There was a time when information moved together not because people agreed, but because the pathways to information were limited and shared. Before newspapers, news traveled by word of mouth: town criers, travelers, posted notices, conversations carried from place to place. Information moved slowly, but it moved collectively.
Newspapers narrowed the lens but unified the frame. Radio condensed it further, delivering the same voices into millions of homes at the same hour. Magazines shaped explanation. Television fixed attention to a shared schedule. There were five dominant channels shaping public understanding: word of mouth, newspapers, magazines, radio, and television. You could disagree with the message, but you were still responding to the same signal.
From One Signal to Multiple
Today, there is no single signal but thousands. Social media platforms with competing algorithms. Short-form video, long-form video, livestreams, podcasts, newsletters, blogs, comment threads, group chats, private feeds, search engines and creator economies all operating simultaneously, all personalized, all optimized for reinforcement rather than convergence.
We did not lose shared discourse because people stopped listening, we lost it because of the evolution of how we receive information. Information went from five sources to an endless number of customized ones.
What we have now is parallel information systems shaped by algorithms that reward reinforcement over verification. You engage with one idea and receive ten more just like it. You accept one version of a story and suddenly there is an entire ecosystem validating it, not because it’s accurate but because it keeps you reading, watching and listening; eventually familiarity masquerades as truth.
This began quietly in entertainment, recommendation engines and the shift from discovery to duplication. Over time consumption overtook inquiry and if something appeared often enough, it felt credible. If it trended, it felt confirmed.
Editorial calendars are built by watching what trends. Coverage mirrors virality. Popularity becomes the proxy for importance. Verification is treated as optional if engagement is guaranteed. All of these things caused a fragmentation in communication.
Unfortunate Effect of Fragmentation
Fragmentation does not affect everyone equally, those with the least power pay the highest cost. People without platforms, followings or media access can do everything “right” file complaints, follow procedures, wait patiently and still be ignored. Systems remain until attention intervenes; which is a story going viral.
Suddenly, action happens, not because the system worked, but because it was forced to perform under a spotlight. That’s not accountability, this is crisis theater.
When justice requires virality, silence becomes a sentence. People without algorithmic favor disappear not because their experiences are false, but because they are unseen. Fragmentation does not just confuse the public; it creates a hierarchy of whose pain counts.
Brands and Virality
When attention becomes currency, even when it corrodes trust. Brands chase viral moments because it feels safe and everyone else is doing it. Take what happened with the Astronomer CEO at the Cold Play concert. How many brands reenacted that viral moment to ride the trend? If they would have not done it, they would have felt as if they were lagging behind. Trend riding is not neutral behavior; it actually dilutes identity and signals that the brand stands for nothing beyond being seen. This destroys the equity of a brand.
Brand equity is not built through visibility alone. It’s built through consistency, integrity and quality over time. When credibility is traded for short-term attention, that’s not evolution.
What Needs to Stop
Communicators need to stop following trends; there is no shortage of audiences but there is a shortage of clarity. Entire communities remain underserved because everyone is chasing the same attention loops. Trend obsession collapses imagination. It convinces organizations that relevance only exists where everyone else is already looking and that’s not true.
If brands want to engage trends, they should create them. Define a lane, invest in values; speak to people who recognize substance when they see it. Reputation isn’t external validation it’s internal discipline. You do not need to be everywhere but you need to be consistent.
Leadership Responsibility
Leaders cannot outsource what their brand stands for and Algorithms are not scapegoats for a weak identity. Audiences are not to blame for lost trust and responsibility does not disappear because platforms change.
Trends arrive loudly and leave without consequence. Remember fidget spinners? I know I do and they dominated everything until they didn’t; that’s how trends behave.
Leadership is the work of building something durable in a disposable culture and choosing relationships over reach. Creating work that reflects who you are, not what is popular this week. Quality, consistency and integrity may not trend but they endure. That’s not nostalgia, it’s strategy and right now, in this fragmented age we need that more than ever.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Shaunta Garth is a strategic communications and visibility expert helping organizations translate complex issues into clear, high-impact public messaging.