magazine issue 9 2025 / Issue

Covert control: How political elites and influencers use manipulation on social media

• written by Meredith M. Turner & Sara Holland Levin
• edited by Rinat Meerson

Reviewers: Sophie Rothut and an undisclosed reviewer.

Editorial Assistant: Maren Giersiepen.

The popularity of users like politicians and political influencers on social media demonstrates their power and sway over public discourse today. But how do these political users gain and maintain power? This article explores how the current media landscape is dominated by political influencers and elites, making it harder for users to know what’s trustworthy and detect misinformation. By spotlighting the tactics that some of these sources use to build influence with their audiences, we bring attention to how political information is shared and processed in today’s digital landscape.

Figure 1: Political influencers and online manipulation.

Today's digital landscape

Nearly two-thirds of the world gets its news from social media [1]. Today, traditional media like broadcast news, radio, and print journalism are less accessible compared to digital and, especially, social media. Though the internet has marked a positive shift in the ability to access information, this comes with a dark side.

Social media gives both audiences and content creators unfettered access to a public platform. On the one hand, this digital shift has made it easier for previously marginalized and underrepresented groups to share information [2]. On the other hand, however, it also means that well-intentioned but misinformed users as well as bad-faith actors are capable of spreading misinformation to large audiences [3]. These users may spread misinformation (any false information shared without intent to deceive) or even disinformation (false information shared deliberately to mislead or manipulate). Both thrive in an environment where messages can be tailored to specific audience preferences and vulnerabilities [3]. Further, because users often passively consume digital news, typically filtered by algorithms and shared within like-minded social networks, they may develop an overconfidence in their ability to detect misinformation online [3]. Audience reception of this content is also shaped by factors such as preexisting attitudes, selective exposure to ideologically aligned sources, and the broader information environment in which messages are encountered [4], [5]. Because social media platforms and algorithms continue to shape users’ experiences and understanding of political information, political figures with large followings may be able to influence their audiences, particularly under certain conditions, such as when their messages align with audience predispositions or when alternative perspectives are absent [4], [5].

Political elites and influencers

Today’s social media environment is especially vulnerable to being manipulated by users with ulterior motives. This is particularly true of politically motivated social media users who use their platform to communicate about political issues. Two key groups to watch are political influencers and political elites.

Political influencers are content creators who promote political and social causes to their audiences by expressing support for them and endorsing them implicitly or explicitly [4]. These users wield significant impact on public opinion and operate as a new form of news media, sharing news and information with the world [3], [6].  Additionally, political elites are people with a disproportionate amount of political power. This can include media personalities (e.g. Joe Rogan), thinktanks, government officials and politicians, and even celebrities who discuss politics on their public platforms [6]. Though there is some overlap between these two groups, each embodies a unique form of communication with the public that was not accessible before the rise of social media.

What unites this population as a group is their lack of binding ethical guidelines. Political influencers and elites are, at their core, not journalists or traditional media sources, so they are not obligated to follow any truth-telling guidelines [7]. In today’s media landscape, political news influencers can share virtually any information to their audiences without the factual safeguards that traditional media sources are bound to [6]. Historically, these political voices lacked the platform to reach large publics. Such reach was commonly limited to traditional news media outlets, which had the near-exclusive power to share information widely. This system allowed consumers to be sure that the information they consumed was fact-based, even if skewed towards a specific viewpoint or ideological stance [8]. But today, social media allows political influencers and elites unlimited access to large audiences without those safeguards. Although some may adhere to fact-based information sharing of their own accord, many lack the training or initiative to incorporate these ideals into their posts. 

Figures like Hugo Travers (@HugoDécrypte), Anuwat Noom (@AnuwatTikTok), Julian Reichelt (@JReichelt), and Elon Musk (@ElonMusk) now possess a disproportionate amount of power and influence over political discourse online, often rivaling or surpassing the reach of traditional news media outlets [1]. It is important to note that not all political influencers and elites on social media are ill-intentioned. Many use their platforms to share and amplify silenced or marginalized voices [2] or to raise issues that traditional news media overlook due to corporate influences and time constraints [9], [7]. However, some political influencers and elites have financial and power-based incentives to mislead constituents and influence public opinion [10]. Because of this, traditional journalism is sometimes perceived as less authentic than influencers’ seemingly unfiltered voices, and their political coverage may even backfire. 

Meanwhile, influencers like Joe Rogan, for instance, can reach audiences in unique ways, maintaining an appearance of “neutrality” and circulating a wide range of content, allowing him to appeal across the political spectrum [11]. The Joe Rogan Experience is considered the biggest podcast in the world and covers topics from current events to UFOs and conspiracy theories. Rogan’s massive audience has been attributed to a mix of broad political appeal, personalization between him and his audience, and the ease of sharing his content across platforms (i.e., video clips of the podcast shared on Instagram, YouTube, etc.) [11]. By capitalize on their “intimate” communication with audience members, political influencers like Rogan become part of their personal networks, especially at a time when trust in traditional civic institutions wanes.

By contrast, government officials and politicians (often called political elites) are more ideologically motivated. Some politicians, like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, are able to engage in grassroots political campaigning and gather large audiences to support their causes. Others, however, deploy their platforms to share false or misleading content online. For example, President Donald Trump uses his platform Truth Social to actively share misleading narratives to his followers on social media [12]. 

Unfortunately, most users today lack the resources and/or motivation to comb through all posts from all sources to determine fact from fiction, making it easier for misleading content to circulate [3]. Because influencers and elites are often masters of social media engagement, they can reach audiences in more creative and intentional ways that traditional media rarely match [10]. Some of these actors may manipulate their audiences by crafting messages designed to garner and hold users’ attention, while prioritizing engagement over accuracy [13], [14]. 

Figure 2: People using social media.

What is manipulation, and how do political influencers and elites use it?

Manipulation is a complex phenomenon and plays an important role in understanding how influencers operate in the online ecosystem [4]. Research has defined manipulation as action-oriented, centered on achieving a goal through the behavior of another [15]. For example, getting a person to do something, view things a certain way, or adopt a certain attitude are considered manipulative strategies when the influencer’s true intent is hidden. Research has identified how influencers and elites use various manipulative strategies, often targeting a vulnerability or provoking emotional responses from their audience [14].

Political influencers and elites attempt to build and maintain a “close” relationship with their audiences by appearing authentic, trustworthy, and original, which can contribute to perceived credibility and rapport [10], [13]. Unlike traditional media, their message feel personal and relatable, which makes audiences more receptive [10]. That closeness may also help influencers better understand their audience’s weaknesses and vulnerabilities, when they are most susceptible to influence, and how best to frame their messages.

A common tactic is fostering an “us vs. them” mentality to discredit anyone who opposes their views [14]. Target audience members become a part of the “us” or the allies, while critics become “them” or the enemies [14]. Using coded messages is one of the simplest ways to encourage this view. For example, the term “globalism” may mean global interconnectedness and international cooperation by definition. However, it has been used as a dog whistle to spread the “Great Replacement” conspiracy, which suggests that immigrants are seeking to replace the white demographics in the United States. By using this term in context, influencers can send a message to those in their “us” group while avoiding detection and opposition from “them.”

Emotional expressions are typically discouraged in the field of journalism, but they give political influencers and elites further manipulative leverage with their audiences [13]. Provocative emotional messages help political influencers overcome social divisions, increase their visibility online, and garner attention quickly and automatically from their audience. For example, foreclosure signs and gunshot sounds serve as symbols that stir emotional responses in those facing financial concerns and those with fears of crime [14]. Using this type of emotional symbol allows influencers to directly manipulate their online audiences without relying on logic or factual appeals.

Finally, these users may misrepresent information, present pseudo-science and misleading statistics, or simply remove the context from their messages to create arguments that are nearly impossible to contradict [14]. Spreading fake news, misinformation, and disinformation offers a distorted reality and provides a trusting audience with a false product. For example, in 2020, President Trump tweeted that COVID-19 was “less lethal” than the flu, yet stated in an interview that it was “more deadly” [16].

Political influencers and elites, whether politicians, celebrities, or everyday social media influencers, have the potential to shape public discourse and democracy as a whole. Understanding the ways that certain political influencers engage in manipulation is an important step towards building resilience against manipulative messages online.

Figure 3: global climate change strike. 

So, what can we do about it? 

First, remember that not all political influencers and elites actively engage in manipulation, and even some who do may not know they’re doing it. That’s why it’s important to understand who these users are and how they have the potential to influence when compared with more traditional media sources. Locating reputable and widely credible sources that fall within this category is essential. Political influencers and elites can be great sources of information, alerting us to current events, rallying activist communities, and highlighting issues that traditional media sources might overlook [2].

However, the burden of maintaining a healthy information ecosystem should not fall solely on the individual. Social media platforms, traditional media, and policymakers must work together to foster a more truth-based information environment. Research shows that simple technical fixes (e.g., fact-checking labels on social media posts) tend to have little effect on whether people view content as credible, share it, or seek more information, in part because many users fail to even notice them or interpret them as intended [8]. Algorithms add to the problem by tailoring news feeds to users’ prior interests, political leanings, and behaviors, creating an illusion of being well-informed [3]. Although this personalization can make news consumption feel easier and more relevant, it can also reinforce ideological content, limit exposure to diverse perspectives, and make biased or manipulative content seem more credible.

For these reasons, platforms must move beyond existing techniques that flag manipulative content and develop more intentionally designed credibility cues and context cues on our social media feeds. Traditional media sources should also adapt to the current state of this environment by adopting more interactive, accessible formats while maintaining existing editorial standards. Finally, policymakers should implement transparency and oversight guidelines for both platforms, influencers, encouraging algorithms to deliver credible, diverse sources.

For everyday social media users, staying informed means still seeking information from many sources: traditional news media, political influencers, and even sources across ideological lines. Local politicians, for example, often provide more balanced or center-leaning coverage worth including. Allowing for a wide variety of sources allows news consumers to stay informed and wary of potential biases from specific sources. It also means being aware of manipulation tactics, especially “us vs. them” framings, and taking a pause before reacting or sharing. While directing likes and views toward reputable sources is one step, users can also demand transparency from influencers and engage critically with news content – even when it comes from our preferred sources.

In short, social media users have a direct role in influencing exactly how powerful political news influencers are, but social media platforms and traditional media must also share the responsibility. Today, most people get their news from social media rather than from traditional news media, which means that if users demand factual, ethical coverage from popular influencers online by directing their clicks and likes, it could help foster a healthier digital news environment. If users reward reputable sources, platforms promote transparency, governments offer a degree of oversight, and traditional media adapt to the social media environment, our existing news environment can thrive. As everyday social media users, we can hold political influencers and elites accountable and make the news we consume more transparent and accurate in the 21st century.

Bibliography

[1]    N. Newman, “Overview and key findings of the 2025 Digital News Report,” Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. Accessed: Aug. 11, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/digital-news-report/2025/dnr-...
[2]    H. Dekoninck and D. Schmuck, “The Mobilizing Power of Influencers for Pro-Environmental Behavior Intentions and Political Participation,” Environmental Communication, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 458–472, May 2022, doi: 10.1080/17524032.2022.2027801.
[3]    C. Skurka, Z. Cheng, M. Goyanes, and H. Gil De Zúñiga, “News Finds Me as the illusion of competence: evidence for overconfidence in discernment of political misinformation,” Human Communication Research, p. hqaf015, June 2025, doi: 10.1093/hcr/hqaf015.
[4]    S. C. Woolley, “Digital Propaganda: The Power of Influencers,” Journal of Democracy, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 115–129, July 2022, doi: 10.1353/jod.2022.0027.
[5]    M. H. Werner, “Influencer-Centered Accounts of Manipulation,” Ethic Theory Moral Prac, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 585–599, Sept. 2024, doi: 10.1007/s10677-024-10458-9.
[6]    C. von Sikorski, P. Merz, R. Heiss, K. Karsay, B. Naderer, and D. Schmuck, “The Political Role of Social Media Influencers: Strategies, Types, and Implications for Democracy—An Introduction,” American Behavioral Scientist, p. 00027642251344208, June 2025, doi: 10.1177/00027642251344208.
[7]    I. Shmalenko, N. Yeftieni, and I. Semenets-Orlova, “Impact of Social Media Influencers on Public Policy and Political Discourse,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Social Science, Psychology and Legal Regulation (SPL 2021), Kyiv, Ukraine, 2021. doi: 10.2991/assehr.k.211218.015.
[8]    A. Oeldorf-Hirsch, M. Schmierbach, A. Appelman, and M. P. Boyle, “The Ineffectiveness of Fact-Checking Labels on News Memes and Articles,” Mass Communication and Society, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 682–704, Sept. 2020, doi: 10.1080/15205436.2020.1733613.
[9]    Y. Benkler, The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. New Haven Conn.: Yale University Press, 2006.
[10]    J. Park, J. M. Lee, V. Y. Xiong, F. Septianto, and Y. Seo, “David and Goliath: When and Why Micro-Influencers Are More Persuasive Than Mega-Influencers,” Journal of Advertising, vol. 50, no. 5, pp. 584–602, Oct. 2021, doi: 10.1080/00913367.2021.1980470.
[11]    N. Bozzi, “Platforming the Joe Rogan Experience: Cancel Culture, Comedy, and Infrastructure,” Television & New Media, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 74–87, Jan. 2025, doi: 10.1177/15274764241277476.
[12]    Y. Zhang, J. Lukito, J. Suk, and R. McGrady, “Trump, Twitter, and Truth Social: how Trump used both mainstream and alt-tech social media to drive news media attention,” Journal of Information Technology & Politics, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 229–242, Apr. 2025, doi: 10.1080/19331681.2024.2328156.
[13]    M. B. Wallace, “Politics in 30 Seconds: How TikTok’s Emotional Appeals Influence Gen Z Voters,” Thesis, 2025. Accessed: July 02, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://wagner.radford.edu/1185/
[14]    P. A. Kakisina, T. R. Indhiarti, and M. S. Al Fajri, “Discursive Strategies of Manipulation in COVID-19 Political Discourse: The Case of Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro,” Sage Open, vol. 12, no. 1, p. 21582440221079884, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.1177/21582440221079884.
[15]    M. Klenk, “(Online) manipulation: sometimes hidden, always careless,” Review of Social Economy, vol. 80, no. 1, pp. 85–105, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.1080/00346764.2021.1894350.
[16]    Y. Yang and L. Bennett, “Interactive Propaganda,” in Political Communication in the Time of Coronavirus, 1st ed., New York: Routledge, 2021, pp. 83–100. doi: 10.4324/9781003170051-8.

Figures

Figure 1: Created in Canva [all images used in design are permitted: https://www.canva.com/policies/content-license-agreement/#:~:text=5.%20P...(except%20Pro%20music%20and%20Popular%20Music%20and%20Branded%20Content)]

Figure 2: unsplash [https://unsplash.com/photos/people-using-phone-while-standing-qZenO_gQ7QA]

Figure 3: unsplash [https://unsplash.com/photos/people-on-road-p2Xor4Lbrrk]