The share of words associated with violence in Donald Trump's speeches more than doubled, rising from almost 0.6% in 2016 to 1.6% in 2024, according to The Conversation. The dramatic increase in violent rhetoric from 0.6% to 1.6% is a deliberate shift in political communication, aimed at shaping cultural narratives and public opinion through more aggressive language.
Modern figures possess significant power to influence public opinion and engagement, but this power often operates independently of their actual expertise, creating both opportunities and risks for democracy. The tension between influence and expertise forms the core challenge in understanding contemporary influence.
Based on the increasing influence of non-expert public figures and the amplification of specific rhetoric via digital platforms, the landscape of public opinion formation appears increasingly susceptible to emotional appeals over reasoned debate, potentially challenging traditional democratic structures.
The Rise of Epistemic Power Beyond Expertise
Celebrities wield significant epistemic power, defined as the capacity to influence what people believe, even when this power is unconnected to relevant expertise. This phenomenon poses a problem for traditional democratic legitimacy theories, according to research by Archer et al. (2020). Public belief formation increasingly occurs outside the channels of established knowledge or specialized authority.
This decoupling of influence from expertise creates a new dynamic where public figures, regardless of their credentials, can shape collective understanding. The public may attribute credibility to these figures based on their visibility or charisma, rather than on their factual accuracy or depth of knowledge.
Rhetoric as a Tool: Shaping Narratives
In contrast, the proportion of violent words in 40 randomly chosen weekly radio addresses by former President Barack Obama was 0.79%, according to The Conversation. Obama's 0.79% figure remained relatively stable throughout his presidency, reflecting a consistent rhetorical approach. The stark difference between Obama's stable use of violent language and Donald Trump's escalating rhetoric, combined with the concept of unearned epistemic power, reveals a significant evolution in how public figures exert influence within democratic systems.
The comparison between Obama's and Trump's rhetoric highlights a spectrum of rhetorical strategies, showing how specific word choices can significantly impact public perception and engagement. The deliberate deployment of more extreme language by some modern figures is not merely a stylistic preference; it is a strategic leveraging of unearned epistemic power to normalize extreme discourse, fundamentally altering public engagement with political ideas.
A Double-Edged Sword: Benefits for Democracy
Despite the risks, public figures and celebrities can also contribute positively to democratic processes. They can serve as a check on political elites, drawing attention to overlooked issues, and facilitating public engagement with complex political topics, as noted by Archer et al. (2020). For instance, a celebrity advocating for climate action might mobilize public interest more effectively than a scientific report alone.
The potential for engagement by public figures means that while their influence carries risks, it also acts as a vital mechanism for democratic accountability and public awareness, fostering broader civic participation by amplifying marginalized voices or bringing critical issues to the forefront of public discourse.
The Broad Impact on Society and Democracy
The same paper by Archer et al. (2020) argues that celebrity epistemic power can be a valuable resource for supporting the legitimacy and practice of democratic elitism, despite certain risks. This dual nature of influence reveals that while public figures can undermine traditional expertise, they can also reinforce established structures if their influence aligns with democratic goals. However, social media's capacity to amplify messages makes this inherent tension in celebrity epistemic power a critical vulnerability, rapidly disseminating rhetoric regardless of its factual basis or democratic intent.
Common Questions About Modern Influence
What are examples of modern figures shaping public opinion?
Modern figures influencing public opinion include politicians using social media for direct communication, celebrities advocating for social causes, and digital influencers promoting specific lifestyles or products. For example, a sports star speaking out on racial injustice can shift public discourse and inspire activism among their followers.
How can individuals influence public discourse in 2026?
Individuals can influence public discourse in 2026 by actively participating in online communities, sharing verified information, and engaging respectfully with diverse viewpoints. Creating compelling content that resonates with specific audiences and leveraging niche platforms can also build a sphere of influence.
What is the role of modern leaders in shaping society?
Modern leaders play a crucial role in shaping society by setting public agendas, modeling behavior, and framing complex issues for broad understanding. Their rhetoric and actions can either foster unity and informed debate or contribute to polarization and the erosion of trust in institutions.
If the trend of escalating rhetoric and unearned epistemic power continues, public discourse by 2026 will likely be even more susceptible to emotional manipulation, further challenging the foundations of reasoned democratic engagement.
