Some of the biggest moments at Davos were shared in viral clips. The posts that travelled furthest were short, digestible and, crucially, funny.
Forbes dubbed the French president’s aviator sunglasses moment “Maverick Macron”. Videos on Instagram captured Trump confusing Greenland and Iceland. Even before the event began, serious announcements from NATO on Ukraine were being packaged for social, including one set to the High School Musical soundtrack.
The World Economic Forum still happened in the halls. But for most people, Davos was experienced through what surfaced on social. That is the version many will remember.
At Pagefield, we see this as a signal of a wider shift. Geopolitical communications, like corporate and institutional comms more broadly, used to be slow, choreographed and closed. Social platforms now sit alongside official programmes, shaping what audiences notice, share and retain.
Davos now has two stages: the conference hall and the scroll.
Co-authored dialogue
In today’s attention economy, that scroll doesn’t just report what happens. It defines what those moments come to mean, as they happen.
Panels and press briefings are no longer the only “official” record. Commentary, memes and 30-60 second videos – including from governments and corporates – are increasingly where geopolitical moments are interpreted. What once stayed as private critique among insiders now plays out in public, at pace.
Social platforms collapse the distance between high-level dialogue and public reaction. Audiences actively co-author the conversation through clips, stitches, reshares and comment threads, adding context, humour and criticism as events unfold.
As a result, leaders’ feeds have become open arenas, where messages can be challenged, defended or ridiculed in real time.
The credibility of imperfection
For audiences raised on short-form video, relevance is judged in seconds. The carefully governed rhythm that once defined geopolitical communications can feel out of step with platforms that simply aren’t built for it.
Part of this is because perfection can read as distance. Lo-fi moments land as proof of presence: shaky corridor clips, tiny-mic asides and off-the-cuff reactions that signal someone is actually there.
At Davos, this shift was clear. Across the week, corporate and institutional feeds leaned into creator formats: GoPro-style interviews, tiny-mic commentary, and major announcements packaged as portrait video set to trending TikTok audio. This wasn’t accidental – it reflected the economics of modern audience attention.
Talking to, or talking with?
This evolution creates a real tension. Founders, CEOs and policymakers aren’t trained as creators; they’re trained for authority, responsibility and consequence. Social-first formats, however, reward speed, personality and entertainment.
In its most basic form, dialogue is a mutual exchange. Yet much of what surrounded Davos felt closer to talking to audiences than talking with them – cultural dialogue without listening. The audience was not invited in, but broadcast to.
The challenge for organisations is no longer whether they can speak the internet’s language. They clearly can. The harder question is whether they can do so without losing the substance that earns trust.
From our perspective, Davos was a useful lens on a shift that is already well underway. Social media now runs in parallel to official programmes, surrounding narratives and shaping how influence is formed. The only real choice left for communications leaders is whether that shift is shaped intentionally – or left to the feed.
