Table of Contents:
Activism has always been a powerful force in shaping societies, from peaceful marches to disruptive protests. However, the landscape is shifting—aggressive, even hostile activism is gaining public approval. As a result, a striking 40% of people worldwide now support hostile activism as a means to drive change.
What’s fueling this shift? Is social media playing a role in normalizing extreme protests? And how does generational divide impact attitudes toward disruptive activism? Let’s explore these pressing questions.
Recent data from the 2025 Edelman Trust Barometer reveals a sharp rise in support for hostile activism. Because of the term “hostile activism” it refers to aggressive protest tactics, including online attacks (27%), spreading disinformation (25%), violence (23%), and property damage (23%).
As a result, this is a significant shift from traditional peaceful activism. But the question is, why are people becoming more accepting of aggressive protest methods?
A major driver of this trend is widespread distrust. Because the Edelman report shows that trust in governments, media, and even NGOs has declined sharply over the past few years. When people believe that institutions are failing them, they are more likely to support extreme measures to make their voices heard.
The study introduces the concept of a “crisis of grievance”—a growing sentiment that governments and businesses only serve the wealthy and powerful. Over 61% of people globally hold grievances against these institutions, believing they are designed to benefit elites at the cost of ordinary citizens.
Such deep frustration is leading many to believe that hostile activism is the only way to demand justice.
Economic disparity is another major factor. Although the trust gap between high-income and low-income groups has widened in most countries. Lower-income communities—who feel excluded from economic and social opportunities—are more likely to support aggressive protest methods.
Social media has revolutionized activism, giving ordinary people a platform to voice their concerns. But it has also amplified radical views and normalized aggressive protest tactics.
Platforms like X (formerly Twitter), Instagram, and TikTok reward sensational content. Peaceful protests rarely go viral, but disruptive, emotionally charged actions do. When protests escalate into property destruction or confrontations with police, they attract millions of views and shares.
Social media algorithms create echo chambers—where users only see content that aligns with their views. This intensifies radicalization, as users are constantly exposed to content that justifies and even glorifies extreme activism.
A key finding from the Edelman report is that grievance-driven individuals are 2X more likely to have a “zero-sum mindset”—the belief that any gain by their opponents is a direct loss for them. Social media amplifies this us-versus-them mentality.
Online activism is often more hostile than real-world protests. Troll armies, cancel culture, and doxxing (leaking personal information) have become common protest tactics. The Edelman report found that over 27% of people approve of online attacks as a form of activism.
With digital anonymity, people feel emboldened to engage in hostile actions without fear of real-world consequences.
The generational divide in attitudes toward activism is stark. The 2025 Edelman Trust Barometer shows that 53% of people aged 18-34 approve of hostile activism, compared to just 26% of those aged 55+.
If current trends continue, future activism will likely become more disruptive. However, whether this will lead to constructive change or societal instability remains to be seen.
While many support aggressive activism, it raises serious ethical and legal concerns.
History shows that nonviolent protests (like Mahatma Gandhi’s independence movement or Martin Luther King Jr.’s civil rights movement) have been far more effective than violent uprisings.
When activism turns violent, public support often declines. Many people sympathize with the cause but not the methods.
The Edelman report found that 25% of people approve of spreading false information to achieve social change. This is dangerous, as misinformation:
Hostile activism can have severe legal consequences, including:
Many governments are tightening laws against digital harassment, vandalism, and violent protests.
(Read more: Employees can be great leaders)
The Edelman report suggests that building trust in institutions is key to reducing extreme activism. Here’s how:
Public trust in government is at an all-time low. To rebuild it, governments must:
People trust businesses more than governments. This means corporations have a unique role in addressing public grievances. They can:
The declining trust in media has fueled the spread of fake news and propaganda. Media organizations must:
Activism is crucial for social progress, but violence and misinformation hurt the very causes activists fight for. By focusing on strategic, ethical activism, movements can win public support and drive real change.
Hostile activism is no longer a fringe phenomenon—it is gaining mainstream acceptance. But does this mean we are headed for a more chaotic world, or can institutions restore trust and reduce the need for extreme protest methods?
One thing is clear: unless governments, businesses, and media address public grievances, the rise of hostile activism will continue. The future of activism—and social stability—depends on whether trust can be rebuilt.
(Read more: Leaders will now have to be the new-age marketers to engage with employees!)
For Public Relations (PR) professionals—whether aspirants, trainees, or seasoned executives—the Edelman Trust Barometer is more than just a report. It’s a strategic playbook that helps shape communication strategies, as a result, manage reputation, and navigate the complex landscape of trust in institutions.
PR professionals must stay ahead of public sentiment to anticipate crises before they explode. The Trust Barometer highlights rising distrust in governments, media, and corporations, signaling potential PR challenges. For instance, if trust in businesses is declining, PR teams can proactively launch transparency campaigns, enhance corporate storytelling, and engage in thought leadership initiatives to regain public confidence.
Trust directly influences how messages are received. According to the report, younger generations consume news differently, and social media plays a crucial role in activism. This insight, further, helps PR teams tailor messaging for different demographics—leveraging digital storytelling, influencer collaborations, and crisis-response strategies to effectively engage audiences.
Although, in an era where 53% of young adults approve of hostile activism, businesses must be cautious. PR executives can therefore, use the Trust Barometer to shape ethical corporate narratives, ensuring that brands are seen as responsible and socially conscious. Managing misinformation, countering disinformation, and building a trustworthy brand image are now furthermore key PR responsibilities.
Because trust within organisations impacts internal PR too. Therefore, with trust in employers declining, PR professionals can work on employee engagement programs, transparent leadership communications, and CSR initiatives to build a positive workplace reputation.
With trust in media fluctuating, PR professionals must position their clients as credible sources of information. Moreover, by aligning with trusted media outlets, PR teams can boost credibility, ensuring that brand messaging is fact-based and resonates with a skeptical audience.
In short, the Edelman Trust Barometer is an essential tool for PR professionals to build, maintain, and restore trust—the cornerstone of effective public relations.
