Hype comparing now and then

[Luno]

For those of you that was around back in May-July 2011, how does the media attention then compare to now?

I know that the common public knowledge was smaller (fewer Wiki hits then) but I'm trying to compare the media attention now compared to a year and a half ago.

The number of news articles was 3 times larger then, but are the sources and quality better now and does the media attention differ this time?

[1713563634]

1713563634

[mccorvic]

For those of you that was around back in May-July 2011, how does the media attention then compare to now?

I know that the common public knowledge was smaller (fewer Wiki hits then) but I'm trying to compare the media attention now compared to a year and a half ago.

The number of news articles was 3 times larger then, but are the sources and quality better now and does the media attention differ this time?

I feel that last time the articles were not much more than "What is bitcoin?! Look at this whacky Internet thing!"

Now the articles are about actual events, sites that are accepting btc, and useful things of that nature.

[proudhon]

For those of you that was around back in May-July 2011, how does the media attention then compare to now?

I know that the common public knowledge was smaller (fewer Wiki hits then) but I'm trying to compare the media attention now compared to a year and a half ago.

The number of news articles was 3 times larger then, but are the sources and quality better now and does the media attention differ this time?

May to July 2011 covers a period were the tone of reporting changed dramatically over that period.  Prior to the MtGox hackcrash a lot of the media attention was positive (May).  Planet Money did a nice podcast on bitcoin, which was really good.  After the hackcrash, there was an enormous amount of negative media attention (July).

My sense now is that lots of reporters are taking it even more seriously than before the hackcrash, but at the same time I think a lot of the public is pretty dismissive of it.  I think the response after the hackcrash badly damaged bitcoin's reputation for most people.  They saw the reports, and came away thinking, "Ok, so that bitcoin thing is over".  A lot of people probably don't even bother with news about it since then.  It's just noise.

[Luno]

Thank you guys, that was what I was speculating about. That the media is getting more informed and that this can be seen as an image of general knowledge level about Bitcoin in the population.

[beckspace]

My sense now is that lots of reporters are taking it even more seriously than before the hackcrash, but at the same time I think a lot of the public is pretty dismissive of it.  I think the response after the hackcrash badly damaged bitcoin's reputation for most people.  They saw the reports, and came away thinking, "Ok, so that bitcoin thing is over".  A lot of people probably don't even bother with news about it since then.  It's just noise.

True. Bitcoin has scars.

[proudhon]

My sense now is that lots of reporters are taking it even more seriously than before the hackcrash, but at the same time I think a lot of the public is pretty dismissive of it.  I think the response after the hackcrash badly damaged bitcoin's reputation for most people.  They saw the reports, and came away thinking, "Ok, so that bitcoin thing is over".  A lot of people probably don't even bother with news about it since then.  It's just noise.

True. Bitcoin has scars.

Pretty deep ones, I think.  The positive side of that is that it gives the developers and the community more time and breathing room to work through some of the serious obstacles to wide scale adoption.  I think all the hacks and thefts bought bitcoin a good 5 years of fairly tepid adoption.  I don't anticipate a flood of investors/users sufficient to hold the price much above where it is now.  We could certainly see some spikes in the next few years that approach or possibly exceed the all time high, but I'm very skeptical that there will be enough money and use in the system to hold.

[Largo]

My sense now is that lots of reporters are taking it even more seriously than before the hackcrash, but at the same time I think a lot of the public is pretty dismissive of it.  I think the response after the hackcrash badly damaged bitcoin's reputation for most people.  They saw the reports, and came away thinking, "Ok, so that bitcoin thing is over".  A lot of people probably don't even bother with news about it since then.  It's just noise.

True. Bitcoin has scars.

That makes it just more sexy 

[proudhon]

TBH, It makes me a little nervous seeing all these fairly heavily trafficked sites adopt bitcoin, because I worry about a new flood of users who don't bother educating themselves on the risks, or, worse, site operators don't fully appreciate bitcoin's risks at this relatively early stage in its life, and, thus, usher in a new wave of people getting burned and prematurely turned off to something that's still very much experimental.

[Luno]

Sensible point Proudhorn, But I think it's out of the community's hands to apply slight braking now and careless newbies will get burned like in: "I've just formatted my drive, are my college savings gone?".

We will also see another breed of scammers: "A Nigerian prince left me a piece of paper with half a Bitcoin code on it.The other part of it is in a safe with my drug lord cousin which I owe money."

We all know how media works and when it's fed up with Bitcoin glamour, it will start printing disaster stories.

But a warning is in it's place Proudhorn.. Points taken.

[julz]

My sense now is that lots of reporters are taking it even more seriously than before the hackcrash, but at the same time I think a lot of the public is pretty dismissive of it.  I think the response after the hackcrash badly damaged bitcoin's reputation for most people.  They saw the reports, and came away thinking, "Ok, so that bitcoin thing is over".  A lot of people probably don't even bother with news about it since then.  It's just noise.

True. Bitcoin has scars.

Pretty deep ones, I think.  The positive side of that is that it gives the developers and the community more time and breathing room to work through some of the serious obstacles to wide scale adoption.  I think all the hacks and thefts bought bitcoin and good 5 years of fairly tepid adoption.  I don't anticipate a flood of investors/users sufficient to hold the price much above where it is now.  We could certainly see some spikes in the next few years that approach or possibly exceed the all time high, but I'm very skeptical that there will be enough money and use in the system to hold.

I think one of the deeper scars is the EFF's stance on it. 

We can add the Python Software Foundation to the list of those citing the EFF for not supporting Bitcoin.
(from Jesse Noller - one of the PSF directors)

Bitcoin Fans: Stop emailing me/tweeting me: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/06/eff-and-bitcoin … -> Risky for 501c3s.

Although...  it was naively and crudely spammed by Bitcoin fans from reddit - so that overenthusiasm is perhaps partly to blame! (embarrassing!)

Given that bitpay allows free transaction processing for 501c3s, without the need for the entity to touch bitcoins directly - this objection is pretty lame.

I'm not intending to open up yet another argument about EFF here - I understand why *they* choose not to accept it - but I think their published stance is taken as a more general reason for non-profits not to accept Bitcoin donations - so it's an ongoing thorn/scar on Bitcoin.
I don't think the EFF even understands the chilling effect they continue to have.
Sad for an organization that is otherwise so cognizant of issues around behavioural self-censorship.

[lebing]

dammit proudhon why must you be so pragmatic

[Luno]

talking about scars, thats how we got Bitcoin. EUR and USD needs to restore confidence also the following months!

[greyscale]

EFF will come around eventually. The more mainstream sites start accepting bitcoin (wordpress, 4chan, internet archive), the more ridiculous EFF's stance becomes.

[FreeMoney]

I think the response after the hackcrash badly damaged bitcoin's reputation for most people.  They saw the reports, and came away thinking, "Ok, so that bitcoin thing is over".  A lot of people probably don't even bother with news about it since then.  It's just noise.

That doesn't make sense.

"Ok so Bitcoin is done now"

Bitcoin news item
Bitcoin news item
Bitcoin news item
Bitcoin news item
Bitcoin news item
Bitcoin news item
Bitcoin news item

"Seeing Bitcoin in the headlines doesn't surprise or interest me since I know it is over"

Ok.....