Growing up with crisis on repeat

The first thing many young people do each morning is reach for their phone, and within minutes all the world’s problems are already in the palm of their hand: war, rising food prices, political tensions, climate disasters, the housing crisis and terrorism.

In the past, major crises and disasters arrived as separate shocks. They were reported through radio, television or newspapers, which immediately sparked widespread debate. Today, however, hearing about such catastrophic events has simply become a part of daily life, and it often feels impossible to escape. Of course, social media is not the reason for these events, but it has changed the way people experience them. Users are exposed to global events in the middle of a conversation with friends, after holiday photos or a make-up tutorial, creating a mix of emotions and, at times, outright apathy and making it much harder to switch off.

This article explores how these overlapping pressures shape the way young Europeans think about politics, their mental wellbeing and their future. It draws on a survey of 128 respondents from across Europe, collected through the authors’ personal and professional networks, as well as an interview with psychologist Giannis Fliatis.

At first glance, the survey suggests that the greatest pressures begin offline, in the realities of everyday life. But when those realities follow people onto the same screen they use to relax, connect and unwind, uncertainty becomes a constant presence.

The crisis is not only online

The pressures named most often in the survey were not online trends, but everyday costs. More than three quarters of respondents selected the cost-of-living crisis and inflation. Housing and rent problems and job insecurity were each selected by around half, while 46 per cent chose wars and international conflict. These pressures shape practical decisions. Rising rents can delay moving out of the family home.

Temporary contracts and uncertain wages make it harder to save, move to a new city or plan a career. Higher living costs can turn heating a flat, travelling, studying or meeting friends into calculations about what can still be afforded. War and political instability add another layer, as personal plans can depend on events far outside an individual’s control.

Psychologist and cognitive behavioural psychotherapist Giannis Fliatis said that uncertainty is part of life, but outside instability can make major decisions harder. For some people, he explained, “starting something or building something seems somewhat pointless” when the future feels insecure. Choices about work, moving abroad, relationships or starting a family can feel more difficult when housing, income and security are already uncertain.

The screen does not create these conditions. It makes them harder to leave behind. News about rent, jobs, war and political instability reaches people on the same device they use for work, friendships and rest.

Always informed, rarely reassured

For many respondents, keeping up with politics means carrying it in their pocket all day. More than 80 per cent said they get news through social media, while almost three quarters encounter political content there often or very often.

Their reactions were mixed. Fifty-eight per cent said political news on social media made them worried, while 45 per cent felt informed and 37 per cent felt angry. Around 31 per cent felt overwhelmed or stressed, and the same share felt confused.

The way this information arrives matters. A report on war can be followed seconds later by a video about rising prices, an election scandal or a climate disaster. Before one event has been processed, another takes its place. Political news appears beside entertainment, messages from friends and ordinary daily content, so there is no clear moment when the news begins or ends.

Fliatis described the stream as endless. “It never stops,” he said. Repeated exposure, he added, can make shocking events feel ordinary and may lead to apathy as well as worry.

For respondents, the feed was both a source of information and a source of strain. The next question is how political content can still shape opinions when trust in it remains limited.

Before submission, check the two short quotations against the original recording because the transcript was automatically translated. The longer “About the interview” box can then be removed, since Fliatis’s profession is introduced where he first appears.

How does reading political news on social media usually make young people feel?

Political news on social media produced mixed reactions. Worry was the most common response, while many respondents also said it made them feel informed, angry, confused or overwhelmed. Foto: Authors’ survey, 2026. Based on 128 responses. Respondents could select up to three answers, so the percentages do not add up to 100 per cent.

Trust and influence do not always go hand in hand. Very few people blindly trust the political information they see on social media, with just as many saying they flat-out dismiss it. Most of us sit somewhere in the cautious middle. Yet, despite this widespread scepticism, a striking number of people admit that a social media post has still managed to genuinely change their mind about a political issue.

Crucially, content does not need to be believed to leave a mark. A post can dictate what we pay attention to, dial up our emotions, or warp our sense of how fractured society really is. Even if we suspect the source is unreliable. Today, most people view society as deeply and fundamentally divided. It is a perception that algorithm-driven feeds only amplify, rapidly pushing misleading claims and emotionally charged posts to the top of our screens.

Fliatis pointed to a related pattern, arguing that repeated exposure to shocking or divisive content does not only provoke reactions at the moment. Instead, over time, it can normalise conflict as a permanent backdrop rather than a solvable problem, making the gap between people feel wider and harder to close.

This constant friction might explain why so many people now feel entirely disconnected from society and the political system as a whole. And the fallout goes beyond just politics, endless exposure to crisis and conflict can ultimately erode our sense of control over our own futures.

A future outside their control

The survey results show that feelings of uncertainty have become the determining factor for respondents’ outlook on the future. One particularly striking finding is the perceived loss of control. More than half of the respondents indicated that they have little or no control over their future. This perception is closely linked to hope: participants who reported a lower level of control were also less hopeful about the future.

Fliatis argues that anxiety and uncertainty are natural parts of life and that, rather than trying to eliminate them, we should develop greater resilience in dealing with them. He notes that younger generations are more likely than previous generations to openly discuss their anxieties and problems. According to Fliatis, collective perceptions of problems can have a relieving effect. The feeling of not being alone in the face of uncertainty, but rather recognizing that others share similar feelings, as well as engaging in open communication about them can be relieving because it reduces the sense of facing uncertainty alone and creates opportunities for communication and mutual support.

Fliatis identifies “intolerance of uncertainty” as a common factor in anxiety disorders, referring to the low tolerance many people have for frustration or uncertainty. When people believe they need absolute certainty before making a decision, they can literally „freeze up“ and avoid making decisions.

He argues that a culture of instant gratification, reinforced by technology where everything is immediately available, and the constant exposure to negative news on social media "doom-scrolling” can amplify feelings of helplessness and normalize pessimism and negativity. Shocking news is perceived like any other weekday, which amplifies feelings of powerlessness.

Learning to live with uncertainty

The survey and the interview suggest that today’s young Europeans are not unusually anxious or fragile and their concerns reflect the realities they face every day: rising living costs, insecure work, political instability and an increasingly uncertain future. Social media has made these pressures more visible and more difficult to escape, but it did not create them.

Psychologist Giannis Fliatis argues that resilience does not mean becoming unaffected by crisis or learning to ignore it. Instead, it means accepting that uncertainty is part of life, limiting constant exposure to negative content, maintaining meaningful relationships and continuing to make decisions even when there are no guarantees. These habits can help protect mental wellbeing, but they are only part of the picture.

Personal resilience cannot become a substitute for political action because young people cannot solve high rents, unstable employment, wars or declining trust in institutions simply by spending less time on social media or becoming mentally stronger. So, addressing the conditions behind this instability may be just as important as learning to cope with the uncertainty they create.

This article was written as part of the “Newsroom Europe” project. The project brings together young Europeans from Germany, Cyprus, and Ireland, who report in international editorial teams on European issues. Its aim is to strengthen journalistic skills and to foster European exchange. The project is organized by the European Academy Berlin. Treffpunkteuropa.de is the project’s media partner.