Velocity of Information
Aemula Writer Spotlight - 2.20.25
In the barrage of digital content, it feels as if we are in a state of constant acceleration. Can you consciously keep up with the events unfolding across X, Bluesky, Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok? Can you consume the daily long-form articles published by The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post — assuming you can afford the subscriptions? Staying informed is a full-time job that we don’t have capacity to work. We are forced to outsource the curation of our information, left to build our worldviews from an incomplete picture — one without the resolution necessary to understand the details. To steal a quote from Rob Henderson’s below article, “How I Read”:
“Almost every idea that you have is downstream from what you consume. When you choose who to follow on Twitter, what book to read, what podcast to listen to, you’re choosing your future thoughts.” — James Clear
Sometimes, we consume accurate, breaking news from an expert in a relevant field. Sometimes, we are dangerously misled by misinformation shared on a whim. Unfortunately, false information travels significantly faster than true information online, fueled by the emotional reactions that feed engagement-maximizing algorithms. Meanwhile, traditional investigative journalism struggles to compete for the finite attention span of readers in this fast-paced environment.
This divergence in speed reflects different priorities. Social media optimizes for immediacy, with content churning through our feeds at breakneck pace. Headlines are crafted to capture attention, creating an exhilarating, yet distracting, cycle of information meant to spark rapid discourse. When speed outruns substance, the methodology of “post first, fact-check later” — driven by the competitive desire to gamify algorithmic rewards for engagement farming — leaves us trapped in the rumor mill.
Investigative journalism, by contrast, prioritizes thoroughness and credibility while digging deep into complex issues. A single article might involve countless hours of research, interviews, and editorial review, with the goal of mitigating the risk of misinformation. However, in our modern attention economy, even the most rigorously sourced piece may be overlooked if readers have already formed opinions based on fragmented social media posts.
This tension is compounded by the consolidation and decline of legacy media. Newsrooms are shrinking, local papers are vanishing, and the remaining outlets often lack the resources for sustained investigations. In most cases, we are left with a handful of conglomerates setting the narrative, while smaller organizations vanish or pivot to sensationalism just to survive. This trend of consolidation has slashed local reporting budgets, leaving entire communities with minimal coverage — a void easily filled by unverified social media chatter.
The solution is not to simply force a reversion to the antiquated traditional media models. Community feedback and rapid publication have significant benefits, especially for breaking news and on-the-ground reporting. We must find a balance that combines the agility of real-time platforms with the professional processes of serious journalism. With the right infrastructure, it is possible to harness the wisdom of the crowd while upholding high standards for accuracy and depth.
Fortunately, the emergence of decentralized technologies enables us to avoid accepting the tradeoff between speed and accuracy. By allowing journalists to access institutional-grade, peer-to-peer resources — and by incorporating a transparent protocol for community moderation and governance — we can achieve a new standard. Relevant experts can be publish swiftly with social-media scale distribution, yet still benefit from a network of moderators and peer reviewers, as well as engaged readers who help refine and validate reporting in real-time. In doing so, we can break free from our ideological silos and ensure that the velocity of information does not come at the expense of quality.
This week, we spotlight writers who are grappling with rapid-fire news cycles and exploring ways to maintain credibility and depth in an era of endless scrolling. As we navigate the tradeoffs between speed and substance in media, we can strive for an ecosystem where velocity goes hand in hand with responsible reporting.
Rob Henderson’s Newsletter
Written by Rob Henderson, author of the bestseller Troubled: A Memoir of Family, Foster Care, and Social Class, a veteran of the U.S. Air Force, and columnist for The Free Press and The Boston Globe, with a PhD in Psychology from the University of Cambridge.
“In our busy and distracted society, deep reading is increasingly rare. Deep reading changes people. When you interact with people, you can tell who reads seriously and who doesn’t. This isn’t just a matter of mental ability or intelligence. There is a difference between raw cognitive horsepower and time spent immersed in complex and intricate ideas. You can tell the difference between a smart person who reads and a smart person who doesn’t by how they express ideas, the references they make, and the chains of logic they follow. The former often demonstrates a subtle understanding that weaves together insights from various domains. The latter, though sharp and quick-minded, lacks the same depth of perspective or the ability to see beyond the immediate conversation or the Current Thing. This is becoming increasingly apparent among obviously bright young adults who don’t read or read nonsense despite paying large sums of money for what should have been a decent education.”
Andy Beach’s Tech, Tales, and Cocktails
Written by Andy Beach, as featured in last week’s spotlight, who released a highly-relevant “Personal Manifesto for the Media Industry”.
“Media today is largely optimized for addiction, not enrichment. The infinite scroll, autoplay algorithms, and AI-generated clickbait are all designed to keep us engaged, but at what cost? We risk valuing engagement metrics over storytelling, virality over depth.
But this is not an inevitability—it’s a design choice. We can build an attention economy that prioritizes:
Quality over quantity: AI can help resurface long-form content and historical archives instead of just accelerating disposable media.
Intentional discovery: Instead of optimizing for time spent, platforms can optimize for value received—curation that helps audiences get what they need rather than what keeps them hooked.
Meaningful interaction: AI-powered media doesn’t have to be isolating. Used well, it can enhance shared experiences—collaborative storytelling, interactive narratives, and deeper engagement rather than passive consumption.
The media industry must decide: Are we architects of engagement or engineers of addiction?”
The Mediator
Written by Doug Shapiro, an independent advisor and consultant, Senior Advisor at BCG, former Chief Strategy Officer at Turner (WarnerMedia), head of IR at Time Warner, and Institutional Investor ranked Wall Street media analyst.
“A shift is underway across media. It’s happening on YouTube and Reels, Roblox and Fortnite, Soundcloud and Spotify and here, on Substack. On these platforms—across video, gaming, music and journalism—consumers are redirecting their time and attention to non-institutional, non-corporate content. Call it user generated, social, short form, independent, creator, whatever you like.
(…)
A common thread among this non-corporate content is that it usually doesn’t meet the same standards as corporate content. It is lower fidelity, less polished, less produced, more amateurish, rawer, more experimental. Measured against traditional standards of quality, you would call a lot of it crap. In most cases, traditional media companies would be embarrassed to put it out. But it keeps taking share of consumer time and attention anyway.
The only possible inference is that a lot of consumers are changing how they define quality in media, at least some of the time. For executives at incumbent media companies, it’s a big blind spot and a big problem.”
Interested in cross-posting your content to Aemula? Reach out to writers@aemula.com to get started! With cross-posting, you can:
Instantly expand your audience
Increase your earnings
Maintain full ownership of your work
Plus, you will have the opportunity to access community resources and grants to support the content you want to create! Cross-posting comes with no costs, no obligations, and you can stop or remove your content at any time.
The open alpha version of the Aemula platform is live at aemula.com! Users can claim a one-month free trial by simply creating an account today!
If you want to support any of the writers we spotlight, we highly encourage you to subscribe to their individual publications. If you want to support independent journalism more broadly, we offer both paid and free subscriptions for you to stay informed!
All subscription revenue is reinvested directly into the independent journalism community.
Follow us on X to stay up-to-speed on platform updates and the writers we are adding to our community!
We would love to hear your thoughts on our mission in the comments!
