For decades, CEOs were trained to assess risk and opportunity within a familiar terrain: markets, competitors, capital, regulation, and technology. That terrain is still there—but it’s surrounded by an entirely new ecosystem.
Social media, artificial intelligence, and the unpredictable currents of culture are the air above every one of these terrains now, shaping how companies breathe, move, and survive. It’s the same story in politics. An entirely new atmosphere, and it’s increasingly toxic. I know how to take a deep breath.
Head scratchingly, most executives still treat these forces as peripheral—communications problems to be handled after the real business decisions are made. But increasingly, they are the environment itself.
Many CEOs and politicians treat culture as background noise. In reality, its become one of the most powerful prisms shaping both corporate and political outcomes. Social media has collapsed the distance between a company’s operations and the public’s reaction to them altogether. What was once a slow-moving reputational ripple can now become a market-moving wave within hours.
Consider the numbers. According to the Pew Research Center, roughly 70% of Americans use social media. Platforms like Twitter (I still call it that), Instagram, TikTok, and LinkedIn influence hundreds of millions of daily conversations about brands, leadership, politics, and institutions. Meanwhile, Edelman’s 2024 Trust Barometer found that 63% of consumers buy or advocate for brands based on their beliefs and values, while roughly two-thirds of respondents say CEOs should engage publicly on societal issues.
This shift means that CEOs are no longer simply quiet stewards of companies—they are increasingly actors in a public cultural arena. CEOs are politicians now, too—whether they like it or not. More and more, you’re seeing CEOs like Blackstone’s, McDonald’s and others jump on social channels to try and be some version of, well, me.
Yes, the environment in which companies operate has fundamentally changed. I built my own massive following in politics breathing this sulfuric air, and for companies, I have one harbinger: inhale fast.
The old CEO model assumed communications flowed vertically: company to media, media to public, public to market. Today, it flows in every direction simultaneously. A TikTok creator can shape brand perception overnight. A viral post can trigger a boycott before a CEO even hears about the issue. A single screenshot can become a global headline.
And increasingly, this cultural feedback loop doesn’t stay confined to the communications department. It bleeds directly into core business functions: supply chains, hiring, investment decisions, product design, and even pricing strategies.
For many executives, this environment feels unfamiliar. Traditional management frameworks never trained leaders to navigate what might be called ‘cultural volatility.’ I did not learn any of this in law school or business school.
Yet, ignoring this reality is no longer an option.
To understand how quickly norms have shifted, it is useful to, again, look at politics. Even in its early days, the deal-making style associated with President Donald Trump was often described as theatrical and narrative-driven. Negotiations frequently played out through public pressure or nauseating media intervention.
At the time, many observers treated his approach as aberrant. To me, it looked more like a preview of right now. Look, the president knows exactly what he is doing when he creates a wave. Like me, he can breathe toxic air. In fact, President Trump is the source of a lot of this pollution, and its created risks and externalities unseen until now.
This is why, I think, the modern CEO must think in terms of four overlapping risk domains: social, technological, economic, and political.
Social risk reflects cultural reactions to corporate decisions. Technological risk stems from the platforms and systems that accelerate those reactions. Economic risk remains the traditional domain of markets and investors. Political risk includes regulation and whiplash-like public policy shifts.
In today’s environment, these risks rarely operate independently.
A social media controversy can trigger economic consequences within hours. A regulatory decision can ignite online activism that reshapes brand perception. A product change can become a political debate overnight. We’ve gone from solos to symphonies when it comes to problems, their potential reach, and their volume.
A CEO’s challenge is no longer managing each force here individually—it is understanding how they converge—and one technological risk sits at the center of this convergence right now: artificial intelligence.
AI promises enormous productivity gains, but it also introduces a new class of systemic risk. AI systems can generate misinformation at scale, imitate voices and likenesses, manipulate financial markets, or automate decisions that carry legal and ethical consequences. Meanwhile, Washington is doing nothing about it.
A deepfake of a CEO announcing a false corporate action could move a stock price before markets can respond. An AI-driven logistics error could ripple across global supply chains. An automated content engine could unintentionally trigger reputational crises in minutes.
The crucial point is this: every company now has increased risk exposure, whether it develops AI or merely operates in a world shaped by it.
Meanwhile, the artificial intelligence industry has rapidly become one of the most powerful lobbying forces in Washington. Major technology companies and AI firms collectively spend hundreds of millions of dollars each year influencing policy, while venture investment in AI startups has surged into the tens-of-billions.
This reality places an important responsibility on Congress.
Lawmakers should treat AI not simply as an innovation policy issue but as a matter of systemic economic risk management. When AI systems can distort markets, spread misinformation, or undermine corporate communications, they become Trump at scale. Can you imagine?
Therefore, congress should focus on three priorities right now: transparency, accountability, and resilience.
Companies deploying AI in high-impact sectors—finance, communications, healthcare, and infrastructure—should be transparent about how automated systems operate and how risks are mitigated. Firms that deploy AI capable of causing economic or reputational harm must bear responsibility when those systems fail or are misused. And the United States should invest in technologies that help detect synthetic media, verify digital communications, and protect financial markets. China is doing this.
Look, these guardrails will not stifle innovation. They would strengthen it by creating a more stable environment for companies operating in an AI-driven economy.
For CEOs, however, regulation alone will not solve the challenge.
The convergence of social media, artificial intelligence, and culture means that leadership itself must change.
A CEO today is not just a capital allocator or operational strategist. Increasingly, they are a narrator of the company’s purpose, identity, and decisions. Their voice travels farther and faster than ever before. Every statement, silence, or misstep becomes part of the company’s cultural footprint.
That reality demands a different mindset. I believe the same thing about elected officials. We need new people.
The leaders who thrive in this environment are the ones who understand the architecture of influence—how narratives spread, how communities organize, and how perception shapes markets.
They treat culture the way previous generations treated finance or logistics: as a system to be understood, monitored, and strategically navigated. That’s what I do.
In other words, the jobs of the CEO and a member of Congress have quietly morphed—they’ve expanded.
Business has always required discipline, foresight, and resilience. But in today’s day it also requires fluency in the cultural forces that surround a company. The digital and the classical business world are no longer separate domains—they are intertwined.
The leaders of today and tomorrow who recognize and act on these shifts will be better positioned to improve our overall environment, rather than merely react to it— They’ll be able to breathe.
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.
