NEW JOURNALIST INVITES READERS TO SELL THEIR "BITCRASH", A "DANGEROUS" CURRENCY THAT COULD "DETABILIZE THE ECONOMY"

A Dutch journalist came to swell the ranks of critics of Bitcoin, inviting readers to sell their digital currency, considering that it was "dangerous".

In an article published on Saturday, Sandra Phlippen, chief economist for the news site AD.nl, argues that "bitcrash" is dangerous, as no financial institution is there to control it, and that it poses a threat to the economy. This article has sparked debate - and for some, it is unclear whether this is a deliberate exaggeration or a new alarmist attack on digital currency.

It's Bitcoin's fault

According to Poe's law, "without a clear indication of the intention of the author of a writing, it is difficult or impossible to distinguish between a truly outrageous statement and a deliberate exaggeration for parody purposes."

Does this law apply to "Bitcrash, or the reason you should sell [your Bitcoins] immediately," this article published by Sandra Phlippen?

Hard to say ... In this forum, she attacked Bitcoin by evoking the everlasting arguments of money laundering and tax evasion - but without giving any number, or cite any study. This reflection seems to be limited to the vision of an economist who may have discovered the existence of Bitcoin a few weeks ago, and who would not have taken care to conduct the necessary research.

She could have mentioned, for example, this study that we presented to you a few days ago. If the latter indicates that Bitcoin was actually mainly used for illegal reasons a few years ago, the majority of BTC portfolios would now be used to conduct lawful transactions.

The economist is also tackling energy consumption related to bitcoin mining. It evokes a "computing power very harmful to the environment."

It is not wrong on this point, since Bitcoin actually consumes more electricity than 159 countries. But it would have been interesting to mention these figures, and to try a comparison with the electricity consumption related to the activity of the banking institutions, ...

She also explains that the banks have "no control over Bitcoin," which could reinforce a potential economic crisis - without mentioning any number, any study that would give an idea of ​​the extent of the possible role of the digital currency in such a crisis.

A dependent article

But it fails to mention that Bitcoin can give some citizens the means to regain control over their money, by freeing themselves from certain inflationary government policies or exchange control policies.

We would have liked her to quote the case of those Zimbabweans who have no choice but to go through Bitcoin to guard against rampant inflation - because they know that BTC's maximum offer is written in marble. .

We would have liked her to mention these websites, these restaurants, these shops, ... who all trust the Bitcoin protocol to receive payments.

We would have liked her to mention those people of African descent, who found in Bitcoin a way to send money to their relatives in need, at a lower cost.

In short, we would have liked a little more objectivity. Because if the journalist castigates Bitcoin, she offers no solution, except to sell this currency "dangerous".

But Ms. Phlippen is far from being the only editorialist to tackle the digital currency:

Elle explique par ailleurs que les banques n’ont “aucun contrôle sur le Bitcoin,” ce qui pourrait renforcer une potentielle crise économique – sans évoquer le moindre chiffre, la moindre étude qui permettrait de se faire une idée de l’ampleur du possible rôle de la monnaie numérique dans une telle crise.

Un article à charge

Mais elle omet de préciser que le Bitcoin peut donner à certains citoyens les moyens de reprendre le contrôle sur leur argent, en s’affranchissant de certains politiques gouvernementales inflationnistes, ou de politiques de contrôle des changes.

On aurait aimé qu’elle cite le cas de ces zimbabwéens qui n’ont d’autre choix que de passer par le Bitcoin pour se prémunir face à une inflation galopante – car il savent que l’offre maximale de BTC est inscrite dans le marbre.

On aurait aimé qu’elle évoque ces sites internet, ces restaurants, ces boutiques,… qui font tous confiance au protocole Bitcoin pour recevoir des paiements.

On aurait aimé qu’elle mentionne ces personnes d’origine africaine, qui ont trouvé dans le Bitcoin un moyen pour envoyer, à moindre frais, de l’argent à leurs proches dans le besoin.

Bref, on aurait aimé un peu plus d’objectivité. Car si la journaliste fustige le Bitcoin, elle ne propose aucune solution, si ce n’est de revendre cette monnaie “dangereuse”.

Mais Mme Phlippen est loin d’être la seule éditorialiste à s’attaquer vertement à la monnaie numérique :

The least we can say is that Bitcoin seems to not leave indifferent ....

Ironic?

Bitcoin ATM distributorMs. Phlippen finishes his indictment by attacking the ICOs, these fundraisers in crypto-currencies through which, investors would buy "only the wind".

While some criticisms of these ICOs are justified (and many of them will fail in the mission they set themselves), let's remember that Eethereum, the second largest Blockchain network in the world, was launched in the summer of 2014 through an ICO.

Ethereum makes it possible to create decentralized applications that empower users while offering them complete transparency regarding the data they exchange with these applications.

For news.bitcoin.com, it is difficult to know if the journalist is trying to "troll" the readers, or if she is convinced of what she is saying.

Anyway, we can see that some mainstream media may tend to lack objectivity and distance when they evoke Bitcoin, the currency that "drives you crazy".

Thus, this weekend, many media have relayed the story of drug traffickers who use Bitcoins distributors to launder money.

Here is what we read:

"Inspectors say they are witnessing a sharp rise in the use of digital currencies by criminals walking around coffee shops, newsagents, and shops to resell their illegally earned earnings in virtual currency ATMs."

Such articles fail to specify that the offense itself - the purchase or sale of drugs - was wholly conducted with fiduciary money.

Between the "fake news", the titles touting, the pseudo-satire, it is a pity to see that some general media (they are many to carry out extensive research, and to propose reasoned reflections) do not seek to take the This phenomenon is likely to be necessary, but it is expected to grow in the years to come.