Let's face it bitcoiners fall into three main categories:
Hackers/Geeks/Nerds:
These guys are in it for the tech. If they somehow become the subject of a TV interview, they will spout off jargon and confuse the interviewer and everyone watching the interview, thus entrenching us deeper in the widely-held belief that “That Bitcoin stuff is way too complicated.”
Hard-Line Libertarians/Anarchists/Crazy People:
These guys are in it for the anonymity. Whether they’re peddling porn, drugs or just plain dodging taxes they’re in Bitcoin for political reasons. If they end up in front of a camera they’ll make us all look crazy and perpetuate the idea that Bitcoin is the currency of "insert political party here", pornographers, drug dealers and others living on the societal fringes.
Now, these are unfair and extreme stereotypes, but they are the way a lot of people actually think. It’s OK to geek out a little on camera and it’s OK to be a little political so long as you can maintain moderation.
Of course, there’s a third archetype you’ll see in front of the camera quite a bit, too: The Detractor
These guys dismiss Bitcoin as “play money” and use their poor grasp of economics to make it sound like the worst idea ever. Their points are almost never valid but they’re usually wearing a suit and speaking authoritatively. They’ll often make disparaging references to those who fall into the other two categories.
So where are all of the moderate, reasonable, well-balanced individuals? We know they exist, so why can’t these guys get any air time?
All too often, the media outlet in question isn’t really interested in providing a fair and balanced perspective. Fair and balanced doesn’t sell ad slots and most reporters have already made up their mind about Bitcoin and are cherry-picking interviewees who fit their personal views. They’ve already decided how the story is going to play, usually based on a feeling they got after spending less than five minutes on research. This is the way the media works now, so I can understand not wanting to feed into it by promoting people who fit the negative archetypes even a little – but those are the people who are going to get the interviews anyway, so wouldn’t it be better to give them a little of what they want to be wrapped in a somewhat respectable bundle?
