Scott Alexander reviews 'The Revolt of the Public', a 2014 book that predicted the rise of social media-driven mass revolts against elites, finding its insights now obvious but acknowledging its prescience at the time of publication. Longer summary

Scott Alexander reviews Martin Gurri's 'The Revolt of the Public', a book from 2014 that predicted the rise of social media-connected masses revolting against elites. The book discusses various protest movements from 2011, including the Arab Spring and Occupy Wall Street, characterizing them as leaderless, nihilistic, and driven by privileged groups. Gurri argues that the internet broke down the government-media-academia elite axis, leading to a crisis of legitimacy. The review critically examines Gurri's thesis, noting that some predictions haven't fully materialized and suggesting that the left-right political divide may have partially stalled the 'revolt of the public'. Scott concludes that while the book was prescient when published, its insights are now obvious, making it less relevant today. Shorter summary

Scott proposes using prediction markets to fund investigative journalism, potentially solving the issue of funding quality reporting in the digital age. Longer summary

Scott Alexander proposes using prediction markets to fund investigative reporting, inspired by Hindenburg Research's model of profiting from exposing corporate fraud. He argues that this could solve the problem of funding investigative journalism in the age of unbundled media. The post explores how this might work for political reporting and even for less quantifiable issues like exposing discrimination in institutions. Scott acknowledges potential challenges but suggests that creating more specific prediction markets could address these. He concludes that this system, while unusual, could incentivize truthful reporting and separate serious journalism from 'infotainment'. Shorter summary