Bitcoin Forum

http://www.coindesk.com/will-bitcoin-have-its-moment-in-the-trump-era/

The propaganda in the above article includes:

- Suggestion that we use cryptocurrency as world reserve currency, but then does a bait and switch and says, oh but not Bitcoin (likely a federated chain run by the state or central bankers) HAHA

- Mentions the Federal Reserve not only in a positive light, but that they should have dictatorial power over the monetary system to operate a debt based scam currency and anyone who opposes them is bad or unreasonable

- Mentions the IMF and World bank in a positive manner when they're just malevolent institutions like the fed

- Writer dismisses metals as useful (gold/silver).  Bankers despise serfs using metals because gold and silver circulated in native form as coins are the only known sound monetary systems.  Gold "backed" currency is useless because it's essentialy the same thing as fiat in practice.  

- Affiliation with MIT (where chain anchor came from to turn Bitcoin into a permissioned ledger run by the state)

- Writer is against letting nations control their borders.  Another red flag.  Bankers and shills like Soros are trying to flood every 1st world nation with 3rd world immigrants because only a homogenous population like Iceland can unite to throw the bankers out.  If you flood a nation with 3-4 warring factions, it's a divide and conquer strategy to keep them enslaved.

- Writer is against people who want to withdraw from globalization and forced entanglements, which the US founding fathers explicity warned against.  Calls anyone that doesn't want to have endless wars for foreign entities "isolationist"

- Writer pulls the race card when anyone that has a basic understanding of sociology knows multicultural civilizations are far more likely to collapse than homogenous ones like Japan or China.  Trying to force "diversity" onto civilizations is always a divide and conquer strategy for someone else's benefit (usually the central bankers to weaken the cohesion of society to prevent being overthrown)

- Demonizes Russia for no reason (we all know the real reason - threw out Soros and refused to bow down to the bankers)

- So, in summary, Coindesk puts out propaganda directly from Federal Reserve central banking shills now.

- Also, never trust anyone as far as you can throw them that claims Cryptocurency is a superior store of value to metals.  Cryptocurrency has uses, but it will never be a superior store of value.  You need to destroy the entire planet to black swan metals, while cryptocurrency is much easier to hijack or destroy.  Metals will always be the base of Exter's pyramid and there is no possible way for cryptocurrency to replace it.  The price of Bitcoin can still go up like 100x, but if the market cap of metals is not larger than crypto, you're in an irrational market and things are going to implode.

Midia is just point of view from writters. Any midia will tend to one side.

I'm happy that you can have your own opinions however none truth is 100%, again, I'm happy that you don't let the midia ride your mind.

Maybe you can show your pov with the writters or well, write some articles. Everything have 2 sides.

As arransiv said, media is biased, it cant be looked at from a neutral perspective, we could have see that in thebrecent elections, and it's the best not to take a ll those articles as facts or a one true fact.

This article is labelled as 'opinion' not 'feature' on coindesk.

Coindesk has always been suspect like everything else, I've put up a sign on the world "gone fishing", and won't be back.

Yes, we know, which is their scapegoat clause saying when people inevitably read their absurd propaganda they can say "oh, we didn't write it, some other guy did!  It's not our fault our website is pushing international banking propaganda!"

Coindesk knew exactly what they were publishing and expected that this publication will cause a stir. Hence they added a Disclaimer:

"The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, CoinDesk."

Something like this make me think that this article is against official views represented by Coindesk. Which is even more stupid.

Why they publish articles which are against their beliefs?

digital currency group and blockstream are both in the 90+ bankers hyperledger collaboration

It depends on any type of readers view whatever shit was posted there. If a reader will just read and read on a same source then they are not a type of a research person who only taking point on a single side and will just believe in it.

With the lots of sources now where we can get bitcoin articles including news, Coindesk is just a part of it but never considered as a primary source of a authenticate information about bitcoin.

this is just a trick to say what they want to say and make the effect they wanted to make but at the same time escape any consequences buy easily saying we don't completely agree with this, blah blah!

it is a trick news media always does.
as an example you can see what they did with the satoshi news, they never said "Craig Wright is Satoshi" if you read the articles they released the hot/clickbait news and never said anything clearly.

this is the same, they spread crap and only say it is not our views!

Well, If it is not blatantly shilling... then they most probably open the floor for everyone's opinion. If they take sides and chose not to publish

specific apposing opinions, then I would agree with you. The funny thing is, these guys built their site on "Bitcoin" articles and then they

turned 360 degrees. "Under new Management", seems so applicable now...   ::)

You don't need to believe everything this website is telling you, the internet is freedom of speech. You could continue to read the website, but simply make you own judgment from the story and make you own opinion.

You can validate the information from other reliable source.

but some people still have the mindset of the good old days where they think 'media' get paid to do the research and then explain it to the lay person accurately but in a simple form.

things have changed its now used to twist accurate information and not make it simple which hides the truth and then blames people for reading it without the people doing the checks themselves..

you're never going to convince a media outlet to change its ways simply by no longer viewing them with a loss of a 0.001cent pay per clickbait fee , especially if they are funded by hundreds of thousands of dollars privately.. the 0.001cent click income wont rivel their private income to run a story

the simple solution is to never believe anything you read in media and to find non-media proof/evidence/research from real sources.

This text looks exactly like something written by Soros or Hillary.

Making an enemy out of Russia: check.
Want to have a cashless society not with bitcoin but their own centralized scamcoin: check
Supporting Globalisation (also illegal immigrants): check
Being against GOLD; check.

This is definitely written by Soros himself. Or he used his footsoldier Hillary to do the work for him.

R0ach, you make very good arguments, and I agree with most of what you said.   Too much immigration,  too much poluting of the gene pool, too much crime.

Gotta love people who decry the fact that we're moving away from physical money, and yet they embrace bitcoin wholeheartedly.

I really couldn't to imagine this from coindesk, I thought such thing would be written by only cointelegraph. Such news publishing is bad because now most part of web media is hiding truth from people and often people don't check trust and that's bad.
Despite this, I don't agree that they must be destroyed but if they delete this, it will be good and halfly reclaim of their "fault".

Let's read these article with a pinch of salt. Most bitcoin related sites publish "pro-bitcoin" articles. Perhaps we can supplement that with articles (not many) from the mainstream media- to have a better understanding of what the "layman's" thought on the latest development of bitcoin.

Thank you for stating this. It is pertinent information to this topic.

I've seen some decent articles recently,
i've also seen articles that are pure propaganda, blatant lies with no sources or fact-checking.

Some writers seem to be worse than others.

But I would be wary to trust anything on that site.
Some of the writers have an obvious agenda. Usually its to promote one product while slamming its competition.

The last time I read something from Coindesk was maybe back in early or mid 2015, and I'm kind of glad I stopped reading their stuff. This kind of stuff just helps to justify my decision.

It's a shame they went this route, before they weren't terrible but now it seems they've just constantly gotten worse.

I don't know about destroying their site, but it has to be changed.

Now the problem is how do you know where the real sources are, since most of the information we get comes from the media?

if they mention a company or a quote. search for that quote.
if they are not mentioning anything factual then deem it as just their unbacked opinion
for instance, the OP links an article. you could research
Michael J Casey
Digital Currency Initiative at the MIT Media Lab.
book:"The Age of Cryptocurrency"

and come to an opinion yourself about how informed this guy is. and how accurately coindesk may have quoted him

One of my family members are in the news business and he says a lot of the things being spread in the media is pure propaganda and it is not what they have posted, but rather what they have conveniently left out of the news. They will spam the stuff that they want you to hear, but the most important thing is the stuff that they want to hide or ignore.

Look at the articles you are not seeing on their site, to identify the corrupted media outlets.

Coindesk - Check
Bloomberg - Check

Is it not CoinDesk's job to also be neutral? The site itself must be open to all the views even if it is against the site owners view. The stupid thing to do is to block one view and make way only for another.

I think OP is reacting this way because the view of the author does not align with his own. So instead of attacking the integrity of the site, why not make counter arguments with the author of the article to express your own view?

Because I assume the audience I'm speaking to isn't composed of 5 year olds and already knows that issuing currency via borrowing at interest is inherently a slavery scam, as opposed to non-debt based currency where there's no continuous service fee paid to the lender.

The big bitcoin news sites have been corrupted for a long time to post only paid advertisements in the form of news articles. I've stopped reading them ages ago, it is simply too obvious what they are doing.

The problem is that new sites will eventually succumb to the same practices as the big ones once they smell the money.

They don't produce news anymore, they simply post when a coins pays them to show something "new" they have.

The idea to use cryptocurrency as a world reserve currecny is really stupid.

Cryptocurrencies are just a bunch of programming code.

Anyway,i agree that 99% of what they write is propaganda.

Coindesk is partially owned by blockchain.info ... They serve its investors interests :)   What did you expect?

If you read the BTC media, you might feel that all the world is using or start using BTC when it's not like that at all :)

news.bitcoin.com is owned by blockchain too? https://news.bitcoin.com/bitcoins-biggest-wallet-best-month-ever/

I'm not sure all the world start using bitcoin, but if I see the price movement right now, the price moving stable than last year ago. I think it's because some country start to using blockchain technology, so some government start to investing bitcoin(i afraid if someday they will turn into big whales).

Would be a interesting thread to create a directory and showing potential issues for all sites bitcoin related.
The site mentioned I only check for the price of bitcoin as the site is easy to recall,other than that I have found the stories to be misleading to often.

The discord in the community really is disruptive in getting people to understand what bitcoin is about. With all these different agendas,it just spreads us thinner in already thin community.

These sites need to be held accountable for any issues they help foster.

Then that is where your argument becomes invalid because you are now attacking the character of those who do not see eye to eye with your views. Instead, why not start by objectively explaining your views and be open to any counter arguments that author may have.

If that is all you can come up with then you have already lost the audience because you are also acting like a 5 year old.

I think this coindesk is been paid for all the content they published, it looks like they are only there for profit objective because I saw it on the site where they charge $199  for single press release publication not to talk more of featured news.

they publish alot of shits because there are no real subjects. of course, they have an agenda. their investor's agenda :)

Which is saddening, in my opinion, since they were decent a few years ago and would put out actual news stories from things happening around the world. Been a while since I've read their stuff, but it sounds like it really has taken a tumble from where it used to be.

Has the news within the crypto world just become so platonic that it sucks to report on any of it?

Everything in this world today is for profit. Even the foundations that were set up by big companies and claim to be "not for profit".

The articles that are for sale on Coindesk are a scam. All the info in those documents are accessible online. With a little motivation and patience, a little googling will get you all the information you need. Some of the people who have the information you need are also accessible thru social media and email.

there are no real news or they are not daily...that's a fact.

Well, I however think it's quite the opposite actually.  I think this represents coindesk's real viewpoint, they just can't go ahead and label it "officially". These,
"The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, CoinDesk." are just convenient words they can hide behind,in case of reader's criticisms.

Anyway, no one really believes everything they read/hear in the news. That's like taking what anyone says at face value.
Seeing propaganda backed articles/"news", just serves to prove the "trustworthiness", or lack thereof, of a certain site.

Well the news is only an 'opinion'. But as what others said media really is biased even here in our country. Making news that will increase their rate and also money always play in any place including making some news like this(just an opinion) But I can't argue with this article, because the most influenced person in the world the US  president can do about this .

...

I don't read Coindesk either.  It's a crappy opinion, whether it reflects the editors' views or not.

r0ach lists the red-flags to beware of.  In general, anything that goes against personal freedom is bogus, and not to be trusted.  I agree w/ O/P that metals (Au, Pt, Ag, etc.) are the basis of wealth preservation ("Store of Value"), it will not be within our lifetimes that all digital currencies put together would come close to the value of gold worldwide.

Maybe in 100 years?  I won't be around to see.