As for (i), I suppose that as long as you interpret the info as reflecting people’s beliefs it can have some value. But not if you interpret it as reflecting the actual likelihood of an event happening, if it’s outside the voter’s control. E.g. a market for predicting whether an earth orbit-crossing asteroid will be discovered within the next 12 or 24 months might be useful if you want to test the level of public anxiety, but not whether the event will really happen.

Here, the aggregated info is people’s beliefs about an event in the media’s control — what’s the next talkativeness study that media will publicize. I suppose that in theory some editors might consult this market (some might even vote in it). But if they consult it without voting, and then decide to act in a contrary way (to thwart popular expectation), how accurate was the info to begin with? What justification is there for assuming that this is a perfect market that will reflect all such self-relfective events?

(ii) Even assuming market perfection, of what use is this info? The asteroid info might be more useful for a marketer of asteroid-protection suits and survival gear. But a prediction about a media story?

(iii) Even we could find some use for it, how do we extract the info from the price? Looking at this price, I can’t figure out what people are thinking — what level of probability are they estimating? Is the price normalized to $100 = 100% likelihood? (maybe some reader knows the answer). say the price went to $105 — what would that mean? And wouldn’t it be more informative to see bid and asked prices?

As for (i), I suppose that as long as you interpret the info as reflecting people’s beliefs it can have some value. But not if you interpret it as reflecting the actual likelihood of an event happening, if it’s outside the voter’s control. E.g. a market for predicting whether an earth orbit-crossing asteroid will be discovered within the next 12 or 24 months might be useful if you want to test the level of public anxiety, but not whether the event will really happen.

Here, the aggregated info is people’s beliefs about an event in the media’s control — what’s the next talkativeness study that media will publicize. I suppose that in theory some editors might consult this market (some might even vote in it). But if they consult it without voting, and then decide to act in a contrary way (to thwart popular expectation), how accurate was the info to begin with? What justification is there for assuming that this is a perfect market that will reflect all such self-relfective events?

(ii) Even assuming market perfection, of what use is this info? The asteroid info might be more useful for a marketer of asteroid-protection suits and survival gear. But a prediction about a media story?

(iii) Even we could find some use for it, how do we extract the info from the price? Looking at this price, I can’t figure out what people are thinking — what level of probability are they estimating? Is the price normailzed to $100 = 100% likelihood? (maybe some reader knows the answer). say the price went to $105 — what would that mean? And wouldn’t it be more informative to see bid and asked prices?