Over the past several days, my TikTok ‘For You Page’ has been overwhelmed with videos about one of Kate Mackz most recent posts in her series ‘The Running Interview Show.’ This well-known and loved series entails influencer Kate Mackz going on runs with public figures and asking them questions about their life, work, etc. Typically, her guests are fellow influencers, celebrities, and, more recently, politicians. Every interview starts with the iconic line “How many miles are we running today?’ With a TikTok following of 783,200, her videos have clearly resonated with TikTok users.
Her episode of her running series from May 1, featuring White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, seems to have had the opposite effect, however. While I have never been a personal follower of Kate Mackz and typically don’t see her videos on my ‘For You Page,’ countless stitches and eventually the original video popped up in my feed. The post has accumulated 2.5 million views as of May 4 and approximately 75,500 likes.
Kate Mackz’s video seems to have ended up on a side of TikTok that does not support either Karoline Leavitt or the administration she works for. Comments under the video read: “Oh Kate, this is disappointing,” and “How can we possibly talk to her [Leavitt] like this is a normal administration,” the former raking up roughly 69,800 likes and the latter 18,800.
It is an understatement to say that Karoline Leavitt is a controversial political figure. She has been criticized for her conduct as Press Secretary and for her general demeanor. While some characterize her as passionate and truthful, others find her delivery of information and dynamic with journalists inappropriate and concerning. Her work for the Trump administration, which has drawn major criticism since assuming the presidency in January, has further condemned her in the eyes of some.
Mackz opened the video with her typical opening line, to which Karoline responded, “No miles because we’re at the beautiful White House, but why don’t we give you a tour?” Critics have pointed out that Mackz’s entire series is based off the concept of interviewing her guests while they run together. This has been the format of nearly every episode of this series as far as I can find, including her interview with Governor Tim Walz during his election campaign for the vice presidency in 2024. Why did Mackz break the mold for Karoline Leavitt? Was the opportunity just too compelling, or did her personal beliefs overpower her professional integrity?
Specific moments from and statements made during the interview raised a few more red flags for some TikTok users. One of these included when Mackz commented on how much smaller the briefing room is than she expected. In response, Leavitt said, “We need to make [the room] bigger so we can allow more voices in.” This has drawn significant criticism, considering Leavitt and the Trump administration have arguably made efforts to limit access to White House press briefings as of late. For example, in April, the Trump administration removed reporters from the Associated Press, Reuters, and Bloomberg (three leading wire services that have historically covered the White House) from sharing a rotating spot in the White House press pool.
Another one of these “red flag” moments includes a meme Leavitt has hung up in her office that reads “No thanks. I won’t be needing that [a brain]. I believe everything the legacy media shows.” Some have deemed this inappropriate for a civil servant to have hung up in their office, in particular someone whose job requires a professional relationship with the press (including that of legacy media).
Karoline Leavitt’s episode on ‘The Running Interview Show’ is not the first or only example of social media influencers commenting on and/or getting directly involved in politics. For example, in October of last year, “Call Her Daddy” podcaster Alex Cooper interviewed former Vice President Kamala Harris during her 2024 presidential campaign. Another example includes influencer Logan Paul’s interview with President Trump in June 2024.
It seems there is a growing trend in influencers interviewing politicians and/or making political statements. This opens a window for a greater dialogue about the role of social media in politics and whether it’s to our benefit or demise. Whatever the answer is, it’s not straightforward.
On one hand, having political conversations on accessible social media platforms like TikTok, YouTube, and Spotify may increase political engagement. Influencers can reach large audiences with their content, especially younger generations who may otherwise be less politically engaged. For example, 54% of U.S. adults, who tend to be younger, get at least ‘some’ of their news from social media, according to a Pew Research study. Gender, party identification, and age all impact how likely someone is to get their news from social media and from which apps.
Influencers can also give a platform to underrepresented voices, shedding light on people and issues that may not be covered (or at least as extensively) by the mainstream media. This phenomenon is often how influencers (especially political ones) amass followers: serving as an authentic, transparent voice for marginalized communities and applying pressure on politicians.
However, with this said, many of these influencers have little prior experience in politics, government, or journalism. This creates a risk of the spread of misinformation. Lacking expertise and context when discussing political issues or interviewing politicians may spread misinformation and oversimplify nuanced debates, ultimately deceiving viewers, whether intentionally or not. In fact, studies have shown that Americans who use social media as their primary news source have less political knowledge and show lower levels of political engagement. This speaks to one of the primary critiques against Kate Mackz’s video: a misunderstanding and lack of context regarding the policy and conduct of Karoline Leavitt and the Trump administration.
Additionally, social media platforms, especially as of late, have been criticized for becoming echo chambers. Echo chambers are closed systems where individuals are consistently exposed to information that reaffirms their beliefs and opinions. Considering most social media platforms rely on algorithms based on user behavior, the result in some cases is systems of like-minded individuals with little exposure to belief-challenging content.
Regardless of whether the crossover between social media and politics is beneficial, it doesn’t seem to be going away anytime soon. Maintaining a vigilant commitment to digital literacy and critical thinking, and resisting the urge to fall into online echo chambers, are just some of the things we can do to remain mindful during these confusing times. The Kate Mackz controversy story will soon fade, and another one will replace it. What won’t pass with time is the impact of social media on political engagement and news consumption.