A linguistic trend has sparked debate in online communities: the growing use of first-person plural pronouns by content creators and public figures when discussing individual actions and decisions. Rather than saying "I'm playing a game" or "I made this choice," some speakers opt for "we're playing a game" or "we made this decision," seemingly including their audience in their personal experiences.
This speech pattern has drawn criticism from those who view it as awkward, presumptuous, or emblematic of broader changes in how people communicate. Critics contend that the practice conflates the speaker's actions with those of their audience members, creating a false sense of shared responsibility or participation. They argue it reflects either linguistic imprecision or an inappropriate blurring of boundaries between content creator and viewer.
The Criticism: Pronouns as Boundary Violation
Detractors of this linguistic trend point to several concerns. The primary objection centers on accuracy and clarity: when a creator is performing an action alone, using "we" technically includes the listener or viewer in that action, which is factually incorrect. Critics suggest this practice stems from streaming and content creation culture, where creators may unconsciously adopt language that acknowledges their audience's presence, even when discussing solitary activities.
Another layer of criticism involves what some perceive as manipulative intent or at minimum, poor communication etiquette. By using "we," creators may inadvertently (or intentionally) foster a sense that viewers are invested in or responsible for the creator's personal decisions. This can feel patronizing to audiences who view the content passively and have no actual stake in the creator's choices. Critics also note that this speech pattern may reflect a broader cultural shift toward less precise communication in digital spaces, where viral language trends often prioritize engagement over linguistic accuracy.
From this perspective, maintaining clear pronoun usage is not merely a grammar preference but a matter of honest communication. When a creator says "we're going to the gym," but only the creator actually goes to the gym, the statement is misleading, even if unintentionally so.
The Defense: Community Building and Digital Evolution
Defenders of this pronoun usage argue that language naturally evolves, particularly in digital and social contexts where audience interaction is central. They suggest that content creators using "we" are attempting to foster a sense of community and shared experience with their audiences. Rather than viewing it as manipulative, advocates frame it as an attempt to break down the traditional barrier between performer and audience.
From this perspective, the use of "we" reflects a genuine shift in how community operates online. Audiences of content creators are often deeply engaged, offer feedback, and feel emotionally invested in creators' journeys. Using "we" can acknowledge this parasocial relationship and create a more intimate connection. Defenders argue that linguistic prescriptivism—insisting on "correct" pronoun usage—misses the cultural context in which this speech pattern emerges and may reflect gatekeeping about how language should evolve.
Additionally, some contend that plural pronouns have historically served various functions beyond literal inclusion, including in formal or humble speech contexts. The trend, from this angle, is simply another natural variation in how speakers use language to build connection with their audiences.
Broader Context
This debate exists within a larger conversation about how digital communication and content creator culture reshape everyday speech patterns. Critics point to other changes—pronunciation shifts, slang adoption, and speaking patterns influenced by viral trends—as evidence of broader linguistic drift. Defenders counter that languages and dialects have always evolved through cultural influence and that digital platforms merely accelerate this natural process.
The disagreement ultimately reflects differing values: one side prioritizes linguistic precision and clear boundaries between speaker and audience, while the other emphasizes community connection and views language as a flexible tool for building engagement and belonging.
Source: Reddit r/unpopularopinion
Discussion (0)