I returned to social media after a week away in the country, only to find my timeline filled with news of the attempted assassination of Trump.
The first thing that came to my mind after noticing my perfect timing was:Let me see how CNN handles this.“
And the first thing they wrote was:Trump walks off stage after falling at rally“
You may have had a similar thought process to the one I went through, and if so, you would probably agree that the media landscape has changed.
a lot.
Influenced by the political leanings of its workforce, the rise of cancel culture, and the need to make money, this shift has had a major impact on how technology and Bitcoin (and just about everything else) are viewed.
So what’s going on here?
Let’s delve into what makes up media today.
There is no homogeneous media elite.
First, let’s get one thing straight: There is no secret group of media elites running things.
The idea that big media controls everything is not true at all.
It’s a legend.
What actually happens is that many journalists come from elite schools like Columbia, Harvard, or Penn. This trend has given the media a liberal bias, not because of some grand conspiracy, but because of the backgrounds and perspectives of those who make the news.
This liberal orientation has particularly affected coverage of technology and Bitcoin, making left-leaning media outlets rely primarily on anti technology.
In general, liberals have been wary of the rapid technological advances and decentralized nature of Bitcoin, seeing them as threats to traditional financial regulations and systems.
The Rise of Cancel Culture
Another factor is that the past decade has seen the rise of cancel culture, where people or companies face public shaming for controversial views or actions.
This has also had a significant impact on media companies, making journalists feel they need to align their reporting with prevailing attitudes to avoid backlash.
As a result, media companies have allowed their employees’ political biases to shape content more than ever before.
Now, you might think this is different from the mainstream media of previous decades, which was supposed to aim to be more balanced and less politically charged.
Sure, political bias often overshadows factual reporting, especially in hot areas like technology and Bitcoin, but that’s nothing new.
Chasing the truth for money
The essence of media operations is the struggle between finding the truth and making money.
These companies make money in two ways: advertising, which connects potential buyers with sellers, and subscriptions, which include consumer subscriptions (such as a $10-per-month news subscription) and enterprise subscriptions (such as purchasing a Bloomberg terminal).
Looking back over the past fifteen years, the era of consumer-facing publications is over. Today, media outlets are thriving on both ends of the spectrum.
For example, The New York Times does the following: exceptionally goodPeople may not realize that The New York Times is actually a product company at this point, with 30-40% of its business coming from games and cooking, and another big chunk from its subscriptions.
The truth is that journalism ideally seeks to uncover and report the truth, but economic reality dictates otherwise.
Media companies need to engage their audiences and make money in different ways, so they can meet their audience’s desires, and dealing with media bias is important in the digital age when that bias has become more apparent. Sometimes sacrificing objective truth, sometimes sacrificing the actual work of journalism in favor of whatever brings in revenue.
This explains why media outlets tailor their content to their audience’s preferences.
Editorial decisions about which stories to highlight and how to frame issues depend on what attracts readers and viewers not only to the story itself but also to the multimedia ecosystem that the media outlet wants to offer to remain relevant and economically viable.
A Historical Perspective on Media Bias
But while these different sources of revenue represent a new approach to media, bias itself is not.
During the American Civil War, newspapers openly supported specific political factions. (Google “Copperhead Democrats (To get an idea of one of three different media, each choose a side.)
Today’s media works in exactly the same way, but with modern complexities.
Digital platforms and algorithms that curate content based on user preferences have led to echo chambers, where people often see information that supports their existing beliefs.
This echo chamber effect exacerbates media bias, as outlets produce content that aligns with their audience’s views to keep them engaged.
For technology and Bitcoin, this means that negative narratives will persist, making it difficult to combat biases.
Bitcoin is not for everyone
In an opinion piece I wrote last year, I wrote that Bitcoin is not for everyone, which means we need to look at specific groups. Bitcoin and the broader tech industry need to understand and deal with this landscape.
Because bias towards certain topics is good, it is part of the media. But the problem comes when this bias leads to writing things that are not realistic.
This is why people hate the mainstream media as a whole – not because it is biased, but because that bias often overrides factual news reporting. This is a relatively new phenomenon.
From the looks of it, it may continue this way, or media organizations may realize that if they continue to do this, they will lose the trust of their audience.
Or maybe the lesson is the opposite: If you go Very neutralYour audience may also react negatively, trying to cancel your contract or have you cancel their contracts.
Most media organizations, whether it’s CNN, The New York Times, or Fox News, know what their audience wants to hear. The only time you face a revolt is when you present the opposite narrative.
So carefully regulate your content consumption.
Because I know the world is scary now, but it’s going to get a lot worse.
This is a blog post written by our guest, Fernando Nicolic. The opinions expressed in this post are entirely his own and do not necessarily reflect the views of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.
