The recent turmoil following the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel has sparked a monumental shift in how global narratives are crafted online. A new study reveals that in a mere three days, a select group of individual-operated accounts on X have surpassed major media outlets like CNN and The New York Times in both reach and influence. This change has rattled users who feel increasingly detached from reliable sources of information.
One notable reaction was captured in a viral tweet by @CollinRugg, who voiced the frustration many experience: “😡😡😡😡😡 what I would love to say ……” This captures a sentiment of disillusionment with a media landscape that is now heavily influenced by accounts that lack transparency.
The research conducted by experts at the University of Washington assessed English-language posts on X regarding the ongoing conflict, filtering for significant interactions on posts mentioning “Gaza,” “Israel,” or “Hamas.” The team pinpointed seven accounts that became central to discussions: @visegrad24, @marionawfal, @sentdefender, @spectatorindex, @warmonitors, @collinrugg, and @censoredmen. Collectively, these accounts amassed an astonishing 1.6 billion views during the initial days following the attack, dwarfing the mere 112 million views of established media sources.
This tremendous rise in influence stems from three key elements: speed, frequency, and a platform engineered to amplify emotionally charged content. The influential accounts posted dozens of times daily, using vivid images and brief captions that often sacrificed depth for impact. For example, @warmonitors shared harsh footage of a child’s funeral following an airstrike. The chaos of these posts frequently lacked solid sourcing, raising the specter of misinformation.
However, it’s not just the frantic pace that fuels this shift. The study points to the changing algorithms of Twitter/X and the significant role of Elon Musk. Among the seven accounts identified, Musk followed six, responding to five of them, which greatly enhanced their visibility. His interactions increased the reach of these posts in users’ feeds, emphasizing engagement over credibility. Musk replied to @marionawfal 51 times in a short span, illustrating the dramatic impact of his engagement.
The study made an alarming observation: “What rises to the top is not what’s most accurate, but what’s most engaging.” This highlights a broader concern about distinguishing fact from fiction, especially in real-time during crises. @CollinRugg’s frustrated post reflects an insider grappling with the paradox of a system that benefits from chaos yet remains difficult to navigate.
The researchers also tracked follower growth for these accounts, finding that since Musk’s takeover of X, the “new elite” has gained 4.4 million followers compared to just 1.7 million for traditional media accounts. This stark disparity underscores the shifting dynamics of news consumption.
Despite the challenges posed by these changes, traditional media outlets uphold rigorous journalistic standards, including editorial checks and sourcing protocols. Yet, in moments of breaking news, they struggle to compete with the rapid-fire content produced by individual accounts that operate without oversight. This dangerous trend allows unchecked rumors to gain traction and be misconstrued as factual narratives.
Policymakers and the public now face complex challenges. The overflow of disinformation hampers intelligence operations and undermines public safety. Unverified claims surrounding the initial Hamas attack—such as sensationalized accounts of brutality—quickly circulated, demonstrating how misinformation can spiral out of control. The emotional toll of consuming this information is equally troubling. The often graphic and unverified content can heighten fear and deepen political divides.
As the findings suggest, this is not merely about who delivers news but what constitutes news itself. Accounts that few had heard of before the tensions now play pivotal roles in shaping global discussions about war. This rapid evolution signals a long-term change in how society interacts with information, challenging the traditional frameworks of journalism.
For those trying to piece together the unfolding events on X, the prevailing sense of helplessness grows. The frustration encapsulated in @CollinRugg’s baffled tweet represents more than anger; it highlights a broader struggle to discern truth in an environment where clarity is increasingly elusive. As the digital battlefield transforms, the implications of these changes will resonate well beyond the immediate crisis, reshaping how we experience news and understand our world.
"*" indicates required fields
