Jeremy Giffon argues AI-driven algorithms are pricing financial markets by choosing which narratives traders see
If the algorithm decides what story you believe about an asset, it may also be deciding what you pay for it.
Jeremy Giffon has been making the rounds with a pointed observation about how markets actually get priced today. His claim: the AI systems running feeds on X and YouTube are not passive pipes. They select which narratives reach which people, and traders then price assets off whatever story the feed surfaces. That makes the algorithm, in his framing, a de facto market-maker.
The algorithm, the AI frankly, because that's what my understanding is, that's what's driving most of the algorithms now on Twitter and YouTube and stuff, is pricing the market in some very real sense, because it's choosing the narrative that it wants to show to people, and then those people are pricing off that. Jeremy Giffon
The argument is speculative, and Giffon flags it as such, noting it was something he had “never thought of before” in the moment he said it. But the logic is not hard to follow. If retail and even professional participants are absorbing information primarily through algorithmically sorted feeds, the selection function upstream of that information shapes the consensus reality those participants trade on.
Giffon pairs this with a broader inversion he sees in influence hierarchies: “the billionaire class has become subservient to the posting class.” Taken together, the two ideas sketch a world where distributional power, who controls what gets seen, matters more than capital or credentials in setting prices and shaping outcomes. Whether that holds up to scrutiny is an open question, but it is a framing worth sitting with.