From bombing Iran to TikTok campaigns, the speculative rules under the attention economy

Author: kyla scanlon

Compiled by: Shenchao TechFlow

What do Trump, Mandani, and Cluely tell us about the attention economy?

Last weekend, Trump launched a military strike against Iran and announced the news through Truth Social. This may not be the first instance of "posting equals policy," but it's hard to find a more straightforward example than this. At that time, I was standing in the supermarket picking bananas, and the push notification on my phone made me feel both strange and confused; everything seemed so bizarre.

Yesterday, Zohran Mamdani won the Democratic primary for mayor of New York City. It was a highly competitive election, and Mamdani won thanks to his high discipline in narrative and mastery of digital tools. Even if you don't like 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.

Finally, just a few days before these two events occurred, a startup named Cluely completed a $15 million funding round led by a16z (Andreessen Horowitz).

The operating model of this company can be summarized as "deceiving everyone and everything." Of course, this approach is not new, but the reason for a16z's investment is not this! They are focused on 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 "having an atmosphere before having a story"—to consumer-facing AI applications. We have already seen "mindless marketing" sweep through the cultural sphere, so it is only a matter of time before it infiltrates the startup scene.

However, these three events—a geopolitical conflict, a mayoral primary, and the funding of a startup—are actually different reflections of the same trend, and I would like to connect them through this article:

Attention is infrastructure: it determines what will be 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 the way beliefs are tested, priced, and transformed into outcomes before institutions take action.

What we are seeing is not just a trend in the media, but a shift in the power structure. Attention → Speculation → Distribution, which constitutes a new supply chain.

Traditional economic theory assumes that information flows serve resource allocation, but now, resource allocation in turn serves the flow of attention. We have shifted from an economy where attention supports other value creation to one where attention itself is a form of value creation.

How to understand "attention"

The fundamental elements of the traditional economy are land, labor, and capital—these are the cornerstones of production. However, today, the true fundamental element has become "attention."

Trump originally stated that he needed about two weeks to consider whether to bomb Iran... but in the end, he took direct action? The New York Times later reported that the decision for the airstrike was partially influenced by the promotional effect of Israel on Fox News, so Trump's response seemed more like a reactive "performance" rather than a rigorous military strategy. The whole process looked more like a drama!

Iran clearly knows that Trump might take action, as evidenced by his frequent posts on social media.

Due to concerns that Trump's post might leak operational secrets, military officials ordered a "feigned flight" of a B-2 bomber to divert attention from the real mission.

Iran simply transferred their uranium to another location, and now we seem to have no idea of its exact whereabouts.

It seems that these bombs did not hit the intended targets?

A few days later, Iran retaliated by attacking U.S. military bases in the Gulf region and issued a warning to the United States in advance (I was also in the supermarket when I learned this news).

Iran has not closed the Strait of Hormuz, which seems to indicate that the situation may (?) start to calm down from here (this is an observation I cautiously noted down on the morning of June 25).

Trump calls for a ceasefire, but both Israel and Iran seem to ignore his proposal.

He also stated that China can continue to purchase Iranian oil, which clearly indicates a relaxation of sanctions?

Subsequently, Trump was very angry on live television (which is actually understandable).

Trump only informed Republican congressional members about the airstrikes, which is not a good sign. At the same time, intelligence briefings seem to indicate that Iran has not actively militarized its nuclear program (which makes the bombing potentially illegal under the law). However, when Congress's role is like a fish flopping by the water's edge, the importance of the law may be less than that of content strategy.

Trump has once again upended the traditional system architecture—completely altering the conventional flow of information and decision-making. Military strategy and foreign policy have been replaced by the dynamics of social media. However, he behaves as if war is just a weekend activity. As his State Department spokesperson said:

"I won't jump in front of the president, nor will I try to guess what his strategy will be. Things are moving quickly, and I think we'll know the answer soon."

This reveals the tricky nature of the attention economy—grabbing attention is indeed easy, and people will make increasingly crazy moves to maintain that attention. But what happens when people stop paying attention? Here, the issue is that Iran may continue to pursue nuclear weapons, as they only need to follow the information flow to understand the direction of the narrative, which could lead to extremely serious consequences.

Zohran Mamdani

There have been many excellent articles about Mandani (Derek Thompson just joined Substack!), so I won't elaborate too much here. But just yesterday, Zoran Mandani won the Democratic mayoral primary in New York City. The 33-year-old democratic socialist defeated former governor Andrew Cuomo, and his campaign has attracted significant attention. Just four and a half months ago, his approval rating was only 1%!

His campaign message primarily revolves around "affordability," which is also one of the reasons why Trump won among young voters. He is skilled at creating short videos and podcasts, and he personally engages with citizens in New York City, even walking across the entire city. In contrast, Cuomo chose to run ads on television and raised $25 million through the largest super political action committee in New York City mayoral campaign history (!), but these efforts seem to be irrelevant.

As many people have said, Mandani is the candidate in the left camp who resembles Trump the most in terms of "communication style"—his campaign heavily relies on the internet, he accepts various interviews as much as possible, he has a loyal team of supporters (who knocked on 1.5 million doors!), and he has a clear campaign message.

Mandani proved that "attention" is the key path to breaking through systemic constraints. Like Trump, but starting from a different direction.

This transformation is not surprising, and it will occur more frequently at both ends in the future. People generally feel frustrated with the status quo, and breaking the rules often excites, like JD Vance's middle finger or Trump's profanity on C-Span.

Of course, ideals are important. People voted for Trump not only because they support deporting immigrants and oppose "woke culture," but also because he is different and full of new ideas. Mandani, on the other hand, 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's social media bombardment of Iran, Mandani walking through Manhattan on TikTok, and Cluely's funding — have one thing in common: power comes from attention, and attention comes from the discipline of narrative.

It operates like a supply chain:

We can track this "attention pipeline" through these cases.

Trump's airstrike on Iran:

Raw materials: geopolitical resentment, national pride, fear of weakness.

Processing: Publish vague threats, share Fox News clips, suggest retaliation.

Dissemination: Amplified through cable news and information echo chambers.

Speculation: People no longer make judgments based on strategy, but rather bet based on emotions and the "atmosphere." The prediction market reacts accordingly.

Consumption: He ordered the bombing of Iran.

Pollution: strategic chaos, legal ambiguity, normalizing information warfare based on social media.

Mandani's election campaign:

Raw materials: affordability crisis, wealth inequality, housing despair.

Processing: Making TikTok videos, giving interviews, hiking across Manhattan.

Distribution: left-wing podcasts, short video clips.

Speculation: Can he really win? Is free public transport really feasible? What would happen if New York City completely went down the socialist route? Young voters, disappointed moderates, and donors are betting their time, energy, and beliefs (even wagering in prediction markets).

Consumption: He won the primary election, and Cuomo conceded defeat.

Pollution: The vicious cycle of anger, factionalism, and intensified ideological divergence.

The case of Cluely also applies to 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 sent a signal to other founders—prioritize viral spread, not just practicality. This is "American Dynamism"!

Attention is the raw material of economic, political, and military actions. However, what really makes this attention work is speculation: the emotional, political, and economic stakes that people bet on regarding a certain narrative potentially becoming a reality.

In the political sphere, this speculative behavior has become the closest "agency" for those who feel the economy no longer serves their interests. People speculate on various ideas, figures, etc.—why not? But when this phenomenon occurs, the system is optimized for speed and viral distribution rather than stability or accuracy.

I believe this is exactly the reason 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 all masters of speed and viral propagation.

They use this speculative behavior to determine what can attract attention, and attention increasingly decides the allocation of resources. Today, the whole world is learning from them—whether it's startups, politicians, or geopolitical strategies. "Checks and balances" no longer come from Congress or the courts, but from the information streams of social media.

We have seen similar situations before.

The phenomenon I describe is not entirely without precedent. Many people 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 signifies a scarcity of something else: the scarcity of what information consumes. What information consumes is evident: it consumes the attention of the recipient. Thus, the abundance of information creates a poverty of attention and necessitates the efficient allocation of attention among the potentially attention-consuming excess sources of information.

The surplus of information has led 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 has brought its own forms of wealth, class differentiation—between stars and fans—and its own forms of property, all of which make it incompatible with the industrial-currency-market economy, and it seems that the attention economy is poised to replace it. Success will belong to those who can best adapt to this new reality.

Robert Shiller proposed "narrative economics," believing that stories drive economic behavior. I think we are in a new iteration of all this, where stories are not only influencing economic activities but are, in themselves, economic activities. 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 phenomenon of speculation intertwined with attention seems to be overlooked outside the market. The issue is not whether we can build better housing or infrastructure—although we urgently need these. The real question is whether we can still construct anything coherent when the resource allocation system places attention above all else.

Because now, those who can create the most attractive speculation for the future, regardless of whether they truly understand the consequences, can gain the greatest power to realize it.

We cannot find a neutral observation point outside of these systems. The tools we are building are also reshaping ourselves, and this reshaping will have a comprehensive impact. Due to the existence of management mechanisms, there is effectively no true "offline" state anymore. We are all participating in a cognitive economy where attention, belief, and behavior are the currency of trade. By controlling the flow of information, we can shape the future. So, what happens when everything turns into an attention-speculation machine?