What Does Digital Resilience Mean for Young People? TRUTH4YOUTH Exchange in Latvia

Young people spend a significant part of their everyday lives online, but being confident using digital platforms does not necessarily mean feeling confident about the information found there. How do young people recognise misinformation? How are algorithms shaping what they see? And what would help them participate more actively in society?

These questions were at the centre of the TRUTH4YOUTH Transnational Online Exchange of Views on Youth Digital Competences and Vulnerabilities, organised in Latvia by EFE on 22 April 2026.

The online session brought together 22 participants, including 18 young people alongside representatives from academia, civil society and local policymaking. The discussion was held in Latvian and created a space where different perspectives could meet around three interconnected themes: digital skills and resilience, misinformation and trust, and civic participation, digital rights and well-being.

Rather than being a webinar or lecture, the activity was designed as an open exchange in which participants could contribute their own experiences and opinions. Interactive questions, Mentimeter, chat discussions and open conversation helped create different ways to participate, including for those who initially felt less comfortable speaking in front of the whole group.

One interesting finding was the difference between being digitally active and being digitally resilient. Participants rated their general ability to navigate the internet relatively highly, yet identified important gaps in critical evaluation, recognising AI-generated content, privacy management, media literacy and cybersecurity. Trust in online information was much less certain, suggesting that knowing how to use digital platforms does not automatically mean knowing how to evaluate what appears on them.

Misinformation generated particularly active discussion. Participants identified TikTok and Instagram Reels as important channels through which misleading information can reach young people. Short-form content, emotional messages and algorithms can reinforce particular perspectives and gradually create personalised information bubbles. AI-generated content was another growing concern, especially as synthetic images and videos become increasingly difficult to distinguish from authentic material.

The conversation also moved beyond misinformation to ask what meaningful civic participation looks like for young people. Interestingly, several participants initially did not consider themselves civically active. Through discussion, however, they recognised that volunteering, community clean-ups, donations, demonstrations, school activities and supporting community initiatives are all forms of participation. Participants strongly valued activities where they could meet others face-to-face and see tangible results from their involvement.

One of the clearest messages from young participants was that participation needs to be genuine. They emphasised that young people can recognise when their opinions are collected only formally but decisions have effectively already been made. Instead, they want opportunities where their ideas are taken seriously and where they can later see what happened as a result of their contribution.

As one youth group explained:

“Young people need to be engaged in a way that shows their voices are being heard.”

Another group highlighted the importance of closing the feedback loop:

“Not just that young people speak, but that they also see what happens next.”

The exchange also opened wider debates around social media regulation and democratic participation. Participants did not see simply banning social media for teenagers as an effective solution. Instead, the discussion highlighted education, critical thinking, parental dialogue, age-appropriate regulation and greater platform responsibility. The group also explored youth political participation, including the possibility of lowering the voting age to 16.

Throughout the session, participants built on each other's ideas and critically reflected on their own digital habits. Mentimeter and the chat were particularly valuable for ensuring that quieter and younger participants could contribute before becoming comfortable speaking directly.

The Latvian exchange showed that strengthening digital resilience is about much more than technical skills. Young people need opportunities to question information, understand how digital environments influence them, protect themselves online and experience meaningful participation in the decisions that affect them.

The perspectives collected in Latvia will contribute to the wider TRUTH4YOUTH European dialogue on youth digital competences and vulnerabilities and help inform the project's subsequent training activities.

TRUTH4YOUTH – Digital Disciplined Citizenship

Project No. 101252921 — TRUTH4YOUTH — CERV-2025-CITIZENS-CIV

Funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Education and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA). Neither the European Union nor EACEA can be held responsible for them.