New York
CNN
—
An errant post on X may have just shaken the stock market, showing how influential — and unreliable — the social media platform can be.
Unsourced “headlines” about a potential “90-day pause in tariffs” sent markets into a state of turbulence Monday morning as investors sought any indication of a reprieve from the Trump administration’s new levies. The problem: It wasn’t true. The White House swiftly denied the rumor shortly after it began to circulate online.
The false posts may have originated from a real Fox News interview with National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett at around 8:30 a.m. ET. Hassett was asked whether President Donald Trump would “consider a 90-day pause in tariffs,” and he replied in part: “The president is (going to) decide what the president is (going to) decide.”
According to CNN’s analysis, the first X post to claim Hassett said Trump would consider a 90-day pause in tariffs came at 10:11 a.m. ET from an account called “Hammer Capital” with the handle “yourfavorito,” which has barely 1,000 followers.
At about 10:12 a.m., CNN’s Vanessa Yurkevich, who was on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange, said that cheers had broken out, as stock indices — which were already recovering from early-morning lows — suddenly surged.
“Walter Bloomberg,” an account with a much larger following that uses the handle “DeItaone” copy-and-pasted the original rumor along with a siren emoji at 10:13 a.m.
On CNBC, anchors were seemingly baffled, wondering what was causing the turnaround.
CNBC anchor David Faber and his network colleagues wondered aloud about the triggering “headline,” searching their computer screens for a wire service alert or any other indication of what could have caused stock market movements.
By 10:15 a.m., CNBC anchors were reading the news on air.
“I think we can go with this headline, apparently Hassett’s been saying Trump will consider a 90-day pause in tariffs for all countries except for China,” anchor Carl Quintanilla said.
“We’re trying to source that exactly in terms of where that’s coming from,” Faber quickly added. CNBC showed the “headline” on screen less than a minute later.
“HASSETT: TRUMP IS CONSIDERING A 90-DAY PAUSE IN TARIFFS FOR ALL COUNTRIES EXPECT CHINA,” the CNBC banner read, as if the news was confirmed.
By 10:19, Reuters alerted the supposed comments, citing CNBC.
Stocks would later decline as the White House firmly denied the supposed headline. CNBC reporters quickly reported the White House denial, and Reuters updated its stories, later issuing an advisory at 12:28 p.m. withdrawing the original alert along with a statement that the newswire service “regrets its error.”
The “Walter Bloomberg” account appears to borrow its name from the Bloomberg financial news service to gain credibility. The account, which has more than 800,000 followers, often posts accurate news flashes from Bloomberg, Reuters and other outlets. “Hammer Capital” also posts headlines, as well as stock market memes.
Both that account and “Hammer Capital” do not publicize their real identities. Both have blue checkmarks on X, which used to indicate the account holder’s identity had been verified. But when Musk took over the service formerly known as Twitter, he turned the blue checkmark into a paid service, meaning anyone could pay to appear verified and have their posts boosted on others’ timelines.
Once the financial damage was done, “Walter Bloomberg” deleted the post, claiming they first saw it on Reuters, and market participants were left wondering what just happened. “Hammer Capital” said on X they first saw the news on Reuters and CNBC, although Reuters’ flash was at 10:19 a.m., sourced to CNBC. CNN has reached out to CNBC for comment.
“Hammer Capital” denied making up the headline: “To be as abundantly clear as possible, trading desks started sending out this headline at 10:09. I was regurgitating what the market was reacting to, to my 600 followers. It was an incorrect interpretation of a Fox News interview,” they posted on Monday afternoon.
Wherever the original source of the incorrect headline came from, it was amplified by trusted sources in financial news, creating a very expensive lesson in the value of accurate and reliable reporting.
