Recent developments in the cryptocurrency space, particularly the rise in the price of Bitcoin, stand in stark contrast to the continued skeptical and sensationalist coverage in the traditional media.
It is true that Bitcoin’s journey in the digital currency landscape has often been tumultuous, marked by significant price fluctuations and evolving public perceptions. However, despite a notable 168% increase in its value this year, Bitcoin continues to face a barrage of skepticism and negative framing in traditional media reports, except for one.
New York Times
The New York Times’ repeated use of terms like “bet” when describing investments in Bitcoin ETFs subtly casts a speculative shadow over the cryptocurrency.
“A Bitcoin ETF would allow investors who want to bet on the cryptocurrency to buy shares of a fund that holds the cryptocurrency without directly exposing them to the more volatile and chaotic digital asset markets.”
Similarly, the term “digital asset fans” used in the same article has a slightly pejorative connotation, in contrast to the more neutral language typically used for traditional investments.
The distinction between Bitcoin and the broader web3 sector remains blurred in such reports. While Bitcoin has demonstrated resilience and growth, media narratives often conflate it with other aspects of the digital asset world, which have been more tumultuous.
“Digital asset prices have been hit by a year of token drops, corporate scandals, bankruptcies and regulatory actions.”
With Bitcoin up above $43,000 when it started the year below $20,000, this merger overlooks Bitcoin’s unique position and distinctive trajectory compared to the rest of the cryptocurrency market.
The portrayal of Bitcoin mining in the media, particularly as it relates to energy consumption, is another area where sensationalism often overrides factual reporting.
“Bitcoin mines profit from electricity (eating it, selling it, and even turning it off) and cause immense pollution. In many cases, the public pays a price.”
Once again, the New York Times’ depiction of Bitcoin mining as a huge polluter during Winter Storm Uri in Texas fails to recognize the industry’s significant strides toward renewable energy. Notably, companies like Riot have actively contributed power to the grid during crises, and the current renewable energy mix in Bitcoin mining is over 50%.
Riot even responded to the article, stating that it operates in rural regions where wind and solar power are “abundant and otherwise wasted” during off-peak hours and takes advantage of that available energy. Riot also confirmed that its Bitcoin mining operations “generate no greenhouse gas emissions” and instead use energy just like other data centers.
Wall Street Journal
The Wall Street Journal’s coverage further exemplifies the biased narrative prevalent in crypto reporting.
“It turns out that of the two largest crypto exchanges, one was a fraud and the other was a money launderer. Who could have guessed?
By focusing on the legal issues facing Binance and painting the entire industry with broad brushstrokes of fraud and crime, these reports neglect the nuances of the legal situations and nature of fraud, which are more akin to traditional financial misconduct. Binance.US allowed users outside the US to trade on the exchange, while Sam Bankman-Fried took users’ deposits and transferred them to Alameda to buy houses and donate them to politicians. There is nothing inherently wrong with the underlying blockchain technology in any of these examples. Additionally, during the FTX crash, DeFi platforms like Uniswap and Aave were able to liquidate withdrawals and positions without materially worrying about their operations. The issues surrounding Binance.US and FTX are similar to similar cases in traditional finance, but are often viewed differently in traditional media publications.
“I don’t understand why anyone would pay a dime, let alone real money, to inscribe art on the bitcoin blockchain, but hey, whatever floats your boat. “
The poor understanding of Bitcoin’s technical applications, such as the use of its blockchain to enroll digital (ordinal) assets, also reflects a gap in understanding of the currency’s technological strength and potential. Bitcoin Ordinals offers a novel way to create and manage digital assets on the Bitcoin blockchain and provides significant benefits. Ordinals enable unique, verifiable ownership of digital collectibles, foster innovation by expanding Bitcoin use cases beyond simple transactions, and improve security and decentralization, making them a valuable investment for both creators and creators. as for collectors.
Forbes
Forbes’ reports on Bitcoin show a particularly contradictory stance. On the one hand, it characterizes Bitcoin as a “Ponzi scheme,” drawing on Chinese state-sponsored media, while on the other, it publishes a CryptoCodex newsletter, apparently capitalizing on the popularity of the cryptocurrency. This inconsistency raises questions about the objectivity and consistency of its cryptocurrency coverage.
“Virtual currency is becoming the largest Ponzi scheme in the history of humanity[…] The BSN chief executive wrote last month in the state-sponsored Chinese newspaper, the People’s Daily.
Interestingly, while Forbes has historically been happy with using Chinese media publication People’s Daily to comment on Bitcoin when it comes to social media, it takes a drastically different approach. Regarding TikTok, he reported: “TikTok has shown a flood of ads from Chinese state propaganda media to millions of Europeans in recent months.[…] from Chinese state media outlets such as People’s Daily.”
However, it is worth noting that amidst this predominantly negative representation, some sections, such as Forbes Advisor, offer a more balanced view. Its recent acknowledgment of Bitcoin’s potential rise, considering various economic and geopolitical factors, is a rare example of nuanced reporting in Forbes’ catalog.
Bloomberg
In stark contrast, over the past six months, Bloomberg’s coverage of Bitcoin has been largely positive, focusing on its price increases, its resilience in the face of market volatility, and its potential as an investment asset. For example, Bloomberg reported that the price of Bitcoin reached $40,000 for the first time since May 2022 and then surpassed $44,000. He also highlighted Bitcoin’s resilience, noting that it shrugged off a drop in global stock markets to set a more than 19-month high.
Additionally, Bloomberg discussed factors that could be driving Bitcoin’s price increases, including hopes for interest rate cuts from the Federal Reserve and expectations that the US will allow its first Bitcoin exchange-traded funds at counted.
In short, despite the positive coverage, Bloomberg has also acknowledged the challenges and controversies in the cryptocurrency market without resorting to hyperbole. He reported on Bitcoin price volatility, attributing it to lack of liquidity in cryptocurrency markets. He also covered the hype surrounding the possible approval of a Bitcoin ETF, suggesting it could attract more institutional investors to the cryptocurrency market.
However, not all content published in Bloomberg’s coverage is Bitcoin-friendly. A December 6 op-ed titled ‘Bitcoin Hype Will Clash With the Rolex Recession’ discusses the speculative nature of Bitcoin and the lack of a clear use case for the digital asset.
“Bitcoin may be a glorified mascot in terms of money, but people like to hoard it and market it as a risky hybrid of gold and NASDAQ startup in the hopes of making outsized profits.”
He also mentions the significant amount of money tied up in crypto markets and the potential uses of this capital in the real world, stating: “The world could do a lot with the trillion dollars currently tied up in crypto markets.”
Overall, unlike other traditional media outlets, Bloomberg’s coverage tends to emphasize the potential benefits and opportunities associated with Bitcoin. While it acknowledges the challenges and controversies in the cryptocurrency market, its overall coverage is generally more positive and focuses on the potential benefits and opportunities of Bitcoin.
This approach reflects Bloomberg’s focus on financial markets and investment opportunities, providing a unique perspective on Bitcoin and the broader cryptocurrency market. Furthermore, no one should exist in an echo chamber, and constructive criticism is essential for the sustainable growth of the blockchain industry.
Ultimately, traditional media coverage of Bitcoin often veers between skepticism and sensationalism, failing to consistently capture the complexities and advancements of the cryptocurrency. As Bitcoin continues to evolve and gain traction, more balanced and informed media representation is essential for public understanding and the healthy development of the digital currency ecosystem.
