Do You Know Where Your Kids Get Their News From?

In an age where digital platforms and algorithm-driven feeds dominate how young people consume information, parents and educators should ask: do we truly know where our kids are getting their political commentary? Two of the most polarizing voices drawing large youth audiences today come from opposite sides of the spectrum — one from the far right in Nick Fuentes and one from the far left in Hasan Piker.

Nick Fuentes, a 27-year-old extremist figure, has built his brand on ultra-nationalist, racist and antisemitic rhetoric that long existed on the fringes but now finds itself amplified. He recently appeared on Tucker Carlson’s podcast, a move that triggered sharp backlash even within his own conservative movement. Critics say the interview signalled a normalization of views once considered outside the mainstream. Within days, prominent Republicans and think-tank leaders condemned Carlson for hosting Fuentes and giving him a platform.

Fuentes’s followers, known as “Groypers”, have used social media tactics to pressure mainstream conservative figures and steer the movement toward more radical positions. Fuentes hosts his show, “America First,” on Rumble, where his streams often generate hundreds of thousands of views. Clips of his appearances are heavily circulated on TikTok, where his soundbites reach younger audiences far beyond the platform’s typical political corners.

On the other side of the ideological divide is Hasan Piker, a high-profile progressive commentator and livestreamer whose content resonates deeply with younger, left-leaning audiences. Recently, he became embroiled in a controversy when viewers accused him of using a shock collar on his dog during a livestream. While Piker denied the allegations, stating the incident was a mistake related to the dog clipping itself while exiting a bed, the debate sparked a wave of criticism from animal-welfare advocates and undermined his credibility among some followers. Piker hosts his show, “HasanAbi,” on Twitch, where he regularly draws tens of thousands of live viewers. Like Fuentes, many of his most viral clips are shared across TikTok and other short-form platforms, where quick edits and out-of-context highlights often amplify his more incendiary remarks. Both figures illustrate how political commentary today is not only extreme but tailored, in many cases, for younger viewers who may not routinely cross-check sources or consider long-term implications.

Digging deeper into Nick Fuentes’s views makes clear the tone and danger of his commentary. He openly espouses white-nationalist ideology and white-supremacist themes, describing himself as a reactionary and advocating for “white men in charge of everything again.” The Southern Poverty Law Center identifies him as a white nationalist who aims to pull the Republican Party to the far right. He has referred to Jews using language like “perfidious Jews” and called for their execution, praised authoritarian regimes, and fantasized publicly about marrying a 16-year-old girl because it was “right when the milk is good.” He also said of his reasons for entering right-wing politics: “Hating women, being racist, being antisemitic.” These statements reflect a brazen embrace of misogyny, racism, antisemitism, and authoritarianism, repackaged to appeal to younger audiences drawn to shock value and tribal belonging.

Likewise, Hasan Piker’s commentary has not shied away from provocative statements, and his positions raise questions about how young people interpret political extremism on the left. He has declared that “capitalism is inherently exploitative,” justified controversial foreign-policy positions such as suggesting the Russian invasion of Crimea was “a completely justifiable f*****g act,” and claimed that “America is the top terrorist organization” in criticizing U.S. foreign policy. In a 2019 stream he said “America deserved 9/11,” sparking outrage and broad criticism. More recently, his harsh online tone and abrasive remarks toward critics have been called out by former fans who say he refuses to admit when he’s wrong or bans dissenters from his community. While his intent may be to challenge power structures, the delivery and content often blur the line between radical critique and inflammatory propaganda.

What is most troubling is how these commentators exploit and energize the fracture lines in American politics. Kids and young adults increasingly rely on charismatic influencers rather than traditional journalism, and the content they receive often comes packaged with ideology, outrage, and little nuance. From Fuentes’s elevation in right-wing circles to Piker’s viral dog-collar scandal, these stories travel fast and stick—shaping perceptions, identities, and allegiances in ways that traditional civic education barely addresses.