Hey, Olasians!
I’ve been thinking about a tricky aspect of the Olas protocol: how it could potentially reward or penalize media outlets and journalists for their coverage. Let me break it down a bit. Recently, the Washington Post faced HUGE backlash from subscribers after deciding not to endorse a candidate in the upcoming U.S. presidential election. Many subscribers admire the Post for its history of speaking truth to power—like during Watergate, when the paper exposed the corruption scandal that eventually led to Nixon’s resignation. That was a legendary moment, adding serious prestige to the Post, and they maintained a similar stance through the Trump presidency (and to a lesser extent with Biden), which earned them additional respect.
But now, it seems like their editorial team is hesitating. Some suggest it might be due to pressure from Jeff Bezos, the owner. While there’s been a lot of speculation around that, what really stands out to me is the surge of canceled subscriptions. It seems many readers feel the Post’s campaign coverage has been disappointing (which I tend to agree with, but that’s another topic). This drop in subscribers feels like a form of ‘punishment’ from the readership—a clear message from paying customers that they’re not getting the coverage they want.
Now, here’s my question: how would this work with Olas? Would there be traditional subscribers paying monthly fees, or would it rely more on micropayments? And would there be ways for readers to give direct feedback to journalists, rewarding or penalizing their work based on audience criteria? Since this tech is new to me, I’m really curious about these aspects. I have plenty more questions, but I’ll let the Olas team tackle these first. Looking forward to hearing from you all!