Mainstream Financial Publications Largely Ignored Bitcoin in Q2, Report Reveals
Bitcoin’s historic surge in Q2 2025 contrasts with a polarized mainstream media narrative. While outlets like Forbes covered the largest cryptocurrency extensively, traditional media remained skeptical.
In the second quarter of 2025, Bitcoin (BTC) achieved a historic milestone, soaring to an all-time high above $111,900. Moreover, the cryptocurrency recorded its highest quarterly returns since 2020.
Yet, according to a new report by market intelligence firm Bitcoin Perception, mainstream media coverage remained strikingly sparse and divided.
‘Willful Blindness’ and ‘Skepticism’: How Bitcoin’s Media Coverage Divides the Industry
In their latest report, Perception revealed that in Q2, 1,116 articles were published about Bitcoin across 18 major media outlets. The sentiment was split: 31% displayed a positive tone, 41% remained neutral, and 28% adopted a negative tone.
“Mainstream media coverage of Bitcoin in Q2 2025 revealed a deeply polarized narrative landscape,” the report read.
Furthermore, the report identified three distinct editorial narratives shaping Bitcoin coverage: ‘willful blindness,’ ‘persistent skepticism,’ and ‘enthusiastic adoption.’ The former narrative is exemplified by the limited coverage from elite financial publications.
Perception highlighted that the Wall Street Journal published only 2 articles about Bitcoin. Meanwhile, the Financial Times and the New York Times each published 11.
“The FT and WSJ—outlets that breathlessly report every basis point move in Italian bond yields—have decided the best-performing asset of the century warrants less coverage than European Central Bank meeting minutes,” Perception stated.
This disparity in coverage creates what Perception describes as “massive information asymmetry” for investors. Those relying on these media outlets are missing out on critical information about Bitcoin.
As a result, investors who turn to media outlets that acknowledge Bitcoin’s relevance and performance have an informational advantage.
“This editorial blindness from agenda-setting outlets reveals more about their institutional capture than Bitcoin’s relevance….Bitcoin doesn’t need the WSJ any more than Netflix needed Blockbuster’s approval…The question isn’t whether Bitcoin is legitimate enough for the Wall Street Journal. It’s whether the Wall Street Journal still matters,” the firm added.
Interestingly, while The Wall Street Journal published the fewest articles on Bitcoin, its sister publication, Barron’s, published 65. Although the publication was ranked as the third most negative outlet, the higher number of articles indicated that the latter did not completely ignore Bitcoin.
“The Barron’s paradox exposes the WSJ’s editorial dysfunction. Is the WSJ choosing institutional dinner party approval over market reality?” the report noted.
Perception’s analysis highlighted that of the 65 articles, 48% were neutral, 25% positive, and 27% negative. All the articles covering institutional adoption and banking and finance were in a negative tone, while only 35.7% of the articles on investment vehicles shared the same tone.
Besides Barron’s, other traditional media outlets like The Independent and Fox News also contributed to a ‘persistent skepticism’ narrative. All of them focused heavily on crime and controversy.
The Independent published 45 articles, of which 42% were negative. Furthermore, Fox News released 32 articles. 38% of the articles were negative.
“Their high-volume negative coverage at least acknowledges Bitcoin’s newsworthiness—a step ahead of elite outlets pretending it doesn’t exist,” Perception wrote.
Despite this, Bitcoin still received plenty of positive coverage. Forbes, CNBC, and Fortune leaned toward ‘enthusiastic adoption’, emphasizing institutional and retail adoption trends, Bitcoin mining, and market analysis.
Forbes produced 194 articles, 43% of which were positive. CNBC was second with 141 articles, 42% of which were positive. Lastly, 25% of Fortune’s 117 articles favored a similar approach.
“Forbes has essentially replaced the Wall Street Journal as the financial publication of record for the digital asset economy. While the WSJ clings to 20th-century asset classes, Forbes covers what’s actually moving markets and reshaping finance,” Perception remarked.
Notably, Forbes and CNBC also provided strong positive coverage of Bitcoin in Q1 2025. Meanwhile, Barron’s coverage was comparatively more positive. However, in Q2, the tone has shifted.
Disclaimer: The content of this article solely reflects the author's opinion and does not represent the platform in any capacity. This article is not intended to serve as a reference for making investment decisions.
You may also like
AI investment enters the "Trough of Disillusionment", the next 18 months will be a life-or-death test!
Goldman Sachs believes that the AI investment cycle is currently in the "trough of disillusionment," but this is not the first time. The core contradiction lies in the fact that the business models of new cloud computing providers are highly dependent on end-user returns from AI spending, while currently "there are basically zero companies that can attribute profits to AI." Social Capital founder Palihapitiya has clearly defined an 18-month key window, during which the market will decide which AI business models are sustainable and which are not.
Anthropic's Core Concern: Revenue Can Be Withdrawn at Any Time, but Computing Power Costs Are Locked in for up to 20 Years
Zheshang Securities believes that Anthropic's revenue is mainly based on usage-based billing, with remaining performance obligations covering only about 5.1 months of annualized revenue, while compute power costs are already locked in with $895.4 billion in irrevocable commitments, some extending as far as 2045. Revenues can be reduced at any time, but costs are non-exitable, creating a highly asymmetric maturity gap between the two—this is the company's real core constraint.
Triple Pressure from the Federal Reserve, Treasury, and Congress; Goldman Sachs: Liquidity Crisis May Occur in 2027
Goldman Sachs warns that the reserve ratio of bank assets has dropped to around 11%, only slightly above the crisis trough of 2019. In the second half of 2027, a deadlock in debt ceiling negotiations will force the Treasury to rebuild the TGA, triggering a "perfect storm" of a sharp drop in reserves and a surge in T-bill supply; combined with stalled money market fund buying, this will create a huge liquidity black hole. The Federal Reserve could be forced into the awkward position of lowering interest rates and launching large-scale bond purchases to rescue the market.
Crypto prices
More
