You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Bitcoin "end game" a mathematical certainty: correcting bad Bitcoin journalism.
The offset is that quality of cryptojournalism is abysmal as it's infilitrated by hacks, shills, companies that own publications as their own propaganda arms (Coindesk), and almost no one of quality. They never dig deep, they mostly FUD, and they are captured by industry. We should demand better not only of mainstream press in their coverage of crypto but also the crypto press.
The exception are people like Laura Shin who remains independent and can write.
Laura is fantastic. Great plug.
You make some great points about the state of crypto journalism. I think a large part of the problem stems from writers who don't necessarily know the deep technical details that form the other sides to their arguments. I try and give them as much slack as possible becasue some of them are often expressing the questions that many of the "average Joes" will be asking - there is nothing wrong with that.
The problems come when this skeptical attitude is deliberate and deceptive. Where to draw that line is by definition, hard. Some of the crypto tabloids (coindesk, CT, twitter) are walking a fine line - how do you simplify and distille topics that take PhD level understandings to really evaluate, into language that is accessible to the masses that are interested? Answer: it's hard. It gets much worse when these firms take advantage of the education level their readers have to promote their shillings.
Crowdsourcing journalism is getting better. I hope to help it improve bit by bit.
Thanks for pointing me to Laura Shin
Happy to do so, she's awesome. A Candle in the Dark in the Saganian sense of the term.