In this piece, Alice (20) reflects on the rise of debate-style online content and how it shapes political discourse. Even more importantly, she considers how this content influences young people’s understanding of politics and how they engage with it.
Today’s 13-year-olds could be casting their first vote in just three years.
With 16- and 17-year-olds gaining the right to vote, attention is turning to whether political education is truly preparing young people to understand the systems they’ll be taking part in.
In an age where social media platforms like Instagram and Tik Tok have transformed into hubs of political discourse, conversations about how young people engage with politics – and where they get their information – have never been more important.
Online debating has garnered increasing engagement, especially amongst teens and young adults. Where politicians once debated to a live audience, the public now have the agency and information to debate ‘hot button’ issues amongst themselves. As an active consumer of online debate content, I am often left feeling like the world is trapped in one never ending argument. Which begs the question- is there any productivity in online debating?
Some of the most popular demonstrations of online debate culture include Jubilee’s series ‘Surrounded,’ in which one person debates 20 other people who have the complete opposite view. For instance, their recent video, with its clickbait title, “1 Progressive vs 20 Far-Right Conservatives” featuring British broadcaster Mehdi Hasan became viral on social media for the relentless nature of debating on topics like immigration.
Another prominent example is right-wing Christian influencer Charlie Kirk’s “Prove Me Wrong” tour across American college campuses (including most recently Cambridge University) – until his assassination in September 2025- an event that spread online in real time, instantly sparking reaction videos, political “hot-takes” and debate across social media. During these “Prove Me Wrong” events students are invited to debate him on any topic of their choice. These debates act as the mouthpiece of Kirk’s controversial political beliefs, broadcasted to millions across the world. As a result of the debates, interviews, a YouTube channel and organisation: Turning Point USA, Kirk led a substantial conservative youth revival. In light of the movement, thousands of young people attended his events across the country in support of his views.
The success of online debates is not down to a homogenous reason. A primary reason is the public’s growing appetite for watching political boxing matches. It is entertaining for us as viewers to watch two people “battle it out” theatrically. As part of my internship with ConnectFutures, I attended a workshop led by Alex at ConnectFutures which discussed systemic sexism and the way it can manifest online. He said that social media algorithms actively prioritise videos that feature extreme rhetoric or ideology as these elicit an emotional response from us, whether that’s outrage, agreement or entertainment; it keeps us engaged and wanting more. In turn, we can then become trapped in digital echo chambers.
“It is entertaining for us as viewers to watch two people “battle it out” theatrically.”
Our consumption of online debate videos has also been subject to research by university professors like Erica Bailey. Bailey argues that online debates, while not an accurate reflection of our debates with friends and families, are popular because our views can be represented in a way that we can’t express ourselves: “Watching debate videos is cathartic because we get to cosplay as an excellent debater who can articulate our position with ease.” For many young people this may ring true, experiencing a sense of gratification from their political representation in these videos.
In conjunction with its rising popularity, many have questioned the efficacy and potential harms of online debating on not only the way both young people and adults’ access political information but also express and argue it. Shows like “Surrounded” and college campus debates give political ideology primacy, in which debaters are obligated to defend over anything else. As a result, online debates perpetuate the polarity between left and right that has been growing exponentially in the last two years. As viewers then, we are not encouraged to add nuance to our own beliefs but pick a side, pick an ideology.
Online debate culture, in many ways, can be deemed a game of political speed dating, with the opposition being cycled in and out in a matter of minutes. This does not allow scope nor time for an intellectual exchange of beliefs and to understand them meaningfully. Rather, debaters often enter aggressive, heated arguments – each trying to win through quick one liners to wind up their opponent. This adds an element of toxicity to online debate culture which can be mirrored in our political conversations offline.
“As viewers then, we are not encouraged to add nuance to our own beliefs but pick a side, pick an ideology.”
These debates also risk the spread of misinformation. In debates I have watched myself, prominent debaters are persuasive storytellers, using statistics that are hard to discern as fact. Young people may find themselves relying on the debater’s “facts” to reinforce or build on their own belief system, lacking the media literacy and critical thinking skills to research and analyse issues for themselves. This gives rise to the spread of misinformation and the pollution of political landscapes with limited perspectives.
In spite of this though, I believe there is some innate value in online debating. Whether he had a harmful agenda that he wanted to push or a revolutionary message that spoke to a “forgotten majority”, Kirk advocated for the imperativeness of debate: “when people stop talking” he adds, “that’s when civil war happens.” As much as the culture surrounding online debate can be toxic, it does promote the importance of conversation over direct action. Online debating has been especially beneficial in exposing me to a wide range of perspectives. I can see the gaps in my own arguments and beliefs and as a viewer I am encouraged to reflect and question.
In light of the debates between Charlie Kirk and Cambridge students in the Spring, many of the student debaters that featured have discussed on their social media the way many young adults have been reaching out to them asking how to get into debating. So, even though online debating demonstrates an often heated and aggressive version of debating, there is no doubt that its popularity has mobilised varying demographics of young people to use their own voices.
Healthy debate on or offline should not be discouraged. A question ConnectFutures constantly asks is “how do we make change in a world we are unsatisfied with?” I think debate is a key way to do this. It is often the first stepping stone to questioning systems and ideas that we feel do not serve us.
During my internship I had the chance to shadow Malik, one of the trainers at Connect Futures, at three workshops at a primary school in Bolton. The workshop was called “Staying Safe and Having Our Voices Heard- Responding to Community Conflict.” Malik started off the workshop by posing a list of statements to the children to agree or disagree. He encouraged them not to be swayed by their peers and to have their own opinion, which they then shared with classmates, opening up a friendly debate. Towards the end of the workshop, Malik got the class to repeat two statements: “research everything” and “question everything.” Both are key to remember when consuming content like online debates.
“A question ConnectFutures constantly asks is “how do we make change in a world we are unsatisfied with?”
The lessons outlined in the workshops are crucial in teaching children how to navigate a politicised online world. Every child has the right to have and voice their opinion. But it’s about teaching early on how to do this in an informed, analytical and respectful way. This avoids the polarisation which we can often see across social media platforms and pushes us towards having more open and productive conversations on and offline.
As a final year History student, I have insight into the way political narratives are constructed and contested and how to approach these narratives with an open mind. In a world where we face both misinformation and too much information, I think these are vital skills for navigating today’s digital political arena. It’s the first step towards de-polluting the often-toxic culture of online debate.
As more young people prepare to vote, we all have a role to play in shaping the spaces where they learn, question and form their opinions. Adults, educators and policymakers alike should reflect on what this new generation of voters is watching, sharing and being influenced by. If we want young people to be informed participants rather than reactive spectators, we must rethink the culture of political debate – on and offline.
Here are three ways teachers, parents and youth practitioners can engage young people in political discourse:
- Encourage reflection, not reaction. Support young people to pause and think before responding.
- Equip, don’t just warn. Teach them to recognise bias, verify information and research for themselves, rather than simply avoiding controversial spaces.
- Model respectful debate. Young people mirror what they see – so show that disagreement can be civil, curious and informed.
We do not have to agree with everyone but we can move in a direction where civility and the want to learn redefine our political conversations with people from all different backgrounds.
About Alice
Alice is a final-year History student from Birmingham, studying at the University of Sheffield, deeply passionate about law and policy that enable positive social change. She is particularly interested in the role gender plays in shaping policy and hopes to build a career dedicated to gender justice, equity and empowerment, particularly for women.
If you want to learn more, reach out to us.
NEW: Our 90 minute – full day Democratic Engagement | AI, Fake News & Democracy workshop designed for young people aged 11-18.
This workshop supports young people to confidently participate in democracy in an informed way. It explores the history of democracy, young people’s democratic rights today, and helps them build the skills to identify and resist mis- and disinformation, particularly online.
Interactive formats range from school assemblies to our signature Election Game simulation that brings democracy to life through hidden roles, secret missions, and prizes. Participants leave with stronger confidence in navigating democratic processes, spotting misinformation, and engaging actively in civic life.
At ConnectFutures, we create and deliver practically minded workshops that seek to develop a sense of citizenship, respect and intolerance to hate that extends across online and offline worlds.
Price| Learning outcomes | format. Click here
