Blockchain
Are fringe skeptics cryptocurrencies’ greatest enemy or greatest strength?
Blockchain technology and its user base may be drifting apart. As the industry has made leaps and bounds in terms of technical prowess and financial acumen over the past five years, it’s hard to say that its audience has evolved in the same way.
This article is part of CoinDesk’s Web3 Marketing package. Note: The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of CoinDesk, Inc. or its owners and affiliates.
Roy Blackstone is the creative director of SHADOW WAR.
Sure, there are far fewer scammers and self-proclaimed wunderkinds filtering through the ecosystem than before thanks to the latest bear market. But for many, the hyper-online culture of trolls and commentators is still the public face of the cryptocurrency industry. Across online platforms, social media, and industry conferences, voices continually seek to influence the trajectory of cryptocurrencies and help HODLers navigate the market’s turbulent waters.
Amid the noise of opinion, however, a fundamental question must be addressed: Are these critics simply fringe observers, or do they hold real power to drive progress within the industry? As cryptocurrencies lose their fringe status, it’s time to reckon with its cottage industry of critics and influencers.
Every industry has a set of commentators – from sports to entertainment to politics – and every industry has experts armed with words, ideas and a varying degree of influence and credibility. However, for an Internet-native industry like cryptocurrency, which relies on digital forums for communication, online communities play a critical role in shaping perceptions, influencing decision-making and drive overall market trends.
The growth of the blockchain industry offers newcomers the chance to explore emerging financial instruments and decentralized finance. Although it has gained traction in a positive way, the pool of builders still remains relatively small. The cryptocurrency landscape is filled with many participants with little to no experience in technology or finance, but who are still eager to contribute their perspectives and support to this growing space.
Therefore, platforms such as X, Telegram and Discord, stand side by side crypto influencers, they have become the lifeblood of many Web3 projects, and feedback can ripple across the Internet, reaching large audiences in moments. Elon Musk is an evergreen example, with his X posts on cryptocurrencies consistently having a notable impact on the market. So, clearly, there is amplified influence from outside voices on the trajectory of cryptocurrencies and associated projects.
The benefits? Social platforms have become grounds for the growth of new projects by authentically inserting themselves into cryptocurrency discussions.
TAG Heuer, for example, it used X to launch the luxury watch brand’s move to Web3. As a result, NFTs rose to fifth place on the list of interest of brand followers on X, up from 13% before launch. This shows how brands looking to enter the Web3 space are turning to user-first platforms like X to establish a presence where their target audience congregates rather than relying solely on traditional marketing methods.
That said, in a niche industry like cryptocurrency, its inherently online culture makes it exceptionally susceptible to trolls – and the more ridiculous or outrageous their ridicule, the greater the potential for frustration. Because crypto communities are tribal, they often become emotionally and financially invested in their favorite blockchain network or project, making them automatically defensive or resistant to criticism that challenges their interests.
It effectively applies “stan culture” to a very real financial and technology ecosystem. But does this mean that every cryptocurrency critic is just a troll in disguise?
When it’s constructive, criticism catalyzes progress, and cryptocurrencies have proven no different. Constructive criticism and discussion can foster innovation, foster collaboration, and help newcomers navigate its terrain.
Well-managed organizations can leverage constructive criticism to address complex challenges because collaborative efforts are fueled by shared knowledge. The ecosystem benefits from the critical eye of commentators, distinguishing true innovation from projects that send up smoke.
One way to address negative feedback about the industry is to get business founders in front of their audiences. Engaging in open dialogue and discussions with critics is a productive way to ensure that information circulating online is factual and not based on skeptics’ feelings about the project.
Virtual LOVES (ask me anything) sessions across platforms like Telegram, Reddit, X, and YouTube allow project leaders to engage with community members, address pain points, and showcase their value. Sharing goals and project updates directly with your audience fosters loyalty and a positive brand experience.
Even now, we are seeing the benefits of constructive criticism, as the common criticism of cryptocurrency’s unprofessionalism and negligence has been addressed and piqued the interest of institutional actors.
This shift in regulatory focus from financial institutions is proof that cryptocurrency creators should listen to and acknowledge feedback from their users. The more developers can embrace the deep-rooted criticism of their community, even from outsiders, the faster the ecosystem will mature and expand.
Criticism produces a torrent of responses, often obscuring the underlying merits of the topic and exacerbating industry volatility. Bringing the next wave of cryptocurrency enthusiasts into the mainstream requires a concerted effort towards education, streamlined processes, and robust security. By fostering familiarity and trust, the crypto ecosystem can transcend its reputation, paving the way for widespread adoption and growth.