Controlling the flow of information can shape the future.
Author: Kyla Scanlon
Translation: Deep Tide TechFlow
What do Trump, Mamdani, and Cluely tell us about the attention economy?
Last weekend, Trump launched a military strike against Iran and announced it via Truth Social. This may not be the first instance of "posting as policy," but it's hard to find a more straightforward example. At that moment, I was standing in a supermarket picking out bananas, and the push notification on my phone felt both strange and confusing; everything seemed so bizarre.
Yesterday, Zohran Mamdani won the Democratic mayoral primary in New York City. It was a competitive election, and Mamdani triumphed through his disciplined narrative and adept use of digital tools. Even if you don't agree with his policies (I think many of them are impractical), his campaign strategy is still impressive! He walked all over Manhattan, and his presence was everywhere.
Just a few days before these events, a startup called Cluely completed a $15 million funding round led by a16z (Andreessen Horowitz).
The company's business model can be summarized as "deceiving everyone." Of course, this approach is not new, but a16z's investment rationale is not based on that! They are interested in Cluely's ability to capture attention! Cluely applies the tactics of the "enterprise version of Jake Paul"—including gimmicks, viral marketing, nihilism, and the narrative strategy of "atmosphere first, story later"—to consumer-facing AI applications. We have already seen "brain-dead marketing" sweep through the cultural sphere, so it was only a matter of time before it infiltrated the startup world.
However, these three events—a geopolitical conflict, a mayoral primary, and a startup's funding—are actually different facets of the same trend, and I want to connect them through this article:
Attention is infrastructure: It determines what gets funded, elected, or built.
Narrative is capital: It drives the flow of funds, policy-making, and public opinion.
Speculation is the operational layer between the two: It is how beliefs are tested, priced, and transformed into outcomes before institutions take action.
What we are witnessing is not just a media trend but a shift in power structures. Attention → speculation → distribution forms a new supply chain.
Traditional economic theory assumes that the flow of information serves resource allocation, but now, resource allocation serves the flow of attention. We have shifted from an economy where attention supports other value creation to one where attention itself is the value creation.
How to Understand "Attention"
The foundational elements of traditional economics are land, labor, and capital—these are the cornerstones of production. However, today, the true foundational element has become "attention."
Trump originally stated that he needed about two weeks to consider whether to bomb Iran… but in the end, he acted directly? The New York Times later reported that the decision for the airstrike was partly influenced by the publicity effect of Israel on Fox News, making Trump's response more of a reactive "performance" rather than a rigorous military strategy. The whole process seemed more like a drama!
Iran clearly knew that Trump might take action due to his frequent postings on social media.
Out of concern that Trump's posts might leak operational secrets, military officials ordered a "feint flight" of a B-2 bomber to divert attention from the real mission.
Iran simply moved their uranium to another location, and now we seem to be unaware of its specific whereabouts.
It appears that these bombs did not hit their intended targets?
Days later, Iran retaliated by attacking U.S. military bases in the Gulf region and warned the U.S. in advance (I was also in the supermarket when I learned this news).
Iran did not close the Strait of Hormuz, which seems to indicate that the situation might (?) begin to calm down (this is an observation I cautiously noted on the morning of June 25).
Trump called for a ceasefire, but both Israel and Iran seemed to ignore his proposal.
He also stated that China could continue to buy Iranian oil, which clearly relaxed sanctions?
Subsequently, Trump appeared very angry on live television (which is actually understandable).
Trump only informed Republican congressional members about the airstrike, which is not ideal. Meanwhile, intelligence briefings seemed to indicate that Iran was not actively militarizing its nuclear program (which could make the bombing legally questionable). However, when Congress's role is like a fish flopping on the shore, the importance of law may be less than that of content strategy.
Trump once again overturned the traditional system architecture—completely changing the traditional flow of information and decision-making. Military strategy and foreign policy have been replaced by the dynamics of social media. However, he acted as if war were just a weekend activity. As his State Department spokesperson said:
"I won't get ahead of the president, nor will I try to guess what his strategy will be. Things are moving quickly, and I think we will know the answer soon."
This reveals the tricky nature of the attention economy—capturing eyeballs is indeed easy, and people will take increasingly crazy actions to maintain attention. But what happens when people stop paying attention? Here, the concern is that Iran may continue to pursue nuclear weapons because they only need to follow the flow of information to understand the direction of the narrative, which could lead to extremely serious consequences.
Zohran Mamdani
There are already many excellent articles about Mamdani (Derek Thompson just joined Substack!), so I won't elaborate too much here. But just yesterday, Zohran Mamdani won the Democratic mayoral primary in New York City. This 33-year-old democratic socialist defeated former Governor Andrew Cuomo, and his campaign attracted significant attention. Four and a half months ago, his support was only 1%!
His campaign message primarily revolved around "affordability," which is also one of the reasons Trump won among young voters. He excels at creating short videos and podcasts, and he personally engaged with New Yorkers, even walking across the entire city. Meanwhile, Cuomo chose to run ads on television and raised $25 million through the largest super PAC in New York City mayoral history (!), but these efforts seemed irrelevant.
As many have said, Mamdani is the candidate in the left camp who most resembles Trump in terms of "how to communicate"—his campaign heavily relies on the internet, he accepts interviews as much as possible, he has a loyal supporter team (who knocked on 1.5 million doors!), and he has a clear campaign message.
Mamdani proves that "attention" is the key path to breaking through systemic constraints. Like Trump, but starting from a different direction.
This shift is not surprising, and it will occur more frequently at both ends in the future. People are generally frustrated with the status quo, and breaking the rules often excites them, like JD Vance's middle finger or Trump's profanity on C-Span.
Of course, ideology is important. People vote for Trump not only because they support deporting immigrants and oppose "woke culture," but also because he is different and innovative. Mamdani promises "affordability" and fresh ideas. In a world where people often feel overlooked, this gives them hope for change.
How to Connect Everything
These three stories—Trump bombing Iran via social media, Mamdani walking through Manhattan on TikTok, and Cluely's funding—share a common point: power comes from attention, and attention comes from the discipline of narrative.
It operates like a supply chain:
We can trace this "attention supply line" through these cases.
Trump's airstrike on Iran:
Raw materials: Geopolitical resentment, national pride, fear of weakness.
Processing: Posting vague threats, sharing Fox News clips, hinting at retaliation.
Distribution: Amplified through cable news and information echo chambers.
Speculation: People no longer judge based on strategy but bet based on emotions and "atmosphere." Prediction markets respond accordingly.
Consumption: He ordered the bombing of Iran.
Pollution: Strategic confusion, legal ambiguity, normalizing information warfare based on social media.
Mamdani's campaign:
Raw materials: Affordability crisis, wealth inequality, housing despair.
Processing: Creating TikTok videos, giving interviews, walking across Manhattan.
Distribution: Leftist podcasts, short video clips.
Speculation: Can he really win? Is free public transport feasible? What would happen if New York City fully embraced socialism? Young voters, disappointed moderates, and donors are betting their time, energy, and beliefs (even betting in prediction markets).
Consumption: He won the primary, and Cuomo conceded defeat.
Pollution: Cycles of anger, factionalism, and increasing ideological polarization.
Cluely's case also fits this logical chain. When a16z (Andreessen Horowitz) invested in Cluely solely based on its ability to capture attention, they were essentially legitimizing "attention" as an investable asset class. This sends a signal to other founders—to prioritize viral spread over mere practicality. This is "American Dynamism"!
Attention is the raw material for economic, political, and military actions. However, what truly makes this attention work is speculation: the emotional, political, and economic bets people place on a narrative potentially becoming reality.
In the political realm, this speculative behavior has become the closest way for those who feel the economy no longer serves their interests to gain "agency." People speculate on various ideas, figures, etc.—why not? But when this phenomenon occurs, the system becomes optimized for speed and virality rather than stability or accuracy.
I believe this is precisely why resource allocation is currently controlled by an informal alliance—podcast hosts like Joe Rogan, YouTubers like Mr. Beast, and figures like Steve Bannon and Tucker Carlson. Even Elon Musk, who has said nothing about what is happening, acts like a "narrative thermostat." These individuals are masters of speed and virality.
They leverage this speculative behavior to determine what can attract attention, and attention increasingly dictates the allocation of resources. The entire world is learning from them—whether it's startups, politicians, or geopolitical strategists. "Checks and balances" no longer come from Congress or the courts, but from the flow of information on social media.
We've Seen Similar Situations Before
The phenomenon I describe is not without precedent. Many have discussed similar issues. As early as 1971, Herbert Simon wrote in "Designing Organizations for an Information-Rich World":
In an information-rich world, the abundance of information implies a scarcity of something else: the scarcity of what information consumes. And what information consumes is obvious: it consumes the attention of its recipients. Therefore, the abundance of information creates a scarcity of attention and requires efficient allocation of attention among the many sources of information that may consume it.
The surplus of information leads to a scarcity of attention! By 1997, Michael Goldhaber further explored this in "The Attention Economy and the Net," arguing that attention is becoming the new currency of the digital age.
The attention economy brings its own forms of wealth, class differentiation—stars and fans—and its own forms of property, all of which make it incompatible with the industrial-currency-market economy, and the attention economy seems poised to replace it. Success will belong to those who can best adapt to this new reality.
Robert Shiller proposed "narrative economics," suggesting that stories drive economic behavior. I believe we are in a new iteration of all this, where stories are not just influencing economic activity; they are economic activity. Attention (in many ways) is the prerequisite for wealth, and speculation drives it all.
In short… is everything like cryptocurrency now? Cryptocurrency does not represent "real" value (some things in the industry do, but overall it does not), but is synthesized through speculation and belief. Emotion, volatility, and mindshare, if you will. We now live in a system where attention dynamics have become the operating system for resource allocation, political decision-making, and identity construction.
What Will Happen Next?
This intertwining of speculation and attention seems to be overlooked outside the market. The question is not whether we can build better housing or infrastructure—though we desperately need these. The real question is whether we can construct anything coherent when the resource allocation system places attention above all else.
Because now, those who can create the most attractive speculation about the future, regardless of whether they truly understand the consequences, gain the greatest power to realize it.
We cannot find a neutral vantage point outside these systems. The tools we are building are also reshaping ourselves, and this reshaping will have far-reaching effects. Due to the existence of management mechanisms, there is effectively no real "offline" state anymore. We are all participating in a cognitive economy where attention, belief, and behavior are the currency of exchange. Controlling the flow of information can shape the future. So, what happens when everything becomes an attention-speculation machine?
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
