Popularity Without Legitimacy? Comparing Trust in Television Meteorologists and YouTube Weatherfluencers

Abstract

During severe weather events, people must interpret rapidly evolving information to make time-sensitive safety decisions. Broadcast meteorologists have traditionally served as credentialed intermediaries within established media organizations, while independent "weatherfluencers" on YouTube have emerged as prominent real-time interpreters for large and growing audiences. This mixed-methods study (survey n=58; interviews n=8) provides one of the first empirical comparisons of how viewers evaluate broadcast meteorologists against YouTube weatherfluencers across credibility, legitimacy, objectivity, and practical utility. Broadcast meteorologists were consistently rated higher on credibility, legitimacy, and safety utility, while weatherfluencers achieved parity on objectivity. Yet weatherfluencer audiences continue to grow, revealing a critical decoupling between audience attention and official or professional authorization that existing crisis communication models do not fully account for. Qualitative findings illuminate the mechanisms underlying these judgments and their implications for emergency communication in hybrid information ecosystems.