Why Social Media Is Now the Place to Build Trust
The nonprofit world excels at communications strategies that are almost irrelevant. Here’s a playbook for how to regain credibility by working with online influencers.
By Renée DiResta and Rachel Kleinfeld
February 3, 2026 | Read Time: 7 minutes
Keep up with everything happening in The Commons by signing up for our monthly newsletter.
As moms, we’re opposites in our relationship with social media: Rachel hates the effects on children and wishes it would disappear; Renée is extremely online and knew about the “6-7” memes before her kids did. But in our work with funders and advocacy groups, both of us have come to this realization: Social media has enormous influence on how the public sees the issues and norms that philanthropy is trying to influence. Organizations have no choice but to jump in and learn how to use it effectively and responsibly.
The cultural shift in media is massive. Only 17 percent of Americans paid for news last year — and those that did were particularly affluent, educated, and left-leaning.
Grant makers may believe there’s an easy response to this change: Fund grantees to get their content on TikTok and Instagram. But the challenge goes deeper. The kind of communication that worked so well in the 20th century is no longer salient. Philanthropy may be hard-pressed to accept the new media landscape because it was so skilled in the old way of doing things. For much of the 20th century, the nonprofit world supplied credentialed experts and advocates to media outlets whose choice of guests conveyed to the public what was worthy of a listen. Credibility was signaled through markers of legitimacy like educational credentials, backing from respected institutions, and a measured tone.
But this communications model — what we call the “elite broadcast” system in our recent Carnegie Endowment for International Peace report — has collapsed, swamped by the digital-age tsunami of information sources as well as increasing distrust of institutions and experts. The very signals that once conveyed legitimacy are often seen as phony. By contrast, informality is perceived as authentic, relatable, and therefore trustworthy.
People now look for information from those they trust — a circle that for many doesn’t include traditional experts. Indeed, research suggests that some of the most influential communicators on policy topics aren’t “policy people” at all. They’re gamers, fitness gurus, and others who mostly make cultural content but veer into the informational or political.
These influencers enjoy credibility and high levels of trust because they seem just like us. They are fellow moms, weightlifters, music enthusiasts, and others who connect culturally with their audiences. They speak from bedrooms and kitchens, not boardrooms and studios, and they seem to have a personal stake in the issues at hand.
Audiences don’t expect influencers to have all the answers. But resonant creators make themselves accessible, responding to comments or chatting in livestreams. Together, audience and influencer co-create a sense of shared knowledge. And when this collective wisdom runs counter to the opinion of a distant expert they worry may be paid by some corporation or vested interest? Guess whose ideas are going to lose.
The New Playbook
Many philanthropists and organizations recognize that they are years behind on social media. They often try to catch up through “pay to play” efforts, hiring agencies or individual influencers to carry a message to their existing audiences. This works for conveying distinct pieces of information — “Don’t forget to vote on Tuesday!” — but it’s less effective at long-term work to shift norms, shape opinions, establish relationships, or build trust and confidence.
Paying creators to produce individual pieces of content is expensive and slow and provides only momentary impact. Information dropped into the never-ending river of social media content is quickly swept away.
What’s needed is a wholesale rethink of how nonprofits communicate. Funders need to give groups time and resources to imagine a new way. Here’s what philanthropy can do.
Support experimentation — now. When online critics or opponents attack a group or a cause, it’s critical to have a community that fights back. But finding the right way to be present on social media and build that engaged audience takes time.
Organizations that know how to reach audiences through traditional media — building relationships with reporters, providing tight soundbites, etc. — must now learn to engage with people directly, read their audience, adapt their message to meet people where they are, and create content that sparks action. And because traditional media strategies still have influence and can’t be abandoned, this transition can’t be done on the cheap.
Expect your grantees to take different approaches. There is no one-size-fits-all strategy or infrastructure. Some organizations are creating twin vice presidents for social and traditional media; some are offering fellowships to creators. Others are putting influencers on staff.
Expect some discomfort with the new content. Social media often has an edginess that unsettles many philanthropists and their grantees. But brand-safe content that eschews internet vibes is likely to fall flat. Grantees seeking to build long-term partnerships with authentic messengers who have resonance with new communities may have to relinquish message control and branding.
Recognize that social media is not just a line item in the communications budget. It’s how many grantees accomplish their programming. Much of what used to be known as “field organizing” now occurs on social media. The same is true for advocacy campaigning, persuasion, mobilization, and more.
That means the C-suite must be involved to integrate social-media work to drive the mission; social media strategy and execution can’t be left to junior members of a communications team. Executives must consider how to build programming so that it’s easily amplified on social media and must be cognizant of how social media can drive their real-world goals.
Offer a services model to scale funding. Just as venture capital makes shared services available across portfolios of companies, a foundation or group of foundations can make new media production or consulting services available to a set of grantees.
Consider funding influencers, potentially through fellowship models. This comes with complexity: Creators need to maintain independence to retain audience trust and authenticity. Also, funders must accept that, whatever their investment, influencers will talk about a lot that has nothing to do with democracy, education, climate, or other issues.
Like their grantees, philanthropy should experiment: Funders can support values-aligned creators who devote small but impactful moments to multiple issues that are funder priorities. A Christian mom might speak about SNAP benefits, the harm caused by cuts to foreign aid, and election reforms a few times over a year. Philanthropists can back communities of creators brought together by a third party, such as “creator labs” that offer salary, production, or back-office support to creators. They can fund micro-grant applications for creators who want to build relationships with grantees.
Help grantees identify their audience — and consider whom they’re trying to reach when you evaluate their success. The easiest audience to reach will share the organization’s views: These people will readily sign up for a podcast or Substack. But if the organization’s mission requires it to persuade the skeptical or indifferent, that’s harder. Philanthropists should expect and support longer time frames and appeals to unfamiliar values in uncomfortable language. And they should look to engagement metrics to measure success.
Incentivize grantees in a cause to amplify one another. Funding dynamics often create competition between organizations. But philanthropists can help defuse this by incentivizing grantees to help one another build productive networks to amplify each other’s content — a key to growing networked audiences.
Seize this chance to advance your mission. Philanthropy can play as big a role in the new media landscape as it did in the old. It can help nonprofits move their social media from a sideshow to a major influence and catalyst. The time to start is now.
The Commons is financed in part with philanthropic support from the Arthur M. Blank Family Foundation, Einhorn Collaborative, and the Walton Family Foundation. None of our supporters have any control over or input into story selection, reporting, or editing, and they do not review articles before publication. See more about the Chronicle, the grants, how our foundation-supported journalism works, and our gift-acceptance policy.
