Why Millennials and Gen Z trust influencers more than institutions.
When millions of Americans lost their homes in the 2008 financial crash, not a single top Wall Street executive went to jail. When the World Health Organization and national governments gave conflicting advice during the COVID-19 pandemic, many people stopped listening altogether. And when mainstream news outlets increasingly framed events along partisan lines, viewers turned away in droves. These aren’t abstract failures. They are the lived reality that shaped a generation.
So when Millennials and Gen Z say they trust influencers more than institutions, they are not rejecting truth. They are responding to betrayal.
According to a 2023 Morning Consult survey, nearly half of Millennials and Gen Z trust influencers more than celebrities, journalists, or public officials when it comes to opinions and advice. This is not a sign of apathy or gullibility. It is a direct response to the erosion of credibility in the very institutions that once claimed to safeguard public trust.
Influencers may not have degrees from Ivy League universities or government roles, but their influence is earned, not inherited. They survive by maintaining a direct relationship with their audiences. If they lie or disappoint, they lose followers. That kind of immediate feedback loop does not exist in most institutions.
Mainstream media can lose credibility and still receive subsidies or lean on legacy status. Politicians can spin half-truths and still get reelected. Universities can silence dissenting views and still be perceived as guardians of intellectual integrity. These institutions often operate on assumed trust, not daily-earned accountability.
Contrast that with the influencer economy, where attention is everything. One mistake can tank a career, especially in an industry now worth $24 billion globally, with nearly 60% of ecommerce brands relying on influencers to drive sales and engagement. One lie, if exposed, can wipe out years of built-up reputation. One such case, beauty influencer James Charles, who was accused of misleading his audience and manipulating relationships, lost over a million followers within days. The backlash was swift, public, and financially damaging.
At its best, this is what decentralized trust looks like. Audiences vote with their attention. No one is above scrutiny. That kind of dynamic competition forces influencers to earn relevance continuously, not simply to rely on credentials.
But this system has risks. Take Logan Paul’s CryptoZoo project. He marketed it as an easy way to earn passive income through NFT animal hybrids. His millions of fans bought in, only to find out the project was poorly developed and, in the end, worthless. Paul was forced to apologize, but only after public outrage left him no choice. The incident highlighted the influencer economy’s darker side, where visibility can become a weapon.
And yet, even in failure, this system offers a kind of transparency that institutions often lack. CryptoZoo collapsed in plain sight. Influencers who promote scams are publicly shamed. The feedback is messy, but it’s visible.
Of course, not all influencers act in good faith. Some gain enormous power by spreading falsehoods, and it can take years and lawsuits for them to be held accountable. Public pressure is not a perfect regulator, but it is often faster and more effective than institutional self-policing. The influencer economy is not automatically virtuous. But it reflects a different set of values: openness, performance, and responsiveness. Millennials and Gen Z are not abandoning knowledge. They are abandoning systems that feel ideological, distant, and self-protective.
This does not mean we should blindly trust influencers. But it does mean we should understand why their model resonates. It offers choice. It demands consistency. It decentralizes authority in ways that challenge legacy monopolies over truth.
Influencer culture rewards attention, and that can be dangerous. But it also creates a path for voices previously shut out of mainstream institutions. It allows individuals to earn trust through action.
If we want to rebuild trust in society, we need systems that reward transparency and punish deception. We need structures where public accountability is real and consequences are swift. That is what the best parts of influencer culture already do.
This is not the end of trust. It is a new way of building it.
