🏛️ Defamation litigation wave hits media balance sheets

⚖ Why this result

fully deterministic — computed from daily closes on the scoring date; nothing below is editable or hand-set

1. Window: 2023-04-21 → 2024-04-21 — first mention + 12-month horizon, then the window locks.
2. The call: ▼ SHORT FOXA (primary play). FOXA fell 5.0% over the window → return (sign flipped for a SHORT) = +5.0% (the call made money).
3. Benchmark: holding SPY over the same window returned +21.9% → vs SPY = +5.0 − (+21.9) = -16.8% — what this call made or lost against just owning the index. This is the number the result uses.
   Direction-only read: +26.9% — did FOXA move the predicted way relative to the market. The two only differ on a SHORT: this call was right about direction relative to the index but still cost money versus holding it.
4. Rule fired:
   · RIGHT — return ≥ +10% AND beat SPY by 5+

   ▶ HALF — return ≥ +5% OR beat SPY at all

   · WRONG — everything else
5. Credit: supporters of a HALF earn 0.5 each, opposers the opposite — this feeds the scoreboard. supported: Chamath, Friedberg, Jason | opposed: Sacks | proxy-sensitive: NYT→MISS (-8.1%); WBD→HIT (+38.1%)

each voice's total push on the score, in conviction points across every mention — supports and opposes · share = % of all mention-driven movement

Chamath 51%

1 scoring event · 46% of moves

+42.0 → net +42.0

Sacks 48%

2 scoring events · 25% of moves

+13.1 / -9.6 → net +3.5

Jason 49%

1 scoring event · 20% of moves

+17.8 → net +17.8

Friedberg 42%

1 scoring event · 9% of moves

+8.1 → net +8.1

⏳ decay drained -56.2 over the idea's life — that's time passing, attributed to no one