When Speed Trumps Truth

However, there is a boundary that is often overlooked: seeing does not mean understanding, recording does not mean explaining, and uploading does not mean taking responsibility.

Jakarta (ANTARA) - The collision between the Argo Bromo Anggrek train and the KRL Commuter Line at Bekasi Timur Station on 27 April illustrates just how swiftly information travels in the digital age.

Within minutes of the incident, video recordings, photos of the carriage conditions, and passenger testimonies circulated widely on social media and chat groups.

The public thus obtained initial information even before comprehensive reports from mainstream media newsrooms were published.

At that point, one thing became clear: in the current information ecosystem, speed has overtaken verification. The newsroom is no longer the sole gateway to information.

In the past, news was born from a layered process: journalists went to the scene, gathered facts, checked sources, and then editors ensured accuracy before publication. Now, the flow is reversed. Information has already spread, and only then do mainstream media work to correct the facts.

Social media has taken over the role as the primary source of events. The public no longer waits for the truth. The public consumes what appears first on their mobile screens.

This phenomenon gives rise to what Stuart Allan calls citizen journalism, where citizens become the first reporters at the scene. In many situations, the presence of citizens is indeed helpful. Without amateur videos or eyewitness uploads, the public might not learn about important events quickly. In emergency situations, citizen documentation often serves as a highly valuable initial source.

However, there is a boundary that is often overlooked: seeing does not mean understanding, recording does not mean explaining, and uploading does not mean taking responsibility.

The problem is not with the technology, but with how the public treats information. In the hours immediately following the accident at Bekasi Timur, various versions of information circulated uncontrollably: fluctuating casualty numbers, premature speculations on causes, and unverified accusations against certain parties.

When official clarifications finally emerged, part of the public had already believed the earlier versions. In the logic of social media, corrections almost always lag behind rumours in speed.

This phenomenon is not unique to the Bekasi Timur case. Similar patterns appeared during the Kanjuruhan tragedy, when various video clips and casualty claims spread wildly before official information stabilised. The same occurred with the crash of Sriwijaya Air flight SJ 182 in 2021 and the Cianjur earthquake in 2022. In every major incident, social media almost always becomes the fastest source of information and the most vulnerable space for disinformation.

This is the main problem of today’s information ecosystem: speed is considered more important than accuracy.

Digital Platforms

Digital platforms are designed to retain attention, not to ensure truth. Algorithms do not operate based on accuracy, but on engagement. Emotional, dramatic, and sensational content spreads more easily than careful and factual reports. In the attention economy, emotion is the primary fuel.

As a result, information that triggers emotions such as anger, fear, panic, or sadness has a far greater chance of going viral than calm, data-based clarifications. On social media, people tend to share something not because they have verified its truth, but because they feel emotionally touched by it. Platforms do not recognise verification. Algorithms only recognise attention.

This situation is exacerbated by the increasingly impulsive digital habits of society. The culture of “share first, check later” is slowly becoming the new norm. Many users feel it is sufficient to trust a short video or a viral thread without seeking additional context. Yet, video clips often only show fragments of reality, not the whole facts.

It is at this point that journalism faces its most serious challenge in its digital history.

Ideally, journalism is built on principles of verification, accuracy, independence, and public responsibility. Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel in their book The Elements of Journalism state that the first obligation of journalism is truth. However, in today’s digital ecosystem, truth often loses out in speed to the first impression.

In communication psychology, the first information received by the public often leaves the strongest influence. When rumours have already been believed, clarifications arrive too late. Even after being refuted, their emotional traces remain. Therefore, disinformation is far harder to correct than to prevent.

Data from the Digital News Report 2025 published by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism shows that young people now rely more on social media as a news source than conventional media.

This is not merely a change in medium, but a change in how information is trusted. Media authority is no longer singular. The public now lives in a fragmented information space, where anonymous accounts, influencers, content creators, alternative media, and private chat groups can be as influential as mainstream media.

In the concept of network society explained by Manuel Castells, the flow of information no longer moves vertically from media to the public, but horizontally between users. Everyone can be both a producer and distributor of information. This democratisation, on one hand, opens up great space for public participation, but on the other hand, it also creates uncontrollable information noise.

As a result, mainstream media is experiencing a crisis of authority. In the past, media was seen as the gatekeeper of information. Now, that function has weakened. The public no longer automatically trusts media simply because of its status as a press institution. In many cases, uploads from anonymous accounts are trusted more quickly because