BBC's bitcoin coverage exposes a lack of sufficient fact-checking and reveals bias, raising concerns about its accuracy and accountability.

My latest piece in Forbes featuring  BBC nostr:npub1trr5r2nrpsk6xkjk5a7p6pfcryyt6yzsflwjmz6r7uj7lfkjxxtq78hdpu nostr:npub13lkyycj8s3da6fhndtj0wd6s3s2ahmq86s7wrruvzd4tnc66cgfqn4lpsy  #Bitcoin

https://www.forbes.com/sites/digital-assets/2024/09/04/bbc-bitcoin-coverage-raises-concern-over-its-journalism-and-trust/


Onward 🫡


Good article. Can these articles be reported to some authority? Line ofcom? I've no idea so don't know if it's possible.


Thank you for exposing the BBC so eloquently
nostr:nevent1qqsgynfwhlsuv8h33tlxsn37q5s0qykv8thfqpg4a4v2u5wr8u8hz2cpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzv9hxgtczyzaepels2vw54w4rnlu9py2hws60km7n4luulwx6yagencjpad807qcyqqqqqqgxaf25y


The BBC has been biased for some time now. It's hard to find a news site that tells unbiased news


Agreed, but unfortunately, there are large swaths of people who don’t see it.


This is the line that shall be towed - meeting over.  smh.
Cracking article  - proper journalism 🫂💜


nostr:npub1hwgw0uznr49t4gullpgfz4m5xnakl5a0l88m3k382xv7ys0tfmlsd503sg went to Ofcom


Great post 👍


Was the article deleted?


The BBC is biased???

Surely not!


Article ded for me. 404.


In the UK we used to think of the BBC with pride.
Now it's a national disgrace.
Woke, leftist, anti free speech. Etc.
Bitcoin coverage shows how little they value impartiality.


What did it for me was when they blatantly lied about the genocide happening in Palestine.


Pls do the economist next!

Pierre goes deep on their latest piece in this episode. Very much worth listening to:
https://fountain.fm/episode/H2MdK2f9KMZrZt4olqQq


Current location of the BBCs much vaunted reputation for impartiality found: https://image.nostr.build/d906298166a4cc0d330124099fb05cfb34e19c6ae2e066b2bfdee0178d8886d7.jpg


The link is dead: 404.


The article is no longer there?


Does this work?

https://apple.news/AMs15A7xSR9SbecjqkYN0Ew


I think Forbes took it down. But still works on my Apple News


Still works on my Apple News. Think Forbes took down!

https://apple.news/AMs15A7xSR9SbecjqkYN0Ew


I think Forbes took it down. Does this work for you? It does for me

https://apple.news/AMs15A7xSR9SbecjqkYN0Ew


I believe so

https://cryptonews.net/news/bitcoin/29727019/


All media is biased. Either intentionally or subconsciously.

Practically impossible these days to avoid it - need to be very aggressive/careful with sources of information & cross reference to validate - then make up your own mind. i.e. actually think for yourself.

This is too much effort for some so they welcome being given "answers"/opinions they can parrot. This is a common human trait and something present on NOSTR - decentralising the tech does not fix this.

Criticising owned rags like the BBC, WSJ, WP, etc etc is too easy - like shooting fish in a barrel. They should never be taken seriously or even acknowledged.

What NOSTR can offer is uncensored content, but you still need to think and make up your own mind - it doesn't remove bias or untruth just because its posted here.

More interested to hear peoples thoughts on this and how it can be solved?


Coffee on me ☕


It’s gone


Can you copy/pasta the article here?


hahah THAT describes everything the BBC report on 🤣


the pathetic pandering hacks that shit on bitcoiners without having the first clue about anything. meanwhile, their purchasing power keeps shrinking while they interview Kensian goons that think they will just use wizard economics to plan their way out of every crisis


Sweet thanks!  Here is the screenshot in case the link disappears again https://image.nostr.build/d124447ed495994c79e31c5106c73fd52a1989fb1eb435c22dcd56861c360779.jpg https://image.nostr.build/9b7e66d376103be5aa168599448c17f5a4f05c15344765bd2d7942c0d1ee5b7f.jpg


BBC's bitcoin coverage exposes a lack of sufficient fact-checking and reveals bias, raising concerns about its accuracy and accountability.

My latest piece in Forbes featuring  BBC nostr:npub1trr5r2nrpsk6xkjk5a7p6pfcryyt6yzsflwjmz6r7uj7lfkjxxtq78hdpu nostr:npub13lkyycj8s3da6fhndtj0wd6s3s2ahmq86s7wrruvzd4tnc66cgfqn4lpsy  #Bitcoin

https://www.forbes.com/sites/digital-assets/2024/09/04/bbc-bitcoin-coverage-raises-concern-over-its-journalism-and-trust/


Onward 🫡


🙌🏼🙌🏼🙌🏼great work. for an organisation that so vehemently forces 'unconscious bias training ' on their workforce, they seem terrible at recognising their real unconscious biases.


good points. i think the only solution is to have a workforce with *truly* diverse viewpoints, even untrendy and fringe viewpoints - and to truly encourage people to recognise their unconscious biases - not just in the 'agreed areas where biases occur' but also at the edges, and even outside, the overton window.


ps - http error 410? 🙈


also getting 410 for the link when searching on google. did they remove it cos it hit too close to home?!?!


This type of FUD from the BBC is embarrassing. Truly.


U mean ba$tard$ broadcasting channel (BBC) they have been int0 (WMD) weap0n$  of mass decepti0n 4 ages vampiring  pe0ples tax m0ney.

Reference: David icke & Russel


U mean ba$rtard  broadcasting channel (BBC) ? have been vampiring people's tax m0ney 4 (WMD) weap0n$ of ma$$ deception 2 proramg the $heeple.

pls refer David icke & Rissel

@gladstein @Daniel Batten #Bitcoin


What happened to the article? I only get a blank page?! Is there a mirror of it somewhere?


Post it as a long-form on nostr, plz.


Was thinking along the same lines.

Need to get past our natural inclination towards tribalism (again, something that NOSTR does not solve & is very much present here) & surrounding ourselves with people that echo our cherished beliefs.

People are happy with freedom of speech when they think it means they can say what they want (and often expect no consequences), but what it actually means is hearing things that you may not want to hear,  that your brain/ego will find difficult to process and will try to dismiss without actually considering in depth.

So groups of like-minded people form, shielded from contrary views, and are not constantly forced to re-evaluate their beliefs & opinions.

Would be good to see NOSTR become an environment where all are welcome to express any thought or opinion, no matter how controversial, providing its put respectfully, and conversations take place that help us develop a deep understanding of both sides of any belief we choose to hold.

This will take a very high amount of self-discipline though, and as numbers on the platform increase, the likelihood of all to be able to do this will decrease and you have the same problem.


Gone. Anyone Archive.org it?


Boosted 👊


Mainstream mierda at their best. This has been taken down by Apple News and by Forbes.
nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzpwusulc9x822h23el7zsj9thgd8mdlf6l7w0hrdzw5veufq7knhlqqsgynfwhlsuv8h33tlxsn37q5s0qykv8thfqpg4a4v2u5wr8u8hz2ctu9h38
 https://cryptonews.net/news/bitcoin/29727019/


I remember going back to UK late noughties after a 10 year break and being shocked at the BBC news coverage. It had changed, I don't hold a masters in communication but their coverage sounded like propaganda, not news. Sad really, because it's only got worse despite the few bastions of fearless reporting.


:). “We can’t find the page that you are looking for.”

Hum must have been good…


Here's a copy and paste , used web.archive.org. and instapaper.

--

BBC Bitcoin Coverage Raises Concern Over Its Journalism And Trust

web.archive.org · by Susie Violet Ward

LONDON, ENGLAND - NOVEMBER 13: The BBC headquarters at New Broadcasting House is illuminated at ... [+] night on November 13, 2012 in London, England. Tim Davie has been appointed the acting Director General of the BBC following the resignation of George Entwistle after the broadcasting of an episode of the current affairs programme 'Newsnight' on child abuse allegations which contained errors. (Photo by Oli Scarff/Getty Images)

Getty Images
The British Broadcasting Corporation, commonly known as the BBC, is renowned globally as a public service broadcaster primarily funded through a mandatory television license fee. Its duty is to inform, educate, and entertain while maintaining high standards of accuracy and impartiality.

However, recent events have raised concerns about the quality of its journalism and the accountability mechanisms in place to address errors and misinformation. One such case involves the article "Every Bitcoin payment 'uses a swimming pool of water,'" which shows some issues within the BBC's editorial process.

The Article And Its Issues
On November 27, 2023, BBC News published an article by technology reporter Chris Vallance, claiming that every bitcoin payment uses a significant amount of water. This headline is inaccurate. The original study cited by the article discusses water usage per transaction, not per payment. A bitcoin transaction and a payment are different, with a single transaction capable of containing thousands of payments - a crucial distinction.

Failing to differentiate between these terms misleads readers and exaggerates bitcoin’s water consumption by a factor of approximately 1,000. Cambridge University refers to this as 'semantic ambiguity,' akin to promising payment in 'a million dollars' without clarifying that the currency is Zimbabwean dollars, not US dollars. De Vries' use of such ambiguity leads to a similarly misleading outcome.

In a statement provided to Forbes, Alex Neumüller from the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance clarified: "In my understanding, there are currently no reliable estimates of the direct water consumption by mining operations. When discussing water consumption, we are likely referring to the indirect consumption associated with power generation rather than the water consumption directly attributable to mining farm operations. It is also important to note the semantically subtle but technically significant difference between water withdrawal and consumption in once-through systems, which is a distinction people should be mindful of as well."

Neumüller’s statement reinforces that the water usage reported in the BBC article likely refers to indirect water consumption associated with energy production rather than directly with bitcoin mining.

Alex DeVries, the study’s author, told Forbes, “There is no such distinction in my work; my article only states “transactions,” but the BBC took this as “payments,” which is inaccurate."

Editorial Oversight And Fact-Checking
The BBC has an editorial process meant to ensure the accuracy and reliability of its content. However, the bitcoin article's publication calls these processes' effectiveness into question. The BBC declined a Freedom of Information request for details on this article's editorial process and fact-checking, citing the FOI Act's exemption for journalism. As stated in the email correspondence from FOI enquiries at the BBC, the act reads:

FOI Enquiries - Information Rights, BBC Legal

FOI Enquiries - Information Rights, BBC Legal
This refusal prevents public scrutiny and undermines trust in the BBC's editorial integrity.

The lack of transparency is further worsened by the apparent failure to fact-check the primary source thoroughly. The study's author, Alex DeVries, is affiliated with the Dutch Central Bank, a potential conflict of interest not disclosed in the article. Upon inquiry, De Vries clarified, “The DNB is not and has never been involved in my research. The purpose of the DNB is the [sic] ensure compliance of financial institutions in the Netherlands (including crypto service providers) with financial regulations, which does not relate to my research either.” This affiliation is problematic due to bitcoin's ability to disintermediate and potentially render central banking obsolete.

In 2018, Cambridge University debunked DeVries's methodology of measuring bitcoin resource consumption per transaction, using the same instrument as the basis for DeVries' commentary and the BBC article, as "not a meaningful metric".

Sai and Vranken (2024) have also comprehensively debunked DeVries' methods.

Cambridge University criticized this approach for not distinguishing between transactions and payments. It does not consider the layered structure of blockchain transactions, which can contain multiple payments within a single transaction, distorting the true resource consumption metrics.

The BBC's Accountability Mechanisms
The response to the FOI request highlights an issue: the BBC's exemption from disclosing information regarding journalism under the FOI Act. This exemption protects journalistic independence but creates a loophole where accountability is minimized. When inaccuracies occur, such as in the bitcoin article, there is no straightforward mechanism for the public to seek redress or ensure corrections are made.

As the BBC's internal review process does not cover these requests, it forces individuals to appeal to the Information Commissioner's Office. In this case, this lengthy process ended with the ICO upholding the BBC's denial.

The Need For Reform
For the BBC to maintain its position as a trusted public service broadcaster, it must address these issues of transparency and accountability. First, it should establish clearer guidelines and more rigorous fact-checking processes, especially for complex subjects like bitcoin. Secondly, the BBC should consider revising its internal review procedures to allow for greater scrutiny and response to public complaints, even those falling under the journalism exemption.

The BBC should enhance its transparency by disclosing potential conflicts of interest and ensuring that verifiable and credible sources support all claims made in its articles.

BBC coverage of bitcoin since 2013, as per Bitcoin Perception, has been consistently negative. In fact, the situation has deteriorated, with only negative media coverage continuing, despite a growing number of peer-reviewed articles supporting bitcoin's positive environmental impacts.

The BBC has characterized it as risky and dangerous, demonizing the best-performing asset of the last decade. This long-standing bias further demonstrates the need for the BBC to reevaluate its approach to covering emerging technologies and financial innovations like bitcoin.

Ensuring Accountability And Accuracy
This BBC article on bitcoin's water usage shows how poor coverage and lack of accountability can disseminate misinformation. This organisation owes it to the public to uphold the highest standards of journalism and ensure its processes are transparent and accountable. When there is accountability, it becomes easier to trust the information provided.

Despite multiple attempts, no substantive responses were received. The BBC Press Office and Chris Vallance were contacted several times, with only one correspondent acknowledging receipt of emails, but no answers have been provided.

After re-contacting the press office and relevant correspondents, instructions were provided for filing an editorial complaint. Though the process was initially said to take ten days, there were only delays, an apology, and a suggestion to contact Ofcom. Despite filing a complaint with Ofcom, two weeks have passed with no response.

This sequence—from the FOI denial to the lack of action from both the BBC and Ofcom—has spanned nearly 10 months, though pursuit of the matter was delayed at times due to other commitments.

This is not an isolated incident; there has been little to no positive bitcoin coverage from the BBC despite it’s benefits in promoting financial freedom, innovation, and environmental solutions. The pieces that have been published are often provably wrong, spreading misinformation across other media outlets and ultimately harming consumers.

BBC Coverage - Spread of misinformation

BBC Coverage - Spread of misinformation
The consistent dissemination of inaccurate information demonstrates the need for the BBC to reevaluate its approach to covering bitcoin and related technologies.

If its bitcoin coverage reflects its fact-checking and bias, the organization is neither impartial nor adequately thorough in its verification processes. A retraction is still warranted. The BBC must address these issues to maintain credibility and public trust. Proper oversight and clarity are essential for a public service broadcaster.

web.archive.org · by Susie Violet Ward


And it's gone. Can you post using highlighter.com or some other long form most client?

https://media.tenor.com/oF2vRAXPoxIAAAAC/joker-its-gone.gif


Unfortunately down 😓 nostr:nprofile1qqsthy887pf36j465w0ls5y32a6rf7m06whlnnacmgn4rx0zg845alcpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzvuhsm89p8k please put on Habla.News. If you need any help just DM me here on on tg.


For Zeus!


The BBC has long been biased, just look at the coverage they have during the referendum, Covid etc etc - I don’t watch their news programmes at all any more.


Cheers 🥂 my beautiful friend. Thanks.

Also, gotta get my Fedi working so I can send Sats again. Still, genuine thank you for all the work you do. 🫡


BBC's bitcoin coverage exposes a lack of sufficient fact-checking and reveals bias, raising concerns about its accuracy and accountability.

My latest piece in Forbes featuring  BBC nostr:npub1trr5r2nrpsk6xkjk5a7p6pfcryyt6yzsflwjmz6r7uj7lfkjxxtq78hdpu nostr:npub13lkyycj8s3da6fhndtj0wd6s3s2ahmq86s7wrruvzd4tnc66cgfqn4lpsy  #Bitcoin

https://www.forbes.com/sites/digital-assets/2024/09/04/bbc-bitcoin-coverage-raises-concern-over-its-journalism-and-trust/