SaTC: Small: Core: Using Markets to Address Manipulated Information Online

Trustees Of Boston University, Boston

Investigators

Abstract

Societies function poorly without free speech. They also function poorly when members cannot agree on basic facts. This research seeks to discover technology-aided social structures that minimize the adverse impact of confusion about facts while promoting free speech. To accomplish these goals, the project develops, prototypes, and tests market mechanisms to dissuade sources of information from dissembling, to decentralize detection of false claims, and to change the incentive structure under which producing false claims is cheaper than producing honest news. It also seeks to decentralize governance so that no single party, neither a government nor a private firm, has content moderation authority. Finally, it provides a principled basis for updating Internet and media law concerning platform liability exemptions for user-generated content. The proposed mechanism extends established economic theories of signaling and screening that allow authors to credibly signal information regarding the veracity of their claims while helping recipients believe which claims are honest. This mechanism puts the burden of proof on the author, in contrast to extant mechanisms that put the burden of proof on the recipients of information or on the platform. Testing is accomplished in a laboratory setting, using randomized control trials, the gold standard for establishing causality. Experimentation tests, for example, whether more honest candidates are more likely to win a tournament and whether more honest firms can sell more products. The claims made by authors will be decentralized. Based on market design principles, the detection and the adjudication of false claims will also be decentralized. Security, privacy, and anonymity is proposed to be enforced by technology advances in the developed system. This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.