AI content and young people: what fresh surveys show

In just a few years, artificial intelligence has become part of everyday life, especially among younger age groups. That is why it is striking that a growing number of surveys among Generation Z and Generation Alpha show not only enthusiasm but also distance. The question today is no longer simply whether they use these tools, but also how they feel when it is clearly obvious that a piece of content was created by a machine.

Based on the latest findings, the picture is mixed. Young people often use AI as a practical tool, yet some AI-generated videos, images, music and texts come across to them as awkward, forced or lacking credibility. This shift may be an important signal for parents, teachers and platforms alike.

It is not AI use that has become awkward, but visible AI content

The key distinction is that it is not necessarily the tool itself that is losing popularity, but the cultural context around it in which young people interpret it is changing. It is one thing to ask a chatbot for help in the background, and quite another to openly present a video, song lyric or post as being largely machine-made.

According to Infostart's report, findings from Wired and YPulse suggest that some young people now see openly embracing AI content as embarrassing, and that it can even become a subject of mockery among peers. This suggests that attitudes to the technology are not merely a technical matter, but are also tied to status, taste and credibility.

Rejection can grow even alongside high usage

At first glance, it may seem contradictory that young people use AI while also speaking critically about it. According to research by the Pew Research Center, 64 per cent of American teenagers have used an AI chatbot, and 30 per cent use such tools on a daily basis. The same research also indicated that the best-known service among respondents was ChatGPT.

However, this does not disprove the more negative mood; it rather adds nuance to it. Everyday use and cultural acceptance are not the same thing. A technology can be useful while still not being seen as cool in social situations, and it may even seem embarrassing if someone relies on it too visibly.

Why does generated content come across as “cringe” to many?

One explanation is the sense of artificiality. Many young people quickly spot texts, images and videos that feel monotonous, formulaic or overly polished. What is technically impressive can still seem empty or impersonal to a human eye.

Credibility is also a key issue. A chatbot used for a school assignment, brainstorming or quick information gathering is judged differently from content that presents itself as a creative achievement while, in the audience's view, involving little individual effort. Younger users are often looking precisely for originality and honesty, which is why material that is too obviously generated can backfire.

Concern about deepfakes and deception is also a strong factor

Rejection may not be driven by taste alone. According to Infostart's summary, which cites YPulse findings, 37 per cent of 13 to 17-year-olds find AI-made content embarrassing, and more than half of respondents are worried about deepfakes and deception. Behind the numbers, this also indicates that issues of trust are becoming increasingly prominent among younger age groups.

This problem is especially important on social media. If it becomes harder and harder to tell whether a video, audio recording or photo is real, suspicion may grow not only towards the technology but towards the digital environment itself. From this perspective, young people are not necessarily naive users: in many cases, they are the quickest to react when something seems manipulated.

Attitudes to AI may also vary by country

The Digital Wellness Lab survey titled How Teens Are Using AI to Learn, Create, and Connect examined teenagers' attitudes to AI in an international sample of 2,850 people. According to the research, different patterns emerged across the United States, Brazil and France.

According to summaries of the research, young people in France appeared more sceptical, while Brazilian teenagers seemed more open towards AI. This matters because it suggests that attitudes to the technology are shaped not only by the software itself, but also by the surrounding social context, educational environment, media experience and online culture.

This duality is not unfamiliar from a Hungarian perspective either

Hungarian findings also point in the direction of growing media awareness among young people. According to the material titled Awareness of young people regarding the everyday use of artificial intelligence, presented on the Online Platforms surface linked to NMHH, concerns about manipulated content have also appeared among Hungarian students alongside AI usage habits.

This fits into the broader international trend in which usage and distrust are present at the same time. In schools, this may be especially visible: students may use AI tools for brainstorming, drafting or language support, while teachers and peers are also becoming more sensitive to work that seems overly mechanical.

What does this mean for parents and teachers?

The trend now visible does not mean that young people have turned their backs on artificial intelligence. Rather, it suggests that they think about it in a more differentiated way. They still use it as a practical tool, but they view it more critically when it appears as content that replaces human performance, creativity or reality.

For parents and teachers, this may be an important insight because it does not make sense to treat young people either as a technology-loving group or as an anti-technology one. The surveys suggest that they are much more conscious users who both make use of new tools and recognise their social, ethical and credibility-related risks.

In practical terms, this may mean that conversations about AI should not be reduced simply to prohibition or encouragement. It may be more helpful to discuss when such a tool can be used as learning support, when independent work may be compromised, and how misleading or manipulated content can be recognised.

The debate of the next few years is unlikely to be about whether AI disappears from everyday life. It is more likely to be about what kinds of use are considered acceptable, where the boundary of originality lies, and how trust can be preserved in an online space where machine-made content is no longer an exception but an everyday presence.