The recent violence in Israel unleashed a new wave of information dissemination that reshapes how news is consumed. The phenomenon unfolded over just a few days, from October 7 to October 10, as social media, particularly X (formerly Twitter), emerged as the dominant platform for breaking news. This shift in information flow does not just reflect a preference for one platform over another; it marks a significant cultural transformation in how people engage with news, especially during crises.
The “new elites” on X, including accounts like @visegrad24, @sentdefender, and @collinrugg, gained an astonishing 1.6 billion tweet views in a mere three days. This staggering figure dwarfs the reach of established media outlets like The New York Times or Reuters during the same timeframe. The data indicates a fundamental change in the landscape of news—it’s a shift where traditional journalism is not just sidelined, but is losing ground entirely.
Musk’s ownership of X plays a pivotal role in this transformation. His approach directly influences the platform’s dynamics. Changes in the algorithm to favor “native” content, coupled with the removal of verified checkmarks, contribute to the rise of accounts that prioritize rapid engagement over polished reporting. Many of these newer accounts thrive on emotionally charged content, often disregarding the principles of verification and context that legacy media uphold. This trend raises profound questions about the integrity of the news landscape.
The data from the University of Washington’s study captures this alarming shift. Traditional media outlets, despite having vastly more followers, are often outpaced in engagement by these smaller accounts. Emotional language and striking visuals become the currency of attention. Researchers noted that during the crisis, many of the “new elites” posted nearly 200 updates—a volume far surpassing the relatively subdued output from established media. This frequency enhances their visibility and influence—a digital reward system that newer platforms seem to favor.
The style of reporting from the “new elites” diverges sharply from that of traditional outlets. Where legacy media emphasizes verification and source citing, many newer influencers use vague references to “local media” or lack context altogether. This dynamic heightens the risk of misinformation, particularly evident in instances where unverified claims circulated widely before mainstream outlets had a chance to respond. The absence of corrections or follow-ups from these influencers underscores a troubling reality: speed often trumps accuracy on social media platforms.
There are both advantages and pitfalls to this new model of news delivery. On one hand, it allows for a broader range of voices in the information marketplace. Ordinary users can raise issues and share perspectives that often fall through the cracks of traditional reporting. Yet, the chaotic nature of unverified news heightens the dangers during critical moments—where misinformation can escalate tensions and spark unrest.
Another crucial takeaway is the emerging accountability dynamic. As these “new elites” step into roles traditionally held by established media, concerns mount over editorial standards and the quality of information. The reliance on immediate, surface-level news could undermine public trust, particularly in situations where accuracy is critical. The studies suggest that this trend may not only influence real-time responses but also shape long-term public perceptions and reactions to major events around the globe.
Followers of @collinrugg and similar accounts echo a widespread sentiment: traditional media is seen as too slow or compromised. Many have opted for the immediacy and emotional resonance offered by these newer platforms, regardless of their reliability. In this evolving environment, clicks, shares, and engagement matter more than a storied reputation or longevity in the industry. This shift towards an easily digestible yet unfiltered news experience illustrates a transformable media landscape—one built more on who posts first rather than who reports best.
As the researchers aptly described it, we now inhabit a “faster, more disorienting crisis discourse ecosystem.” This environment prioritizes reactions over rigor, creating a blurred line between fact and sentiment. In the landscape forged by social media, those who can be “unapologetic” in their delivery gain traction. The implications of this are not just limited to one region or crisis; as seen, they hold the potential to influence the very fabric of public discourse across the globe.
"*" indicates required fields
