Several mainstream media outlets have journalists focusing on weed. Yet, among media professionals, Blockchain-experts are a rare breed. Is mainstream media underestimating the revolution unfolding - again?
First off, this is debut on Steemit, glad to be part of the community – please show some mercy ;)
Today I want to share some of the observations I have made over the past months on how large mainstream media outlets are reporting on the crypto- and the Blockchain-space in general. On top of that, I would like to talk about why I believe many media outlets tend follow a very shallow and unreflected narrative when it gets to reporting crypto. Having worked in the industry for several years, I would like to provide an inside look on why I believe crypto is being reported on the way it is.
Before I dig in, I would like to briefly talk about context. As someone that has worked with large media companies, I know the underlying mechanisms on why certain topics are reported on - and why others are largely ignored. Contrary to the general consensus in the tinfoil-hat-fraction, it isn’t really “higher powers” that influence the coverage on certain stories or topics in order to guide public opinion. There is no big universal conspiracy between the “elite” in finance, politics and media pushing “fake news” onto the general public to steer the herd. As with all conspiracy theories, this would simply be too simple. And it is the simplicity of conspiracy that is so appealing to some people. A clear true vs. false, good vs. evil paradigm. But as with almost everything in life, the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
Yet, digging for this truth is often cumbersome and complicated. A narrative along the lines: “Why Bitcoin is a fraud” currently simply pays better, because it reflects the current general perception. People want to hear what they believe. In addition, as a journalist, you’re also not risking anything with a story like that. This is why we see so much of these narratives.
Two simple reasons:
1. Bitcoin clicks, Blockchain doesn’t (yet)
2. Many journalists simply don’t understand the space (yet) - and choose to skim the surface instead of exposing a lack of understanding.
Imagine some major news outlet writes a bullish feature on some crypto-project which later turns out to be a scam? There you have it, full shitstorm. Better not dig too deep for now and write what others have written.
“Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies”
Honestly, how many times have we read about this god damn tulip bubble in mainstream media in the past months? I mean, it’s like the same general, easily digested Bitcoin-story again and again and again. There are literally thousands of them. The story of exploding Bitcoin prices, dishwashers that that have become millionaires overnight, fifty-million-dollar pizzas and lost hard drives on landfills, followed by the obligatory listing of every economic bubble since the Neolithic period - reaching mostly the same conclusion: “Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies (literally like comparing apples and oranges) … are shady at best, probably a Ponzi-scheme, be careful people, and you’re going to lose all your money.” Not a word of Plattform-Blockchains, Utility or ERC20-Tokens, of DAPPs and DAOs and how they are fundamentally different to Bitcoin or privacy coins.
It’s like almost the entire value proposition of the most promising Blockchain projects today are largely ignored. I understand that these differences can be pretty technical and are not easily explained. Yet, dear editors and reporters - that’s what you are being paid for. But what’s probably even more important in terms of agenda-setting is that the editors in chief and media CEOs take a good deep look at the Blockchain space and have an open mind to it. I’m not talking about hyping the entire space and covering every ICO out there. To the contrary, journalistic skepticism is needed in a space that today resembles the Wild West. Checks and balances are important. There is no doubt about the fact that there are many crypto-scams and many shady people out there and that many projects will fail. Just like during the Dot.com boom. None the less, the bubble survivors still changed the world. Wouldn’t it be interesting to report on the next Google BEFORE it became the next Google? This takes courage and you’ll have to step outside the comfort zone.
This leads me to another argument why large media companies in particular should take a good close look at what’s happening in the Blockchain space. Since the Internet of information became mainstream, many of these companies have failed to develop sustainable business models in the digital world. They didn’t take the web serious in the beginning, they saw it more as a nice gimmick - and are playing catch-up until today (Paywalls or not, trashy advertising, micro payments, print revenue is declining - quo vadis?) The free movement of information on the web simply isn’t ideal for you if your major source of income is - information. More precisely, it is not ideal for you if you don’t have plans on how to embrace it. Blockchain is the next evolutionary step on this journey. The internet of value. It would be highly advisable to learn from past mistakes and approach the space with an open mind and journalistic curiosity. It might just help you solve some of the problems you still have on your plate since about 20 years now.
Dinosaurs in Davos
With this being said, I believe it’s the role of journalists to show the public what’s really important for society and report on it in a reflected and accurate way - even BEFORE it has arrived in the absolute mainstream (and the related traffic on certain keywords goes through the roof). In other words, to write about what matters for society before it becomes a no-brainer in terms of traffic, views and the related advertising revenues.
And the developments we see in Blockchain today will have profound implications for our future, this becomes clearer every day (and has been a general consensus at the Davos World Economic Forum). Even though, the innovation taking place with regards to decentralization and public Blockchains was largely met with skepticism. Economic gurus mostly followed the view: Blockchain has great potential, if we can bring this gift to our beloved corporations. What those decentralized dreamers and cyber-hippies are doing - well, that’s just a bubble. There may have been other interests at play.
Many mainstream media outlets are failing to position themselves as experts in the fields early. Instead, if you want reflected and detailed insights of Blockchain projects, people flock towards Medium, Hacker Noon or Steemit as sources of balanced analyses. It is largely financial-news-outlets the likes of Bloomberg which make an effort to deal with some of more complex concepts in the space, i.e. everything that goes beyond “Bitcoin as a digital store of value”. Yet, their approach is, understandably so, very focused on financial matters whereas there are so many projects on the way that will disrupt/improve many industries from energy to cloud computing to online-services to supply chain.
Down by the corner of Silkroad
Considering the vast impact of Blockchain technology and cryptocurrencies will have on many facets of our lives, I believe the entire space is not receiving the media attention it deserves. Or, to put it more precisely, it doesn’t receive the balanced, fair and professional look it deserves and which professional media outlets have vowed to uphold. Sometimes I believe that if many Blockchain-startups would not be tied to the cryptocurrency space at all, they would receive much more detailed and balanced reporting. Yet, crypto as a whole is looked upon with skepticism, largely due to the fact that Bitcoin or privacy coins are used for illegal purposes. Even though this logic in itself is already completely flawed, and here’s why:
Imagine two blocks down the street from you there would be an illegal market where drugs and weapons are being sold openly. Down by the corner of Main- and Silkroad, you know? Now imagine the currency used on this market would be gold. Would anyone in their right mind argue that we should ban gold to dry out this market? I think the same holds true for cryptocurrencies that solely serve as medium of exchange or store of value. Even though I am aware of which challenges these pose to authorities. I do believe it is vital to differentiate between Blockchain platforms, utility tokens and privacy coins. See here for more information. The Blockchain space will need to detach itself from grandfather Bitcoin’s reputation if it is ever to be taken really seriously. Balanced reporting would help but at the moment most media don’t grant the benefit of the doubt.
The value of the likes of Ethereum is not derived from the trust that people have in an intangible asset like Bitcoin (which could theoretically easily substituted with more technologically advanced cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin Cash for example). Instead, the value of Ether is derived from its vast disruptive and transformative potential it holds for classical industries, possibly going into the trillions of dollars. It’s in no way competing with classical stores of value like gold or fiat money. Even though Ether might turn out to be a much better store of value in the long run. Instead, Blockchain platforms like Ethereum, Neo, Icon and others can be perfectly integrated into the global financial and economic system. Granted, even Ethereum is at a very early stage (scaling is immensely important for a platform blockchains). But in terms of it still being a speculative asset, is purchasing NEO any different than purchasing a stake in Alibaba when it was a small webstore? Aside the obvious fact that you couldn’t back then - and now you can.
Time to get technical
I would like to draw a comparison between reporting climate change and reporting on Blockchain. The general public cares more about celebrities and football, yet (some) media outlets feel like it’s their duty to write about it because it has a long lasting profound impact on the world which isn’t entirely graspable today. In journalism climate change stories are considered to be bad sellers if they don’t have a new or exciting angle. After 50 stories you’ve read, compassion fatigue sets in. A reflected and detailed approach to Blockchain is similar, many people don’t get it and therefore won’t click it. The difference is, if you write about scientific data and climate, you better get your facts straight or again – it’s shitstorm time. If you write nonsense related to crypto, well, the worst that will happen is some unfriendly mails from a bunch of nerds. Crypto-entrepreneurship still lacks economic (and academic) street cred.
Whereas it’s true that certain public broadcasters are linked to party politics of a given country due to way they are financed, private media companies and conglomerates are first and foremost in it for the money. If crypto pays (i.e. the mainstream craves this content) the media will be all over it 24/7 and quickly ditch their skepticism for over boarding enthusiasm. In general media isn’t different to other industries. Money talks, especially in an industry that doesn’t have as much of it as it used to.
So, to conclude, I really thing that the crypto-space has now proven to be resilient and mature enough, that it merits open-minded, detailed analyses from mainstream media outlets. Just like you have detailed analyses on the prospects of successful startups up to fortune 500 companies. The Blockchain space (and its culture) offers a vast fundus of fascinating stories to write about - if you develop an understanding for it. I certainly think that the individual projects deserve an in-depth look at their use cases. Yet, in order to do this, you need plunge into the technical side of things. Today, I believe that young crypto-enthusiasts on average have a better understanding of the space than most senior financial editors with major media outlets. Time to step your game up, ladies & gentlemen.
(
If you liked this article, I am thankful for any support - expect some more ramblings around crypto in the upcoming days and weeks. Till then, cheers!!
Usual disclaimer: none of this should be taken to be trading or investment advice... just random musings from a complete stranger online!