Stopping the Spread of Influencer Propaganda: Who’s Really Shaping Online Opinions?

Social media platforms have evolved into powerful stages where influencers can shape public opinion and spread information—sometimes accurate, sometimes not—to millions of impressionable followers. This growing concern is exemplified by lifestyle blogger Brittany Xavier, whose dramatic content shift highlights the dangers of unregulated influence.

Xavier built her career as a relatable lifestyle and family content creator, initially gaining popularity by sharing her journey as a young single mother before expanding her narrative to include her growing family. Her authentic approach resonated particularly with young Gen Z audiences who continued to follow her throughout her evolution as an influencer.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Xavier leveraged her platform to advocate for safety measures and vaccine awareness. She even participated in discussions with Dr. Anthony Fauci, then Medical Advisor to the President, helping the administration reach younger audiences through a familiar face they trusted.

This pandemic-era content significantly boosted Xavier’s following, along with that of her daughter. In the years that followed, she continued to build her platform, showcasing her family life, including two new additions—her daughter Poppy and son Charles—while maintaining the approachable, family-friendly content her followers had come to expect.

However, a significant shift occurred when Xavier relocated her family from Los Angeles to Tennessee. Following this move, her content underwent a dramatic transformation. The once-neutral family vlogger began expressing strong political views, advocating for right-wing positions, and discussing newfound Republican ideals and Christian beliefs—topics previously absent from her content.

Most concerning was her recent pivot to health misinformation. Despite having no medical background or history of health-focused content, Xavier began sharing dangerous and incorrect medical advice with her large audience. She made unfounded claims linking Tylenol to autism and detailed an unscientific regimen of vitamins and supplements she gives her children to “prevent illness” and “reduce fevers.”

In one particularly troubling statement, she claimed, “I don’t give my kids Tylenol. The only brand we use is acetaminophen”—a clear contradiction, as Tylenol is a brand name for acetaminophen. Such misinformation can potentially harm both children and parents who trust her recommendations.

Xavier isn’t alone in this problematic space. Other popular “mom influencers” like Lacey Lynn and Sensibly Shy have similarly used their platforms to spread questionable information while portraying idealized versions of family life that some critics argue set unrealistic expectations.

The case highlights a crucial question for today’s social media landscape: When should content from influential figures be regulated or restricted? While freedom of speech remains a fundamental right, the responsibility that comes with addressing millions of followers introduces complex ethical considerations.

The relationship between influencers and their audience is built on trust and relatability. Followers often view these figures as friends or advisors rather than entertainers, making their pronouncements particularly powerful. When influencers build platforms based on one type of content and then pivot to spreading misinformation, it represents a problematic breach of the implicit trust their followers have placed in them.

Industry experts suggest that social media platforms may need to implement stronger verification systems for health and scientific claims, especially from accounts with large followings. Some have proposed warning labels similar to those used for political content during election seasons.

While social media has democratized communication and created opportunities for diverse voices, the Xavier case demonstrates the double-edged nature of this power. As these platforms continue to shape public discourse, finding the balance between free expression and preventing harmful misinformation remains one of the central challenges of our digital age.