Clovr, a start-up operating in the field of eSport, publishes an extensive study on media coverage of crypto currencies. The authors of the study discuss, among other things, the connections between the Bitcoin course and the media presence of crypto currencies. Further the trend goes according to report clearly toward a balanced reporting. The results at a glance.
Bitcoin revolution and media attention
In the first section, the authors examine the relationship between the Bitcoin revolution and the frequency with which it is mentioned in the media. Here is the review about the Bitcoin revolution. The result is not surprising. The amount of contributions on the topic of crypto currencies is proportionally dependent on the course. This apparent correlation is illustrated by the following graph:
How fine this dependence actually is, however, is astonishing. Even small price fluctuations are visibly associated with a reaction on the part of media attention.
Only after the crash in January 2018 did an anti-proportional picture emerge: Contrary to the share price trend, the number of reports on Bitcoin shot up during this period. By the way, we can observe this phenomenon again today.
Positive vs. negative reporting of the Bitcoin loophole
In this section, the authors compare the proportion of positive and negative reporting of the Bitcoin loophole. The result: https://www.forexaktuell.com/en/bitcoin-loophole-scam/As can be seen in the graph, a decreasing polarization has been observed since 2013. While the reporting at the beginning of the study in 2013 was either positive or negative, this trend gave way to a more balanced media attention.
The authors explain this with a growing technical understanding of the media: „If the technology becomes known, fluctuations in praise and criticism could become less frequent.
According to the study, how the media houses have set their focus depends first and foremost on the target group. Magazines such as Forbes or the Business Insider appeal to a young, technology-oriented audience and tend to report positively about Bitcoin & Co.
CNBC, however, has shown a quite balanced relationship between positive and negative reporting: About 53 percent of the articles were positive, while 47 percent were negative.
On the other hand, according to the study, there are media houses that are extremely critical of Bitcoin:
„Still other media tended to report with greater scepticism (‚The Wall Street Journal‘, ‚Gizmodo‘) or open criticism: ‚Breitbart News‘ and ‚Raw Story‘, targeting polarising opposites within the American political spectrum and together making only one positive contribution to 91 negative articles‘, the study says.
Conclusion: Who you believe in, you decide for yourself
In the end, the authors point out that the study shows one thing above all else: Each phenomenon can be viewed from different angles. The attitude you adopt depends not least on the media you consume. A critical reflection of media reporting is therefore indispensable.
Responsible media consumption is important in order to develop a balanced stance on the subject of crypto currencies. BTC-ECHO is a good start.