Why outrage spreads faster than facts online

KUALA LUMPUR: Ever wondered why the most outrageous, infuriating or shocking posts seem to dominate your social media feed? According to researchers, it’s no accident.

From fake news to divisive rhetoric and hate speech, emotionally charged content tends to spread faster than factual information because it captures attention. And that’s exactly what social media platforms are designed to reward.

Econometrics and business statistics lecturer Nazirul Hazim Khalim said research into elections in Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines found that social media users were far more influenced by a post’s popularity than its credibility.

“The most important factors are reach and engagement, not authenticity, not reliability, not the source of the information,” he said at the Harmony Symposium here on June 26, as reported by Bernama.

In other words, people are often more likely to trust or share a post simply because it has already been widely viewed, liked or shared, regardless of whether the information is accurate.

This tendency, experts say, creates the perfect conditions for misinformation and emotionally charged content to spread rapidly online.

Nazirul’s findings are only part of the story: the other part lies in human psychology. Experts say humans are naturally wired to pay more attention to threats than positive news – a phenomenon known as negativity bias.

Thousands of years ago, that instinct helped people survive by spotting danger before it was too late. Today, our brains often react to alarming social media posts as though they are immediate threats, even when the information is misleading or false.

“We are emotional and social beings,” said Nuurrianti Jalli, visiting fellow at Singapore’s Iseas-Yusof Ishak Institute. “We react strongly to stories. We react strongly to emotional content, and that includes negative news.

“Most of the information we see, especially when we’re talking about polarisation and hate speech, looks threatening. At that point, it doesn’t matter whether it’s true or false – our brains react to the emotion first.”

Social media platforms understand this well: posts that provoke anger, fear or outrage typically generate more comments, shares and reactions, keeping users on the platform for longer and increasing advertising revenue.

“It’s part of their business model. Harmful content tends to be very attractive,” said Harris Zainul, director of the Centre for Responsible Technology.

The longer users remain engaged, the more advertisements platforms can display. That also creates opportunities for highly engaged creators to earn money, giving some users an incentive to produce increasingly provocative content.

The Centre for Independent Journalism has observed a similar pattern. Executive director Wathshlah Naidu said inflammatory posts often begin with a single viral upload before attracting growing engagement.

“It all starts with just one person. Then you can see the engagement count increasing. After that, you see affiliate links appear, followed by merchandise.

“When the platform allows it, people can monetise hate and emotional content. That means we have to hold the platforms accountable,” she said.

Research supports what many users experience every day. A study published in the journal Science by researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that false news was 70% more likely to be shared than truthful reports.

Another study published in PNAS found that posts containing negative moral or emotional language received about 20% more shares than less emotionally charged content.

Closer to home, research led by Nuurrianti during Malaysia’s 15th general election found that more than half of widely viewed election-related TikTok videos contained hate speech, highlighting how quickly divisive content can gain traction online.

Nazirul believes one way to reduce the spread of harmful content is to slow the speed at which platforms amplify viral posts, particularly before their accuracy has been verified.

“If the content is harmful or untrue, but the amplification is not working, then it doesn’t work either,” he said.

For individual users, experts say the most effective defence is awareness. Rather than immediately sharing posts that trigger a strong emotional reaction, people should pause to verify the information, read beyond attention-grabbing headlines, and rely on trusted news sources.

They also recommend limiting endless doomscrolling by setting aside specific times to catch up on the news instead of consuming a constant stream of emotionally charged posts.

Nuurrianti added that media literacy and critical thinking should not be limited to children but encouraged across all age groups.

As governments around the world debate how best to regulate social media platforms, understanding how algorithms shape what appears on our screens may be just as important as deciding what we choose to click, share, or simply scroll past.