A deepfake didn’t have to be perfect. It just had to be first.
In 2023, a deepfake of the CEO of India’s National Stock Exchange surfaced online, falsely showing her recommending stocks.
Around the same time, a fake image of an explosion near the Pentagon briefly sent financial markets into a tailspin before it was debunked.
WPP’s CEO was impersonated via a deepfake Teams call.
And in one of the earliest truth-adjacent stock crashes, the Emulex hoax in 2000 wiped out over 60% of its market value in minutes – with a single fake press release about the CEO.
These aren’t cybersecurity threats in the traditional sense. They’re belief threats – situations where the appearance of truth acts faster than fact.
This is the danger of truth-adjacent risk—where events feel real enough to trigger reactions before anyone confirms the facts.
What Is Truth-Adjacency?
Truth-adjacent threats are events that aren’t technically true, but are:
- Plausible enough to believe
- Timely enough to spread
- Sticky enough to cause action
They live in the uncanny valley between fact and fiction – deepfakes, screenshots, AI-generated leaks, out-of-context emails, and internal comms surfaced without attribution.
And they’re increasingly targeting executives, boards, and brands.
Why Boards and Executive Teams Should Care
Boards are trained to deal in certainty: material facts, audited financials, legal disclosures. But truth-adjacent events don’t wait for certainty – they exploit hesitation.
This presents a challenge that’s both governance and operational:
- Governance risk: Public misperception can become regulatory concern, especially if the board is seen as slow to act or “out of the loop.”
- Reputational risk: Employees and customers rarely wait for a press release – they respond to what feels true.
- Strategic risk: Falsehoods can force real decisions – pausing M&A, delaying launches, or triggering resignations.
If you’re only preparing for what’s true, you’re already behind.
Truth-Adjacent Testing: A New Kind of Scenario
Traditionally, board tabletop exercises focus on known risks: cyber breaches, weather events, product recalls.
But the new frontier is this:
“How does our org respond to something that looks true, spreads fast, and isn’t yet verifiable?”
We’ve seen leading organizations run Microsimulations where:
- A deepfake CEO message leaks during earnings week
- A fabricated whistleblower email circulates internally
- A false regulatory fine surfaces on social media
In each case, the goal isn’t just to test the comms plan – it’s to reveal the thresholds for action:
- When do we escalate?
- Who owns the narrative before we confirm?
- How do we talk to stakeholders who’ve already made up their minds?
From Control to Containment
Truth-adjacent crises can’t always be stopped. But they can be contained.
This requires executive teams and boards to:
- Rehearse ambiguity – get comfortable making decisions with 70% confidence.
- Define trigger points – know what constitutes “enough” to act.
- Empower comms early – speed and clarity beat perfection.
- Use Microsimulations – not to predict, but to pressure-test the response muscle.
Ready to Lead Through the Blur?
Boards no longer just govern risk – they participate in its perception.
As AI-generated content, platform speed, and social virality continue to blur the line between real and false, resilience isn’t always about waiting for the truth. It’s about being ready before it arrives.
Because by the time you know it’s not true, the damage may already be done.
Test your team’s reflexes before the next reality-bending moment hits.
Schedule a Microsimulation to explore how your organization responds when perception outpaces proof.
