Making Meaning of the Media: The Impact of Media Illiteracy on Younger Voters

I think I can confidently say that the first thing I do every morning is check my phone. I scan for Snapchat notifications that I'll never respond to, skim through Outlook to see if my lecture has been cancelled, and space out as I look through Instagram stories of people I met once and never spoke to again. After that, the next thing I do is check the news.

Reading the news is something I think everyone should do. But if someone right now told me they didn't want to listen to Good Morning Britain or follow along with the BBC every day, I would completely get it. It's depressing. Waking up to reports of bombings and the destruction of world peace has dampened my mornings; granted, it could be a lot worse. I am extremely lucky that my worries arise from a screen and not from life experience, and I wish all the love and safety to those who have been impacted by recent events. The news can be upsetting, so I want to talk about

something good (or at least good in my opinion).

Recently, the UK government introduced the Representation of the People Bill 2026. This bill effectively expands the franchise, allowing 16- and 17-year-olds to vote in UK elections, as well as tightening some rules on funding political endeavours. Scotland has allowed over-16s to vote for the past ten years, and so far, the outcome has been pretty positive. This age group has been amongst the highest for voter turnout and in return, younger people are naturally more politically engaged. For a country with rising concerns of participation and potential arguments of a democratic deficit, more voters is a good thing.

There are, however, some concerns. Debates on this topic are varied: legal adulthood and full legal responsibility begin at 18, so should voting rights be aligned with that? Are 16-year-olds mature enough to understand who and what they are voting for? Is this a ploy to benefit left-wing parties? Or adversely, is it only being criticised as right-wing parties fear less support? Personally, I think younger people should be able to vote – it's their future after all. And yes, there are many nuances to the conversation – but for today, my main concern is media literacy.

Media literacy refers to the ability to critically analyse the various forms of media we are exposed to. This issue doesn't strictly relate to teenagers: it’s universal. But while this affects people of all ages, there is a general understanding that younger people are highly exposed to online media, and in turn lack the ability to assess it. In an age where almost all aspects of our lives are online, it's hard to decipher good media from bad. The more recent surge of AI has made it even harder to comprehend and critique the information we are presented with. AI is developing at a rate that is outpacing our ability to learn about it. It is one of the most contentious topics in technology, and undoubtedly the most dangerous. As we try our best to keep up, everyone inevitably falls into the trap of AI-generated images or fake interviews which circulate the media. From Facebook mums to young children using the internet for the first time, none of us are truly prepared to decipher the never-ending complexities of social media.

Beyond that, our algorithms make it no easier to improve our literacy skills. For some context, algorithms essentially work to churn out similar information based off your likes and reposts. In turn, this practically creates an online echo-chamber of one-sided stories without you even noticing. With social media working to keep us engaged enough to keep scrolling but not aware enough to question its faults, how should we know how to effectively criticise the media we consume?

Social media is intentionally easy. I can spend an hour on TikTok without realising, and by the end of it, I've been provided with 10 different opinions on Timothee Chalamet, none of which I can recall in much detail. Most people consume media online, both through social media and online news outlets. But without the ability to distinguish misinformation or evaluate what we do see, our judgment and credibility as voters is seriously limited. Technology is advancing at rates we cannot keep up with. We are constantly bombarded with more and more online information, all of which are capped at a 15-second attention rate. People need to recognise these flaws and actively engage with what they see. Like I said, this isn't a critique for just potential teenage voters: nearly every generation can be seen on social media, so the debate here really applies to everyone. But, when it comes to younger voters, I don't believe the issue is necessarily understanding political issues, but more so accessing the right range of information about those issues. This isn't something people can learn overnight, nor is it something I've personally mastered. I sent that video of the bunnies on the trampoline to at least 5 people before realising it was AI.

When I inattentively consume the news and eat up useless TikToks in the morning, I always make sure to go back for seconds. Social media can be fun: it has its benefits, but it can also be dangerous. So, when it comes to

voting, I don't think that age is the problem but understanding and literacy can be. So next time you check the news, take a minute to think about it or find an opposing source – it makes you a better voter.

And when it comes to the news being depressing, I promise there are good things happening, too. Marsupials which were thought to be extinct have recently been rediscovered. Australia is on track to be the first country to eliminate cervical cancer as a public health problem. The Netherlands have closed more than 20 prisons as crime rates have fallen so low. Read about the good things too.

Words by Chloe Wu, she/her