Shutterstock photo

I try not to be a grumpy old man. I can, with some effort, watch the local kids play without yelling “Get off my lawn!” My own children’s laughter and derision has caused me to check my urge to shout at the TV screen when politicians refuse to answer a straightforward question. I have even stopped complaining about the weather; a remarkable feat for somebody born and raised in the UK.

Despite my best efforts, though, some things still get my goat. Prominent among those things are articles like this in the British newspaper The Guardian, entitled “Paedophiles Sell Child Abuse Images for Bitcoin.” The Guardian, a serious, respectable, left leaning newspaper in the UK was not alone in reporting this story this way. Almost every media outlet that picked it up did the same.

Child pornography, of course, is repellent to any right-minded person, and those that sell it are rightly regarded as some of the lowest life forms on Earth. If that revulsion leads to a somewhat hysterical style when talking about the subject, it is understandable. The implication that Bitcoin is somehow to blame for their behavior, however, is another matter. This particular story was prompted by this fact being mentioned in a report from the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF), but there have been countless others that link Bitcoin to crime, whether it is laundering drug money or whatever.

My immediate reaction to such stories is “so what?” I mentally replace the headline with one that substitutes the word “cash” for Bitcoin or, in the case of money laundering stories, “banks” for Bitcoin, and the absurdity of it immediately becomes obvious. After all “Banks Being Used to Launder Drug Money” and “Illegal Things Sold for Cash” are hardly the kind of news that stops the presses.

In many ways, though, this is not a Bitcoin problem. It is really a symptom of the broader problem of framing the news. Any independent minded person who has watched, for example, Fox News and MSNBC report the same story is aware of this phenomenon. Coindesk reported on the same story last week, but their headline “Bitcoin Exchanges in Talks to Join Fight against Child Pornography” paints an entirely different picture.

Even putting my generally pro-Bitcoin attitude aside, it seems that the Coindesk version of the news is a little more accurate based on a quote it contains from Emma Hardy, Director of External Relations at the IWF. “We know, from our experience, that new services and technologies will always be abused by criminals for their own agenda and we’re really open to working with anyone who seeks to keep their services, networks and exchanges free from criminality,” she said. Even the IWF, it seems understands what The Guardian et al don’t; the child pornographers are the problem, not the currency they use.

Most people won’t dig that deep, however, and their perception of the story will be colored by the headline. That is a problem, and not just for those who see the Guardian headline and conclude that Bitcoin is somehow evil. It is also a problem for those who see the potential of Bitcoin and, as I am prone to do, immediately dismiss the same words as biased nonsense. The simple fact is that Bitcoin is being favored by criminals. The anonymity that has been an essential part of the crypto-currency’s character to this point makes that almost inevitable.

Maybe the Bitcoin ecosystem should, rather than erupting in indignant rage when these stories surface, look for ways in which the problem can be addressed. The Coindesk headline and story would suggest that that is already happening to some extent. If that means giving up the anonymity of transactions for a while or in certain cases, then maybe that is better than the alternative. Agreed, the simple fact is that cash, credit cards and the banking system are all used for the same illicit transactions and have been for centuries. As parents tell their kids all the time, though, “But he did it first...” is not a legitimate argument.

If Bitcoin is to truly fulfill its potential, then it must become clear to the general public that digital currency is better than, not just equal to, fiat currency. Ignoring the issues that anonymity raises won’t further that aim, no matter how strong the ideological arguments about privacy are. In the meantime, the slanted headlines suggesting that Bitcoin is somehow to blame for crime will continue. I guess I’ll just have to add that to the list of things that require me to hold in my grumpy outbursts.

The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.

The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.