Should Influencers prove they are experts in their fields before posting about it?

They are people with an interesting personality that people choose to watch.

If you view it as entertainment, fine. But I don't really get why people believe them on many different things. I suppose they trust their judgement. When you have millions of products to buy, someone telling you which ones to get, or giving advice, it looks helpful. But you don't know them or their background or their biases/ knowledge, etc.

Good con men also have engaging personalities that suck you in. I am not saying they are con men, but just that certain people have a communication style that people find engaging and trustworthy.

You can learn it, interrogators use it, but it is psychological manipulation. It is possible some influencers do it consciously, but some probably don't. They often cultivate carefully curated online personalities and an image.

Anyway, it says as much about the people following them as about the influencers. If they declared their interests, like MPs, or declared their background so you could judge how much weight to put on what they say, I can't see it would be bad.

And of course, just because someone is a expert on one thing does not make them an expert on everything. Also, regular people can also have very food ideas abe views. The thing is to use critical thinking and check what people say, but most people don't. 

Stuart333 said:

just because someone is a expert on one thing does not make them an expert on everything.

This is so true, a common mistake. So many, especially immature and vulnerable people, believe what they read onine. There is a huge difference between freedom of speech and license - ie, freedom without ethics. Ethics seems an old fashioned concept these days, especially in public life. Now religion is no longer the force it was, there is [as yet] nothing to replace the teaching of ethics, especially to kids from broken homes. The citizenship course is far too narrow.

There has to be some censorship, now the internet is a common source of information. The Chinese government is highly oppressive, but here I think they are on the right track. It is too easy for malcontents to start conflicts in a dangerous, volatile world. There are many sociopaths who love spreading misinformation and mischief.

Things like these ought to be regulated or blocked - giving medical information, posing as a mental health expert, inciting criminality, inciting violence, posing as an expert /bogus qualifications, writing essays for university students, 'miracle cures'.

Stuart333 said:

just because someone is a expert on one thing does not make them an expert on everything.

This is so true, a common mistake. So many, especially immature and vulnerable people, believe what they read onine. There is a huge difference between freedom of speech and license - ie, freedom without ethics. Ethics seems an old fashioned concept these days, especially in public life. Now religion is no longer the force it was, there is [as yet] nothing to replace the teaching of ethics, especially to kids from broken homes. The citizenship course is far too narrow.

There has to be some censorship, now the internet is a common source of information. The Chinese government is highly oppressive, but here I think they are on the right track. It is too easy for malcontents to start conflicts in a dangerous, volatile world. There are many sociopaths who love spreading misinformation and mischief.

Things like these ought to be regulated or blocked - giving medical information, posing as a mental health expert, inciting criminality, inciting violence, posing as an expert /bogus qualifications, writing essays for university students, 'miracle cures'.