If attention economy does not also weight on stake then it will spread rewards so thin that the benefit of economisation does not exist. Here on on Steem, it is precisely by linking stake and voting power that anyone can even win a big reward at all. This is a simple economic equation that only someone who does not understand economics would think equal vote power is viable.
Actually, I need to correct myself a little. If the 'attention economy' concept works like it does in a democracy, it will grant power to the most manipulative, lowest-common-denominator addressing tricksters. The way that stakes controlling vote power works is that if you have, say, 10% of the share of stake, and your actions cost 1% of the total pool in net losses, you lose 0.1%, whereas the swarms of minnows with only 0.001%, only lose 0.00001%.
Translate that into $100mln total cap. The big stakeholder loses $100,000 from $10mln, the little stakeholders lose $1 from their $100. In proportion, the loss is equal, but I think it is easy to see that the incentive to be good weighs heavier on the bigger stakeholder. For investors, 1% loss is not trivial. For little players, it doesn't hurt nearly so much, especially in a system like this where you can get that little stake from a few weeks of hard work.