On the cover page of The Economist

[Carlton Banks]

The first time I knew about bitcoin was about 3 years, I read an article in The Economist. I did not take it seriously. The bitcoin has grown a lot since then.

The first time I found out about Bitcoin 3 years ago, I too was an occasional reader of The Economist. I stopped taking The Economist seriously.

[thejaytiesto]

The first time I knew about bitcoin was about 3 years, I read an article in The Economist. I did not take it seriously. The bitcoin has grown a lot since then.

The first time I found out about Bitcoin 3 years ago, I too was an occasional reader of The Economist. I stopped taking The Economist seriously.

Lol, I also found out about Bitcoin 3 years ago because I saw it on TV. They were talking about how it was a tool for terrorist and drug dealers on the "dark web" and the price was at about 700 dollars the first time I ever opened Bitcoinwisdom.com. Good ol times. Luckily i saw the light and stuck around waiting for a lower price to buy as much as possible. I knew even at 1.2K was insanely underrated.

[Pab]

It's great to have an article in the Economist about bitcoin. Not quite, mostly about blockchain technology. I believe this could be a better approach to have economists (people) appreciate bitcoin. Most have debunked bitcoin for it's deflationary properties.

The article talks about nothing bitcoiners wouldn't know:

...But most unfair of all is that bitcoin’s shady image causes people to overlook the extraordinary potential of the “blockchain”, the technology that underpins it. This innovation carries a significance stretching far beyond cryptocurrency. The blockchain lets people who have no particular confidence in each other collaborate without having to go through a neutral central authority. Simply put, it is a machine for creating trust.

Direct link:
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21677198-technology-behind-bitcoin-could-transform-how-economy-works-trust-machine

Via Google if site wouldn't let you read the article:
https://www.google.com/search?q=The+trust+machine+site%3Aeconomist.com&oq=The+trust+machine+site%3Aeconomist.com

Thanks for direct link,good article.Economist is readed all over the world not only in Europe.Will bring some people attention to btc. and his technology,finally press is not talking about btc price,scandals but about technology
People are tired of centralised economys and thay dont trust banks anymore

[OROBTC]

Wow guys, this is a huge freaking news! You have to earn a right to be in this magazine, let alone to be on the cover page! This will introduce Bitcoin to the higher class, more eminent people that are reading the Economist!

I can only say that Bitcoin is in a fifth gear when it comes to promotion, adoption and acknowledgement by the masses!

Yes, the demographics of the people (high education, high income) who read The Economist are very favorable for us hoping that Bitcoin gains the exposure we need "to get BTC into fifth gear" (nicely put, MickeyB).

That magazine is read all over the world by rich & connected people.  Many of them will be taking a look at BTC if only out of curiosity.  And some of them will become heavy hitters.

Indeed, this is very good news as so many of you above have written.  

[Timeline]

Nice that Bitcoin gets some free advertising.

[jeffthebaker]

Nice that Bitcoin gets some free advertising.

Bitcoin? No. Blockchain? Yes.

The actual story on Bitcoin in the Economist doesn't hail Bitcoin as a currency, it appreciates the blockchain technology behind it and predicts that banks and other businesses can create their own blockchains for whatever use they see fit.

[BitcoinFortune]

Nice that Bitcoin gets some free advertising.

Bitcoin? No. Blockchain? Yes.

The actual story on Bitcoin in the Economist doesn't hail Bitcoin as a currency, it appreciates the blockchain technology behind it and predicts that banks and other businesses can create their own blockchains for whatever use they see fit.

Yes. The article is mainly about the blockchain technology. It also mentioned Ethereum, which is block chain as well as a platform for many usages.

[CIYAM]

I thought it should read "The trustless machine"? There is no trust in bitcoin, as it is not needed.

That is a common misconception (that Adam Back has mentioned several times) - you have to trust the network (if all your nodes are feeding you a fork then as far as you know that is the correct blockchain).

[Slark]

Do you realize what exact words are they using on the cover? It is not: Bitcoin can change the world - instead it is - How technology BEHIND bitcoin (I assume: blockchain) can change world.
This is a huge difference.

[CIYAM]

The "blockchain" is the genius of Bitcoin (not the currency).

Interestingly enough Satoshi basically invented nothing (even the blockchain concept had been documented before Bitcoin).

What he (or they) did was simply put together a bunch of ideas into a practical and working piece of P2P software.

[Denker]

The article is great to read in many terms.But again it's "Praise the blockchain and forget Bitcoin"!
Therefore I like to link to Erik Vorhees' article "It's all about the Blockchain".

http://moneyandstate.com/its-all-about-the-blockchain/

First, let’s understand why the change in narrative had to happen, why it was necessary and indeed inevitable.

Bitcoin, to many in the world who have casually heard about it, is an uncomfortable and cryptic creature, existing somewhere between Ponzi Scheme and “money used by bad people.” Didn’t Bitcoin go bankrupt in Japan? Wasn’t the CEO arrested? To others, it’s just downright weird and unnecessary. Visa works just fine, thank you.

More importantly, though, to professionals in the money realm – to bankers and investors and financial regulators – Bitcoin is an awkward and annoying development, a technology almost all of them dismissed as absurd and useless, and yet it keeps growing. Bitcoin promises a dangerous world without strict top-down financial control. Terrorism. Think of the children. Bitcoin made the term “fiat” a thing, and when something has a name, it can be critiqued. Every day Bitcoin exists, it demonstrates the naive idea that money may be able to work without central planning. Worst of all, Bitcoin brings with it an obnoxious cult spouting proletariat nonsense like “financial privacy is a human right,” and “money should move faster than an anvil FedEx’d to Singapore.”

What respectable banker wants to deal with that?

And while the technology brings with it vast promises of financial innovation, these cannot be discussed in terms of “Bitcoin,” because this term brings with it all the aforementioned baggage. One cannot discuss Bitcoin in polite company, for the conversation may veer into one of monetary theory, human rights, massive sovereign theft and bank fraud… better stick with the weather.

But how do you convince your boss or shareholders that you’re keeping pace with innovation? They read the news, they know that disintermediation is a thing. At the edges of their mind, they have a sense that, perhaps, charging $45 to send a money transfer message is neither logical nor sustainable. As Jamie Dimon recently warned in his annual letter to shareholders, “Silicon Valley is coming.”

Enter “Blockchain.”

Ahhh, what a term! It encapsulates all the magic, all the technological brilliance, all the promise and the sparkle of true financial innovation. And it does it without devolving into a discussion of Silk Road or Jekyll Island.

Blockchains, as a concept, are not controversial. Bitcoin is highly controversial. That is why the narrative changed – because “Bitcoin” makes financial professionals uncomfortable. There was no conspiracy to change the subject, it just happened naturally; the path of least resistance.

[n2004al]

Arriving at the cover page of "The Economist" it is not at all easy. It is one of the most prestigious magazine in Europe and even more. I haven't found any article about bitcoin in the link given by OP (maybe is my fault) to have a more clear idea about the meaning and the aim of this fact. But it is enough even the meaning of cover page to understand the behavior and the position of this magazine versus it.

If The Economist think that bitcoin will (can) change the world, this, not only is a important recognition from this prestigious and very influential magazine versus bitcoin, but even a prelude of the possible advancement of the status of bitcoin in Great Britain. Actually its status is "private money". Maybe soon we will see it to have the new status as a full currency with all the power that such status can give.

[Blawpaw]

Yeah! this should have made some upward pressure on the price. This year was o a hell of a great year for bitcoin and the blockchain. I believe next year will be even better!

[Gleb Gamow]

This is bigger than many people might think... They have over 1.5 million average weekly circulation and more or less 50% of that is sold in the U.S.A

They also have about 11 million twitter followers and about 6 million Facebook followers and +/- 10 million Google Plus followers. 

We are not talking about the local news paper here... The viewers are mostly financial and highly educated people with loads of money to invest. 

Thank you kindly for putting this into perspective. Interesting stats!

[Carlton Banks]

This is bigger than many people might think... They have over 1.5 million average weekly circulation and more or less 50% of that is sold in the U.S.A

They also have about 11 million twitter followers and about 6 million Facebook followers and +/- 10 million Google Plus followers. 

We are not talking about the local news paper here... The viewers are mostly financial and highly educated people with loads of money to invest. 

Thank you kindly for putting this into perspective. Interesting stats!

Not to mention that it's around 150 years old. And so the historical list of proprietors and investors is interesting.

[medUSA]

This is bigger than many people might think... They have over 1.5 million average weekly circulation and more or less 50% of that is sold in the U.S.A
They also have about 11 million twitter followers and about 6 million Facebook followers and +/- 10 million Google Plus followers. 
We are not talking about the local news paper here... The viewers are mostly financial and highly educated people with loads of money to invest. 

Not only that, a large percentage of those published are put in school and public libraries around the world. The exposure is huge.

Do you realize what exact words are they using on the cover? It is not: Bitcoin can change the world - instead it is - How technology BEHIND bitcoin (I assume: blockchain) can change world.
This is a huge difference.

Yes, it's not ideal. At least the article holds a neutral stance regarding bitcoin and the word "Bitcoin" is on the front cover. It will get newbies interested.

[cjmoles]

The "blockchain" is the genius of Bitcoin (not the currency).

Interestingly enough Satoshi basically invented nothing (even the blockchain concept had been documented before Bitcoin).

What he (or they) did was simply put together a bunch of ideas into a practical and working piece of P2P software.

Exactly, the one virtue that Bitcoin does have, however, is its community support....the lunatic fringe who inspired the early adopters who now move the chain and confirm the ledger.  The blockchain works the magic but the community waves the wand.  Bitcoin is the community that stands behind it; the community is what makes exchanging bitcoin unique.

Having said that, the blockchain technology that many economist are getting excited about is the key that makes this whole concept work.  Magazines such as the "Economist," are in the process of building another community around a blockchain technology that will change the way people interact economically....it may not be the community we call "Bitcoin," but it will be a very valuable resource nonetheless.

[ajareselde]

Yeah! this should have made some upward pressure on the price. This year was o a hell of a great year for bitcoin and the blockchain. I believe next year will be even better!

I agree. The trending is also increasing, with all the good news and publications. On http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=bitcoin&date=today%203-m&cmpt=date&tz=Etc%2FGMT-2
you can clearly see that the impact is highly positive. I just hope the interest doesn't dissipate as fast as it arose.

[isvicre]

This is very good thing because it basically means stable rise for price.
These papers cannot cause bubbles but strongish uptrends.

[Carlton Banks]

The "blockchain" is the genius of Bitcoin (not the currency).

Interestingly enough Satoshi basically invented nothing (even the blockchain concept had been documented before Bitcoin).

What he (or they) did was simply put together a bunch of ideas into a practical and working piece of P2P software.

Exactly, the one virtue that Bitcoin does have, however, is its community support....the lunatic fringe who inspired the early adopters who now move the chain and confirm the ledger.  The blockchain works the magic but the community waves the wand.  Bitcoin is the community that stands behind it; the community is what makes exchanging bitcoin unique.

Having said that, the blockchain technology that many economist are getting excited about is the key that makes this whole concept work.  Magazines such as the "Economist," are in the process of building another community around a blockchain technology that will change the way people interact economically....it may not be the community we call "Bitcoin," but it will be a very valuable resource none the less.

Magazines such as The Economist have spent the past 4 years of Bitcoin's existence trying their best to ignore one of the most extraordinary technological achievements of all time, and in the arena of finance no less. To spend any portion of their capitulation attempting to denigrate what Bitcoin genuinely represents is simply a tacit admission of fault on their part. The vast proportion of their coverage has been spent interviewing Mike Hearn; now persona non grata amongst professionals, and strangely also the one developer who sought to change Bitcoin into a system that more closely resembles central banking in comparison to what Satoshi originally proposed.

So any attempt to portray The Economist as somehow the leaders of a cryptographic vanguard is misleading at best. Before Bitcoin, The Economist's name was to some extent synonymous with being well informed about technology and finance (amongst other qualities). Since Bitcoin, no longer. Their bias on monetary issues is naked.