Back in high school, part of my English classes (not language learning) was a semester on Bias in the Media and I think that it had a pretty profound effect on my mindset throughout life. Do not trust them. There are so many "discrepancies" in the way they report that either twist or completely omit the truth, aiming for maximum audience baiting and minimum effort.
And, this was thirty years ago.
Yes. I am old.
I'll never reveal my source!!
Because, I don't have one.
While I am sure that there are plenty of idiots out there who did take extremely large risks on the markets, you'll often notice that in clickbait articles like this that are made to trigger the fear mechanisms in the audience - there is no source. It is the way that many of the articles "source" their material now, using social platforms as if they are accurate and trusted pieces of information and acceptable and statistically relevant indicators of social temperature.
Who is they?
The social platform landscape is built for attention-seeking, not truth. It is made to drive engagement, not statistical fact. It targets emotional reaction, not analytical reflection. There is so little "trust" that can be put into anything that is said online, because not only does everyone have their personals agenda that skews their perspective provided, they are also anonymous and generally what they have said is unverifiable, meaning there is no reliable skin in the game. When it is coming from Twitter or Reddit, even the "support" that a post gets is not to be trusted.
Yet - because the media has printed it, those reading assume that there has been some due diligence performed, some kind of fact checking. But, this is very, very rarely the case, as they know that with the level of content and the speed of flow through, the chances of them being pulled up on it are very low and, the consequences incredibly slight. They have next to zero accountability for what they print. It is like an extreme form of beta software releases with the intention of crowdsourcing bug detection, but they have absolutely no care in improving the product. Instead, they just keep releasing buggy code constantly to a userbase that doesn't rely on the software for their daily bread.
However, unlike an operating system that is used to run a PC or support a business, this code does impact on our daily lives in many ways, including speeding the breakdown of informational integrity across and between groups. This affects our opinions, beliefs and therefore, the decisions we make going forward. This includes our investment decisions.
These articles trigger that primal fears of loss that dwell in all of us and because they make us consider and feel that loss, they warn us away, even if we wouldn't be silly enough to take a $400,000 loan to buy crypto. Our fear of being like "these idiots" will often outweigh our analytical considerations on a balanced and effective investment strategy - moving smaller amounts of disposable income into crypto, whilst investing the majority where we feel "safe" holding our funds.
But, remember that while Bitcoin is down and the FUD is swirling, darling tech companies like Atlassian are also down, with that one losing 60% in the last 6 months to mirror the losses on Bitcoin. Netflix is down 70%, Microsoft and Amazon down 40% - These are considered Bluechip stocks that offer a stable investment strategy - but those numbers tell a different story. Apple is down 20% this year and Alphabet down 40 since November too.
But those crypto investors are crazy!
There is an industry shakeup happening that I believe is going to take the tech industry to new heights, as the transfer from traditional industry increases. However, there is a "last hurrah" happening for many of the traditional portfolio stocks, driven by a very timely shift in geopolitics that enables them to extract all they can, before dumping out and into the new industries.
Sometimes it is good to look at what the world's largest investors are doing and there is an interesting fund out there in Norway, the Norwegian Oil Fund - the world's largest sovereign fund that holds almost 2% of all stocks on earth. In the coming years, they are looking to stop investing into oil, but that doesn't mean they are going to do it yet. With an energy crisis deepening, they are going to take their time no doubt. But, their goal is the same as all funds - maximize shareholder wealth, with the shareholders being the Norwegian people in this case.
Oil is stalwart and will be for some time, but value is driven be demand and scarcity and while the demand for oil isn't going anywhere soon, the demand for many other products are shifting, as cultural behavior shifts. One of those shifts is the way and what information we consume and, how we spend our time, with far more focus being given to sitting behind screens in digital worlds and far less on the "real world".
The digital world is obviously primed for borderless interaction and as such, is suited to digital tokenization that is able to transcend local conditions to some degree. Of course, through various smart contracts, the localization needs can be counted, but from the user level, not much has to be done. This means that a lot of the middleman services will end up being DAO managed services, with far less overhead and the potential to better distribute the wealth that passes through their gateways.
What is going to enable all of this is effective information management and what is going to be highly intere4sting, is that once more of this information becomes transparent, webs of trust increase their efficiency and impact on what that information is, where it has come from and, whether it is suitable as supporting content for a viewpoint. This fundamentally changes the world of "news" reporting, because essentially all content could be rated on-the-fly to give a confidence score for the audience and perhaps if too low, would be omitted by the code before it even hits the eyeline.
I wonder how much of the current content would pass an accurate "trustworthy" test.
I have my suspicions.
But I am biased.
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Is it even journalism when you're just reporting on Tweets or Reddit posts?
I don't think so and have been questioning it for a long time. Journalism is dead. They think it is because of a changing demographic, but they have shot themselves in the foot, by reporting for clicks, not substance. The advertising model bastardizes content.
Which is such a massive shame... because true journalism is the very thing that exposes fraud and corruption in corporations and governments. We need real journalism to survive as a society and we're obviously feeling the affects of this attention advertising model and VCs buying up local papers to increase shareholder value.
I agree. The problem is that who is going to go undercover for 6 months to get 1000 clicks, when they can post a story about another photoshop fail on a Kardashian ass for 1,000,000?
Almost none!!! When one clicks on links in articles from even the most "respected" sources, NYTimes among them, the links take you to another article produced by that same source. It is rare for a link to take you to their source. I no longer trust any of the mainstream media sources, not a one of them.
I have a source - click here... leads to a source with a link to another source... to another source... sourceception...
I could consider myself a person who takes risks, but also a person who investigates, who does my homework. It's crazy to think about how someone sells their assets, the ones they really have to invest in such thing, something uncertain. Mental poverty abounds a lot in this materialistic world, this learning cost them dearly for sure.
"Mental poverty" - you mean idiocy? ;D
Could it be a synonym? Hahaha but actually u right
I've also had that sort of mindset for a while now. The news they spread on the media is quite funny especially if you know better.
I wonder what they try to achieve by misleading a lot of people. It's so rampant nowadays and a lot of ignorant people would go as far as sticking their necks for stories they can't even confirm.
News is a powerful tool in the crypto space and it's proven very vital. I don't think false news would change anytime soon but then we'll have to be wiser. .❤️❤️
They are incentivized to get clicks, not get to the truth. I think that because of this monetization, we are all ignorant :)
I think they're just interested in the traffic "click bait" news brings
Since you have talked about petroleum, there are officials who say reasonable and funny ideas
By the beginning of 2030, they want all cars to be electric for a clean world, knowing that not all renewable energy is clean and has a certain pollution rate. Aren't those electric cars made in factories that rely on oil and combustion to produce electricity?
They want cards they can switch off remotely. It's not about electric cards, it's about centralised cars.
Matt mentioned one reason for it I agree with.
The compelling argument for electric cars for me is, they are energy agnostic. As long as they get electricity, they can run. That might be dirty electricity now, but it doesn't have to be tomorrow.
A few days ago I had a little laugh at a first hand account of this. A person who very seldom contacts me sent me a message. Hi Andy blah blah Did you lose loads of money in the crypto crash???
The weirdest part for me is that if I had to ask her how much money she spent on alcohol last month she'd quite happily tell me that her financial information is none of my business.
Social media has been the death of not just journalism, but of personal boundaries regarding financial and medical information as well.
Don't worry you're not the only one that's biased, but being biased these days requires having a brain and a reasonable seasoning of critical thinking and logic, something that is on the verge of extinction.
Less than what you made in crypto most likely ;) But yeah - it is funny how people are happy to talk about money when it is *someone else's.
I like that the financial conversation is opening up,, but at the core data level - a very small few, know everything.
The social platform landscape is built for attention-seeking, not truth. — where is the lie in this ? None found . The social media platform landscape thrives on clouts , Twitter is an app that readily comes to mind when this issue is raised.
I don't lie - unless I have to. :D
I get, gimmicks.
I suspect that very little content would pass the test. And it would be very interesting for information to go through that a kind of "trustworthy" test. It would change the rules of the game in many ways.
The media have always manipulated information since they have been media, and everything has reached a new dimension with social networks. There are a lot of interests involved. And a lot of power behind looking for using them for manipulation.
A true information validation system would have so many enemies that who knows if the idea would ever be viable.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Imagine if there were fines attached to professional monetized content that was found to be more than x% false.
This is why it has to be decentralized and leverage cross-chain functionality.
If there were fines for that, those who collected them would not know what to do with so much money.
And yes, the only way such a validation system could happen is with a fully decentralized one.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
FOMO, FUD, and BTFD, it is all creation of the market, and best use case is non other than Social Media.
Take example of Elon, how he manipulated Doge's price to later integrate it to his own company. These people like Elon, exchanges, new platforms, twitter, medium, reddit, etc are all involved and support each other to spread greed and fear.
Everything is a manipulation of some sort - some are better than others though.
An information system should be based on honesty and should be zero-interest. However, when they target emotional reactions, logic loses control of checking the accuracy and veracity of the information provided.
It will be something that is wild and continues to develop in emotional reactions, so that measuring the validity of information becomes something that is ignored. especially if the information is sent continuously so that it takes root in the subconscious into a truth.
Information as raw material for decision making is no longer digested and processed as a basis for action. Anyone will lose their freedom of action when their behavior is controlled by misinformation. People will continually be milked their resources for the benefit of the information factory holders.
I'm also not sure, that I'm also biased.
the "illogical wisdom of crowds" should be the term now.
Yes, the media cover up the truth because they only infer news from parties of a diplomatic strategy that are distinguished for marketing in terms of image. For example, you may find news about the seizure of a drug smuggling truck. I don't deny this, but on the other side, many trucks passed easily and calmly, in order to decorate the country's image and prove its efficiency.
It is cherrypicking from the data, to suit the narrative they want to push at the time. We do the same thing when we see a particular bias - because we feel smart catching one, but we don't realized we missed 9 others that manipulated us.
Haha, stop reading news.com.au!!
Absolute tabloid trash.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
it definitely is, but it is so funny!
What has also been interesting is the way the narrative has been on Finland joining Nato. They made it sound like Finns friendly toward Russia prior to the invasion of Ukraine - not even close to the truth.
I've been viewing headlines through a new lens lately myself. It is almost a game to see how clickbatey they can make the headlines. I often wonder if they feel bad about what they are doing at all. I am guessing no since they are able to pull in so much money from viewers.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I wonder how much of it is AI generated? No emotion, just creating for clicks.
That could be. Work smarter not harder I guess! :)
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Reading some of the language and the errors made, I think it is likely that there are large portions, if not all of some articles that are generated. No one cares though.
I don't understand why a person invest his lifetime savings into cryptos or something else. I read news that in my country, people sold their houses and cars and put in LUNA. Are they the cleverest of the world?
Unfortunately, some of them committed suicide in the bloody days last week.
Greed and impatience. Rather than taking a measured approach, they want it all now.
The greediness of being rich in a short time.
All the news headlines are kind of crazy and I am not surprised to see so many people report losing money. Everything has it's risk and I personally think that only risking what you can afford to lose is the best way. All that debt and losing their own home is way too much for me and I would never want that.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I've never really thought of this before! It's so true, no real source in any of the articles anymore. And we just take all these "news" as the gospel truth