Decoding a16z's New Concept of "Media Pledge": Online "Written Agreements + Deposit"—An Economic Solution to Combating Fake News

Recently, a16z proposed the concept of "Staked Media," which is quite interesting. Considering that social media is now filled with AI accounts, fake news can look just as real, and ordinary users simply don't have the time or energy to distinguish between truth and falsehood.

The prediction of "pledged media" is not a pipe dream. It may happen within the next two years.

So, what does it mean to pledge media?

In simple terms, using cryptographic technologies like ZooKeeper allows media outlets or individuals to prove their credibility, similar to "signing a written agreement" online. This agreement is recorded on the blockchain and cannot be tampered with. However, simply signing an agreement isn't enough; collateral, such as ETH, USDC, or other cryptocurrencies, is required. This serves to prove the authenticity and reliability of the published content. If the information is proven to be fake, the collateralized assets will be forfeited. This creates an environment that encourages speaking the truth.

AI-generated articles and videos are everywhere, along with rampant fake news. Staking media is meant to make content creators more cautious, rather than speaking carelessly. For example, if a YouTuber posts a video praising a product, they might stake some ETH or USDC on the Ethereum blockchain. If the video is fake, the money is lost, and viewers feel reassured. Or, imagine you're a blogger recommending a phone; you might stake $100 worth of ETH on the Ethereum blockchain, stating, "If the phone's beauty function doesn't achieve a certain effect, I'll compensate you." Viewers see you've staked money and perceive you as reliable. If the video is AI-generated, the $100 is lost.

How can you play the staking game? You can imagine.

Whether it's a major influencer/media outlet or a minor influencer, when publishing an article, they need to "establish a written agreement" on the blockchain (such as Ethereum) (signature verification is sufficient), and at the same time deposit a certain amount of tokens (such as ETH/USDT) into a specific smart contract. If the content is false, this money will be confiscated (given to the victim or destroyed). If the content is legitimate, the money can be returned after a certain period of time, and they may even receive rewards (such as staking tokens issued by the media itself/funds confiscated from other sources for false content, etc.).

The specific amount to be staked depends on the platform's rules. Major media outlets/influencers who publish important news will stake more tokens, such as hundreds or thousands of dollars or even more; smaller influencers who publish everyday content may only need to stake tens of dollars. The amount can be linked to the content's influence (using a fluctuating algorithm); the greater the influence, the more tokens can be staked.

While pledging does increase financial costs for the media, it can gain the trust of the audience, which is also a cost in the age of fake news.

However, how is authenticity determined? It's verified through a dual approach of community and algorithm. On the community side, users with voting rights (who need to stake crypto assets) vote on-chain. If a certain percentage, such as 60% or higher, declares it fake, it's deemed fake. Additionally, an algorithm analyzes data to assist in the verification. If the content creator disagrees, they can initiate arbitration, which is then handled by an expert committee. If malicious manipulation by voters is discovered, their funds will be confiscated. Participation in voting and becoming a member of the expert committee are rewarded. Rewards come from confiscated funds and the media's own tokens.

In addition, content creators can use zk technology to generate proof of authenticity from the outset, such as using zk technology to generate videos.

What if rich people cheat? Rich people can pledge large sums of money to create fake news. As long as the returns are large enough, they might do it.

This involves not only pledged funds, but also historical records and reputation. Accounts with a history of penalties and confiscations are tagged, and the pledged funds for future content will increase. If an account is penalized and confiscated three or four times, people will be less likely to trust its subsequent content, and there may be legal repercussions. Therefore, falsifying information has significant costs, including not only financial losses, but also the trust built over time, historical records, reputation, and real legal liabilities.

Perhaps the pledged media project is already underway.