On a moonlit night in April 1775, Paul Revere rode through Massachusetts carrying a warning—“The British are coming”—as English troops advanced toward Lexington and Concord.
The episode became one of the most iconic stories of the founding of the United States. However, Revere’s cavalcade was successful for a deeper reason than the courage of a single messenger. The colonies understood the British threat. Revere’s warning provided urgency and synchronization, not persuasion. Americans acted collectively because, to a large extent, they shared the same perception of reality.
Also read:
For much of the country’s history, American institutions operated on a simple premise: If enough people were given the same information, the majority would come to a similar understanding of events.
This shared understanding of reality has become a kind of national infrastructure. Markets depended on it to price risks and allocate capital. Companies depended on it to plan and invest with confidence. Democracies depended on it to sustain their legitimacy and public trust.
The United States has survived sensationalist journalism, political demagoguery, propaganda, and conspiracy theories. What made the system resilient was not the absence of lies, but the existence of a widely shared factual basis. That base is now fragmenting.
Continues after advertising
The danger is no longer the speed at which information circulates. It’s just that misinformation now spreads faster than institutions can interpret, verify or respond.
The result is growing uncertainty about what is real — and this uncertainty is producing increasingly significant economic consequences.
Every communications revolution in American history has reshaped politics, commerce, and culture. Colonial newspapers and pamphlets fueled revolutionary debate and expanded political participation. Philadelphia and other colonial capitals were home to competing publications, exposing citizens to very different political arguments. Speeches and sermons circulated widely, helping to create a national political identity even before the nation’s formal existence.
Continues after advertising
The telegraph accelerated financial markets and reduced distances. The telephone transformed business coordination. Radio synchronized national attention. Television centralized culture around a small group of major networks. The internet has eliminated virtually all friction in publishing and distributing content.
Each communications revolution has expanded access to information. But each also concentrated influence — first on publishers, then on broadcasters, and finally on digital platforms. These platforms have replaced editorial judgment with algorithms optimized to generate outrage and engagement. The benefits were enormous. The risks too.
Radio perhaps represented the pinnacle of shared national experience. On December 7, 1941, Americans learned of the attack on Pearl Harbor through bulletins that interrupted regular programming. The families gathered around the radio sets and received the same facts at the same time.
Continues after advertising
Today, digital platforms reward outrage, emotion and immediacy over verification. Artificial intelligence is accelerating this problem by making fraud faster, cheaper and more scalable. AI is changing the economics of deception.
Deepfakes, synthetic audio and manipulated videos are no longer theoretical risks. These are operational realities. Institutions no longer just face the challenge of distributing information. They struggle to preserve their credibility as markets, regulators, consumers and algorithms simultaneously react to competing versions of reality.
This is no longer just a communication problem. It is becoming a governance problem, with direct implications for markets, corporate performance and democratic stability.
Continues after advertising
The World Economic Forum already ranks false information and disinformation among the most significant short-term risks to the global economy. The confusion itself has become a market force. The erosion of trust is not just a technological phenomenon. Political culture began to treat facts themselves as partisan instruments.
Donald Trump popularized the expression “fake news” as a political weapon against unfavorable coverage. But Kellyanne Conway’s defense of “alternative facts” in 2017 marked something even more relevant: the normalization of competing realities built around demonstrably false claims.
Since then, Americans have witnessed conflicting official narratives about immigration enforcement, threats to national security, prosecutions related to the January 6 attack and the Epstein files.
Public authorities have begun to dismiss damaging information as fabrications, while presenting unsubstantiated allegations as if they were fact. The cumulative effect is institutional erosion. Americans increasingly question whether government bodies, media organizations, businesses or political leaders are providing verifiable information.
This erosion produces direct economic consequences. Markets can absorb bad news. What they have difficulty absorbing is the uncertainty about what is true.
The collapse of Silicon Valley Bank served as an early warning. Depositors did not wait for the next day’s newspaper or the analysts’ quarterly report. They reacted instantly to screenshots, speculation and comments on social media. The information — correct or not — circulated more quickly than the institutional response. This acceleration is reshaping companies’ risk management.
Communication does not resolve operational failures. But slow decisions and poor coordination can quickly turn operational problems into financial and reputational crises. A manipulated video of an executive, a false announcement of financial results or synthetic audio can move markets before verification mechanisms can react.
Deloitte has warned that losses from AI-enabled fraud could reach tens of billions of dollars per year in the coming years. Gartner predicts an increase in AI-generated impersonation cases against executives, employees and investors. The danger is not just misinformation. It is the collapse of trust in the authenticity of the evidence itself.
When stakeholders begin to assume that any image, video, or statement can be fabricated, institutional trust weakens at every level. In this environment, organizations lose speed precisely when markets demand clarity.
For CEOs, three priorities are becoming unavoidable.
First: treat trust as operational infrastructure, not as a secondary aspect of reputation. In a world of deepfakes and AI-generated disinformation, companies will increasingly compete on their ability to establish what is real before false information moves markets or undermines their credibility.
For two centuries, institutional advantage often depended on controlling the distribution of information. In the age of AI, competitive advantage may increasingly depend on verification capabilities.
Second: drastically reduce decision-making time. Traditional response structures—in which legal, communications, cybersecurity, and investor relations teams act in sequence—were designed for slower media cycles.
This model is becoming obsolete. Today, markets and social platforms react in minutes, while many institutions still take hours or days to respond. In future crises, the delay itself could turn into a market risk.
Third: credibility has become a competitive weapon. Information circulates globally at an unprecedented speed. Without credibility, even correct information has difficulty regaining control when false narratives take hold.
For generations, institutions believed that facts were capable of stabilizing uncertainty. Increasingly, the opposite is happening. Competing narratives now move markets, shape political outcomes, and redefine the value of companies in real time.
What makes this moment different is the speed with which technology compresses the creation of lies, their amplification and their consequences.
The challenge is not to restore an idealized era of perfect agreement that never existed. Democracies are, by nature, spaces for debate and disagreement. But functioning democracies and stable markets still require broad consensus about what constitutes evidence, truth, and reality. Without this foundation, trust deteriorates, institutions weaken, and instability spreads.
More than two centuries ago, Founding Father James Madison wrote to Kentucky statesman WT Barry: “A popular government, without popular information, or without the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy.”
Madison understood that a democratic government could not survive without reliable public information. In the age of artificial intelligence, this warning goes far beyond politics. When societies fail to agree on what is real, markets destabilize, institutions weaken, and public trust becomes extraordinarily difficult to restore.
The opinions expressed in Fortune.com opinion articles solely reflect the views of the authors and do not necessarily represent the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.
2026 Fortune Media IP Limited
