The episode became one of the defining stories of America’s founding. Yet Revere’s ride succeeded for a reason deeper than the courage of a single messenger. The colonies understood the British threat. Revere’s warning provided urgency and timing, not persuasion. Americans acted collectively because they largely agreed on the underlying reality.

For much of the nation’s history, American institutions operated on a simple assumption: If enough people received the same information, most would arrive at roughly the same understanding of events. That shared understanding of reality became a form of national infrastructure. Markets depended on it to price risk and allocate capital. Businesses depended on it to plan and invest with confidence. Democracies depended on it to sustain legitimacy and public trust.

America survived yellow journalism, political demagoguery, propaganda and conspiracy. What made the system resilient was not the absence of falsehoods, but the existence of a broadly shared factual baseline. That baseline is now fracturing.

The danger is no longer the speed at which information travels. It is that misinformation now travels faster than institutions can interpret, verify, or respond.

The result is growing uncertainty about what is real — and that uncertainty increasingly carries economic consequences.

Every communications revolution in American history has reshaped politics, commerce, and culture. Colonial newspapers and pamphlets fueled revolutionary debate. and expanded political participation. Philadelphia and the other colonial capitals supported competing publications, exposing citizens to sharply different political arguments. Speeches and sermons circulated widely, helping create a national political identity before the nation itself formally existed.

The telegraph accelerated financial markets and compressed geography. The telephone transformed business coordination. Radio synchronized national attention. Television centralized culture around a handful of dominant networks. The internet eliminated nearly all friction from publishing and distribution. Each communications revolution expanded access to information. But each also concentrated influence — first in publishers, then in broadcasters, then in platforms. Digital platforms have now replaced editorial judgment with algorithms optimized for outrage and engagement. Benefits were enormous. So were the risks.

Radio perhaps represented the high point of shared national experience. On Dec. 7, 1941, Americans learned of the attack on Pearl Harbor through bulletins interrupting regular programming. Families gathered around radios and absorbed the same facts at the same moment.

Today, digital platforms reward outrage, emotion, and immediacy over verification. Artificial intelligence is accelerating the problem by making deception faster, cheaper, and more scalable. AI is changing the economics of deception.

Deepfakes, synthetic audio, and manipulated video are no longer theoretical risks. They are operational realities. Institutions are no longer struggling simply to distribute information. They are struggling to defend credibility while markets, regulators, consumers, and algorithms react simultaneously to competing versions of reality.

This is no longer merely a communications problem. It is becoming a governance problem with direct implications for markets, corporate performance, and democratic stability.

The World Economic Forum now ranks misinformation and disinformation among the most significant short-term risks facing the global economy. Confusion itself has become a market force. The erosion of trust is not solely technological. Political culture has increasingly treated facts themselves as partisan instruments.

Donald Trump popularized the phrase “fake news” as a political weapon against unfavorable coverage. But Kellyanne Conway’s defense of “alternative facts” in 2017 marked something more consequential: the normalization of competing realities built around demonstrably false claims.

Since then, Americans have witnessed conflicting official narratives surrounding immigration enforcement, national security threats, Jan. 6 prosecutions, and the Epstein files. Public officials routinely dismiss damaging information as fabricated while advancing unsupported claims as fact. The cumulative effect is institutional erosion. Americans increasingly question whether government agencies, media organizations, corporations, or political leaders are presenting verifiable information.

That erosion carries direct economic consequences. Markets can absorb bad news. What they struggle to absorb is uncertainty about what is true.

The collapse of Silicon Valley Bank offered an early warning. Depositors did not wait for the next day’s newspaper or quarterly analyst report. They reacted instantly to screenshots, speculation, and social-media commentary. Information — accurate or not — moved faster than institutional response. That acceleration is reshaping corporate risk management.

Communications cannot solve operational failure. But slow decisions and weak coordination can quickly turn operational problems into financial and reputational crises. A manipulated executive video, fake earnings announcement, or synthetic audio clip can move markets before verification mechanisms catch up.

Deloitte has warned that AI-enabled fraud losses could reach tens of billions of dollars annually within the next several years. Gartner predicts rising levels of AI-generated impersonation targeting executives, employees, and investors. The danger is not merely misinformation. It is the collapse of confidence in the authenticity of evidence itself.

Once stakeholders begin assuming that every image, video, or statement could be fabricated, institutional trust weakens across the board. In that environment, organizations lose speed precisely when markets demand clarity.

For CEOs, three priorities are becoming unavoidable.

First: treat trust as operational infrastructure, not a reputational afterthought. In a world of deepfakes and AI-generated misinformation, companies will increasingly compete on their ability to establish what is real before falsehoods move markets or damage credibility. For two centuries, institutional advantage often depended on controlling the distribution of information. In the AI era, competitive advantage may increasingly depend on verification.

Second: compress your decision-making timeline. Traditional response structures — where legal, communications, cybersecurity, and investor-relations teams act sequentially — were built for slower media cycles. That model is becoming obsolete. Markets and social platforms now react in minutes, while many institutions still require hours or days to respond. In future crises, delay itself may become a market risk.

Third: credibility is now a competitive weapon. Information moves globally at unprecedented speed. Without credibility, even accurate information struggles to regain control once false narratives take hold.

For generations, institutions believed facts would stabilize uncertainty. Increasingly, the opposite is happening. Competing narratives now move markets, shape political outcomes, and redefine corporate value in real time.

What makes this moment different is the speed at which technology compresses fabrication, amplification, and consequence.

The challenge is not restoring some idealized era of perfect agreement that never existed. Democracies are inherently argumentative. But functioning democracies and stable markets still require broad consensus about what constitutes evidence, truth, and reality. Without that foundation, trust erodes, institutions weaken, and instability spreads.

More than two centuries ago, Founding Father James Madison wrote to Kentucky statesman W.T. Barry: “A popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy.”

Madison understood that democratic government could not survive without trusted public information. In the AI era, that warning extends far beyond politics. Once societies lose agreement about what is real, markets destabilize, institutions weaken, and public trust becomes extraordinarily difficult to restore.

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.