Before you vote, remember this

The message offers no verifiable data: it does not identify the video, does not cite a source and does not explain what is being denounced. Its force is purely emotional, and that is what deserves close scrutiny before sharing it.

A short message, with no visible link to the content and not a single figure. It asks people to share a video "every day, at all hours". It does not say which video, what it is about, or who is behind it. What gets shared is not the video: it is the instruction to keep repeating it. And that is where the economic problem lies, not the political one.

## Attention as a scarce resource

Every minute someone spends on a screen is a minute not spent on something else. Platforms' business models live off that contest: the more repetition, the more ad impressions and the more behavioural data. A message that orders people to repeat something without specifying what is a perfect piece for that machinery, because the content does not matter: what gets monetised is the habit.

## No source, no figure, no fact-checking

There is no way to verify anything the message claims, because it makes no concrete claim. When a message avoids the data, the date and the name, it cannot be checked, and what cannot be checked spreads at no cost. Verification requires a minimum: what is being said, who is saying it and when. Here, all three are missing.

## The cost of sharing on reflex

Forwarding costs zero seconds and zero euros. That rock-bottom price is the reason so many empty messages circulate. Before amplifying something, apply the same yardstick you would to an invoice: item, amount and issuer. If any of them is missing, it is unclear what you are paying for.

None of this is financial or political advice: it is just attention accounting.