Hot Topic: Ownership of Media and Communication Platforms

Economic Models
1

Hello, Olasians,

I’m back on the forum to share some thoughts on the challenges within today’s media landscape and how decentralized platforms could offer a solution. This time, I want to discuss the issue of ownership. Many of you may have noticed the recent conversations about who owns digital communication platforms. Much of this discussion stems from the case of X, acquired by Elon Musk and, arguably, transformed into a political platform. This may be an extreme example, but it highlights a broader trend: around the world, media has increasingly become a tool for advancing political agendas. When that happens, facts often take a back seat, and balanced public discourse suffers.

This brings us to a key point—ownership matters if we want to protect media from manipulative influences. It might be too late to prevent the problems we’re seeing now, but perhaps not too late to address them. Until the 1980s, media ownership was relatively restricted, dominated by public broadcasters and a limited number of publishers. Then came the liberalization of TV channels, followed by a wave of consolidation that concentrated media ownership into the hands of a few powerful players. If you’ve seen the HBO show Succession, you’ll recognize the dynamic.

I firmly believe that control of the media by oligarchs is as problematic as control by the government. Owning the platform essentially means controlling the narrative, no matter how much journalists defend their profession. This presents a difficult question: Who should own the media? Should media be a public good or strictly regulated private enterprise? The answer is tied to another important question: what basic guidelines should exist to prevent harmful and toxic behaviors in media?

Here’s my perspective. Media ownership should lie with the communities that engage with it. A decentralized, community-owned platform governed by a DAO could offer a promising model—provided we address the legal challenges DAOs currently face. It’s also critical that the DAO’s governance structure prevents those with the most tokens from monopolizing power. In this way, we could create a media landscape accountable not to elites but to content creators and consumers alike.

Is this the direction Olas is planning to take? What governance solutions are you proposing? I’m genuinely curious to learn more.

2 Likes
2

Both. Comparing the state content and smaller/independent voices all the time can give you some insight on the state of media in your country. I think it’s all about constructing a mental “filter” driven by common sense and critical thought. That way, you can consume many media outlets, coming from different political compases and angles, and construct your most neutral “truth”.

This is a very intelligent solution. But we are again coming to the basic truth of human nature and will for power and control. I am joining @Biduido 's questions and raising another one: is it possible to taint this kind of model somehow (even in theory), or will it be foolproof?

3

I don’t believe anyone, including a DAO should own it. It should just be a neutral protocol. A DAO is a human controlled entity that will end up becoming a vector for powerful people to try and control. You can implement mechanisms to reduce that risk but they’ll never be perfect. Best to just eliminate human governance altogether IMO.

We plan to implement a Bitcoin and Ethereum-like system where protocol rules are developed under rough consensus. Once changes are acccepted and tested, they’ll be pushed to mainnet and remain outside of the control of any entity including any DAO. If people don’t like the rules, they can always fork the protocol!