom 20 years after the war ended. You aren't a WW2 baby boomer if your childhood memories are the 1980s.
Chinks use their 12-year cycles for bands. Conveniently, a sliding 5-band window is how much of history a person gets to witness.

White people should just use decades and whichever milestone events conveniently happened at the beginning or end of the decade.

1939-1941 depending on country - WW2
1950 - Cold War
1961 - first manned spaceflight
1971 - 1971
1981 - Reagan (RotW pick your own)
1991 - the USSR is destroyed
2001 - Jews did WTC
2010 - smartphones (and gig work)
2020 - Covid
 
How much is gullibility and how much of it is institutionalization?

If all you know is an overbearing parent, teacher, boss if you even have a job, and moderators on discord or Facebook or whatever, it's understandable you'd become a broke back faggot who can't think or know how to disagree with "authority."

Zoomers are so passive and hand wringing about anything critical that isn't top-down it's fucking baffling.
That's the thing, there is no way out of brainwashing and re-programing for them since even when they're not in school or college, they're on the internet. Unless they had good parents and upbringing, nobody is going to teach them how to be a critical thinker and how to avoid powerleveling ect. all the lessons most of us learned the easy way or the hard way. This is merely the end result. All of this was manufactured, of course, the seeds of social engineering were there for decades but only now technology truly caught up. You could consider Baby Boomers to be subject zero in this regard, with their disgusting brainwashing and blind obedience to the idiot box.
 
They should only be believing fact checked, credentialed information like "men can be women", "you must stop eating meat to save the planet", "the rushed vaccines that don't match the previous definition of vaccines are safe and effective", "mass migration is good for you", "you must adjust your expectations downwards", and of course "questioning authority is dangerous disinformation".

Unfortunately, the more disinformation researchers, fact checkers and investigative journalists are appointed, the more the enemy works its evil among the youth.
 
Many young people are growing deeply skeptical of institutions
Why are they skeptical of institutions, I wonder? To me, this entire article is one big "person sets down rake, steps on it, gets mad, and starts demanding to know who set down all these rakes." Now I'm not even going to go down the conspiratorial route, let's just do what the article is lamenting Zoomers refuse to, and try to verify the article's claims.
But when researchers from Stanford studying young people’s media literacy — the ability to accurately evaluate information in the wilds of mass media — showed the video to 3,446 high school students, only three succeeded in identifying the Russian connection.
I click on the link for Stanford's research (suspending my mistrust in an institution whose most famous experiment was an instructor trying to get students to roleplay his confirmation bias and the best he could get was a theater kid trying to be a hardass to kickstart his acting portfolio), and it takes me here.
Screenshot_20250425_122851_Brave.webp
I try to click on the highlighted link, and I get this.
Screenshot_20250425_123030_Brave.webp
At best, this wants me to create a free account to view the source, but seeing as how I don't see a "create account" option, it either wants me to pay for some service to get access to this or, worse, enroll in fucking Stanford to view their source. I am now 2 links deep (one of which was just another article referencing the research paper, which was probably just another way to harvest an ad click), and I've hit a login page. How is this functionally any different than, "Trust me, bro"?

But you know what? I don't have to look at the paper, because I've done this dance before many times and I know how these fuckers do their credibility laundering. The actual study is going to be some laughably retarded "we asked some of our students what they thought about a certain issue, and if they disagreed with us we marked it down that they're a crazy lunatic who believes in reptoid illuminati," but because they locked the actual research behind a series of links and login pages, they're hoping no one jumps through all those hoops to find out their methodology is fucking dogshit and just takes their word because they're Stanford. If someone does jump through all those hoops, they likely have to give Stanford money to find out Stanford is full of shit.

And the hell of it is, up until a few years ago, this worked, but now the intelligencia's been caught bullshitting people one too many times, so now no one believes them anymore and all they can do is screech about how those lazy Zoomy-zooms don't just eat up whatever lazy narrative the cathedral shits out on their plate.
The misinformation people see on TikTok and other social media ranges from nefarious to absurd: Famously, there was a period when some young people on the app seriously questioned the life story of Helen Keller, who found success despite being deaf and blind (“Did she get any kind of money for lying her way through life??” one user asks).
I would stop while you're behind on that one. The supposed success story of Helen Keller gets more incredulous the more you know about it and the more you know about how activist talking heads work.
 
I'd argue it's not exclusive to Zoomers. Millennials have been duped in so many ways, and turned a lot of it into activism. Only some of them were brave enough to admit they were fooled.
Autism makes people easier to manipulate since autists want their proxy models to explain the world in simple black and white terms. Identity politics are just autist masking: ism edition. All of it.
But autists on the internet tell me we're immune to propaganda! How can this be???/??/
 
I actually feel this way about most generations. The bands are way too long. People will tell you someone born in 1964 is a boomer. That's obviously not true. You aren't part of a baby boom 20 years after the war ended. You aren't a WW2 baby boomer if your childhood memories are the 1980s.

What you are referring to is the Jones Generation. A recognized subset of the Boomer Generation. Jone's are 1956 to 1965. The reason why the subset exists is they are the ones that got shafted and had to live through the hardship of the Hyper Inflation years and all of the shit growing up from 1966 to 1982-86.

Boomers born from 1946 to 1955 had the so called "golden years" of the mid century life style.
Jone's did not.

This is why many from the Jones Generation are distrustful of the government. Distrustful of the media and over all have a "Fuck you... This is mine. I earned it and you aint going to get any of it" mentality.

Charity is one thing... Hand outs? Oh hell no.
 
I'd argue it's not exclusive to Zoomers. Millennials have been duped in so many ways, and turned a lot of it into activism. Only some of them were brave enough to admit they were fooled.

But autists on the internet tell me we're immune to propaganda! How can this be???/??/
As a millenial I can say the biggest propaganda our generation got hit with was that education is the most important thing in the world. Millenials worship college so unthinkingly that they gladly took on mortgage-levels of debt to get into careers that barely pay them a living wage in overpriced cities because they're now locked into unbankruptable debt, but they'll almost all say they'd do it all over again because they're that tied to their "I'm a smart person" identity. Hell, a lot of them are these journo faggots screaming into the void because all they have is this once-prestigious title that's now tied to a sinking ship.
 
I would stop while you're behind on that one. The supposed success story of Helen Keller gets more incredulous the more you know about it and the more you know about how activist talking heads work.
Like a boomer, I never thought about it at all and took her story at face value. I should have known better.
 
  • Feels
Reactions: Maverick Vile
Back