Social media has transformed the way news is gathered, disseminated and consumed. It has facilitated anyone with a smartphone providing first-hand accounts and experiences of events taking place, whether in real time or at a later date. In turn, this transformation has impacted traditional media in a major way, forcing journalists to engage with the public in one of the places that they increasingly go for information first: online.
Before the advent of social media, traditional journalism largely laid claim as the primary source of news. Journalistic storytelling relied on organising information in a professional manner that included the verification of data and sources and thorough investigation. This professional structure of receiving news has been disrupted by social media’s ability to change who produces and consumes news.
This shift can also be understood through media convergence. Hamada explains that convergence is more than different technologies simply merging. It has broader implications for journalism, including its producers and consumers and the distribution of power and influence. He describes convergence as both a “top-down corporate-driven process” and a “bottom-up consumer-driven process” (Hamada, 2018, p. 36).
That is particularly relevant to social media because the public is no longer simply waiting to receive information from journalists. We record events, post updates, comment, share and sometimes even break stories before a journalist arrives on the scene. The line between the person producing information and the person consuming it has become increasingly blurred.
For me, this disruption is not entirely negative. Social media has made information more accessible, immediate and participatory. However, it has also created an environment where being first can sometimes feel more important than being right.
Ambient Journalism and the Changing News Landscape
One of the concepts I discovered while researching this topic was ambient journalism. Alfred Hermida uses the concept to explain an environment in which people are continuously exposed to fragments of news and information through digital communication networks. Social media allows users to maintain an awareness of events as they unfold rather than waiting for a complete news report (Hermida, 2012).
This has been especially beneficial during breaking news, disaster management and other situations where rapid updates are important. A person at the scene of an event can share a photograph, video or first-hand account almost instantly, giving both journalists and the public access to information that might otherwise take much longer to reach them.
But that speed also creates one of social media’s biggest problems.
A person witnessing an event can upload a video within seconds, but that does not necessarily mean that person knows the full context of what happened. A video may be real while the caption attached to it is misleading. An image may show a genuine event but be shared months later as though it happened today.
This is where journalism still has an important role to play.
When Everyone Can Break the News
I spoke with Jerome Williams, a reporter at the Jamaica Observer, about how social media has affected journalism locally. His perspective, like mine, is not simply that social media is good or bad.
He believes one of the biggest changes has been the speed at which news now travels. Something can happen in St Thomas or Montego Bay and, within minutes, people in Kingston may already be seeing videos and posts about it.
As Jerome explained, “Social media has therefore become a very useful newsgathering tool, not just a platform for publishing stories” (J. Williams, personal communication, 2026).
A video posted by someone at the scene may alert a newsroom that something has happened, help journalists locate witnesses or provide an early lead. In that sense, social media has expanded the tools available to journalists.
Where our perspectives strongly align, however, is on verification.
Jerome puts it simply: “Being first is not more important than being right” (J. Williams, personal communication, 2026).
Journalists are now operating in the same digital environment as influencers, anonymous accounts, fake pages, WhatsApp broadcasts and ordinary social media users. The difference is that professional journalism carries a responsibility to verify information before presenting it as fact.
Jerome also made a point that feels particularly Jamaican: “The fact that something has been forwarded 500 times doesn’t make it true” (J. Williams, personal communication, 2026).
And we all know that WhatsApp message.
No identifiable source. No official confirmation. Somehow everybody’s auntie already has it.
It would be funny if misinformation did not have real consequences.
When False Information Travels Faster
In June 2026, a photograph and message began circulating claiming that nine-year-old Adonai Thomas was missing. There was just one major problem: she wasn’t.
The Jamaica Constabulary Force confirmed that Adonai had been accounted for, was in good health and was safely with her family. Police urged members of the public to stop circulating the photograph and message, warning that the false information could cause unnecessary distress to the child and her family (Jamaica Observer, 2026).
For me, this case demonstrates how easily our instinct to share information can overtake our instinct to verify it. Someone may genuinely believe that sharing a missing-child post is helping, but when the information is false, that same act can spread misinformation to hundreds or thousands of other people.
This does not mean that social media itself is the enemy. The same ability to rapidly circulate information can be incredibly valuable during a genuine emergency. The problem is what happens when speed operates without verification.
It brings me back to a question I think we should be asking more often when we see something online: Who is providing this information, and has it actually been verified?
In my Topic Tuesday video, I explore this issue further through a Jamaican example and look at why verification becomes even more important when information is moving faster than traditional reporting processes.
When Fake News Looks Like Real News
The problem becomes even more complicated when misinformation does not simply circulate alongside journalism but actually pretends to be journalism.
In July 2026, the Jamaica Observer issued an advisory about an unauthorised website using its name, logo and other brand elements to imitate its official platform. A fabricated article circulating online appeared to originate from the newspaper and referenced former Cabinet minister Lisa Hanna and a purported investment platform. The Observer confirmed that it had published no such article and had no association with the website (Jamaica Observer, 2026).
For me, that example is particularly concerning because simply telling audiences to “check the source” is no longer always enough.
What happens when the source itself is being impersonated?
This becomes even more complicated with the development of artificial intelligence and other digital technologies. Written content, photographs, audio and video can be created or manipulated with increasing ease. Audiences therefore have more information available to them than perhaps ever before, while simultaneously having to work harder to determine whether that information is authentic.
It also reinforces Jerome’s distinction between simply sharing information and practising journalism.
Anybody can record something and upload it to TikTok, Instagram, Facebook or X. A professional journalist, however, works within a system of accountability. There is a reporter attached to the story, an editorial process behind its publication and a media organisation that can be held accountable for what it publishes.
Jerome explained it this way: “People should be able to look at a journalist’s report and know that somebody actually did the work behind it” (J. Williams, personal communication, 2026).
So, Has Social Media Helped or Hurt Journalism?
For me, the answer is both.
Social media has helped journalism become faster, more accessible and more connected to the people it serves. Journalists can identify developing stories, interact directly with audiences, locate eyewitnesses and distribute important information almost instantaneously.
It has also given ordinary people a greater role in the news process. That reflects the convergence Hamada describes, where the traditional boundaries between producers and consumers of information have shifted.
But greater participation also brings greater ethical challenges.
Sensational information can spread rapidly because it attracts attention. People can form opinions about an individual, business or situation before all the facts are established. False information can be repeated so many times that even after a correction is issued, some people may continue to believe the original version.
That is why I don’t think journalism should try to compete with social media simply by becoming faster or louder.
Its value is in doing what the endless scroll cannot guarantee: verification, context and accountability.
Social media has not made journalism irrelevant. If anything, the overwhelming amount of information available to us has made responsible journalism even more necessary.
We live in a world where almost anyone can publish information, established media organisations can be impersonated, artificial intelligence can generate convincing content within seconds and an unverified post can travel across Jamaica before a journalist has even made the first phone call.
The challenge for journalism, then, is not simply keeping up with social media.
It is ensuring that in the race to keep up, truth does not get left behind.
Sources
Hamada, B. I. (2018). Social media: A turning point into global journalism identity and ethics. In J. Višňovský & J. Radošinská (Eds.), Social media and journalism: Trends, connections, implications. IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.80255 DOI.org
Hermida, A. (2012). Social journalism: Exploring how social media is shaping journalism. In E. Siapera & A. Veglis (Eds.), The handbook of global online journalism (pp. 309–328). Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118313978.ch17
Jamaica Observer. (2026, June 15). Adonai Thomas not missing; police urge public to stop sharing photo. Read the Jamaica Observer article
Jamaica Observer. (2026, July 27). Public advisory: Fraudulent website alert. Read the Jamaica Observer advisory
Williams, J. (2026, September). Personal interview with the author. Jamaica Observer reporter.
Leave a Reply