Bitcoin Goes Quiet: Why Major Media Ignored Crypto in Q2 2025

Wall Street's favorite distraction got the silent treatment last quarter—while Bitcoin kept grinding, legacy outlets looked the other way.

The sound of silence

No front-page FOMO pieces. No breathless 'death of crypto' hot takes. Just radio static from mainstream desks that usually can't resist hyping—or slamming—digital gold.

Stealth mode activated

Turns out boring price action makes terrible clickbait. With BTC stuck in its tightest trading range since 2023, editors apparently decided viewers would rather hear about AI stocks and Fed rate cuts.

Funny how quiet things get when volatility doesn't suit the narrative. Though we're sure they'll suddenly 'rediscover' crypto right as the next bull run peaks—just in time to help bagholders buy the top.

In brief

• Bitcoin was largely ignored by major media in the second quarter of 2025, despite its historic performance.
• The WSJ, the Financial Times, and the New York Times published only 13 articles on the topic.
• This lack of coverage fuels an information asymmetry that penalizes traditional investors.

An Absence That Speaks Volumes

Silence can be deafening. While bitcoin was reaching new heights in the second quarter, the big names of economic press remained surprisingly silent.

According to Perception’s study, the Wall Street Journal, the Financial Times, and the New York Times, pillars of global financial information, dedicated only 13 articles to bitcoin during this period. A barely symbolic coverage, just 2% of the total volume recorded by the 18 media outlets studied.

For a technology that redefines global finance, this discretion raises questions. The report goes beyond simple tallying: it highlights a clear editorial divide between media that engage in debate and those who persist in acting as if bitcoin does not exist.

Three distinct approaches emerge: enthusiastic adoption, willful blindness, and deep-rooted skepticism. This media silence is therefore not negligence but an editorial choice that says a lot.

Opposing Narratives for the Same Asset

In this fragmented landscape, the voice of the media varies radically according to their editorial line. While Forbes, CNBC, and Barron’s offer comprehensive coverage, sometimes even optimistic, “elitist” media like the Wall Street Journal or the Financial Times stand out by their withdrawal.

Result: bitcoin’s perception varies widely depending on the media consulted. The study notes an almost equal distribution between positive (31%), neutral (41%), and negative (28%) articles.

This divergence in tone also reveals an influence strategy. Some media do not just ignore bitcoin; they favor fearmongering narratives: crime, money laundering, instability.

Others venture into more analytical grounds, exploring institutional adoption, regulatory challenges, or the environmental impact of mining. The same asset, three radically different angles.

This contrast creates a fragmented reading of reality, where the reader only grasps one facet of a much broader phenomenon. While bitcoin continues to attract capital, institutions, and states, its media coverage remains fragmented, even caricatured.

Under-Informed by Editorial Choice?

The report’s final finding is unequivocal: this media polarization generates a worrying information asymmetry. Readers who rely solely on mainstream media to understand economic dynamics are largely under-informed about an asset that has become strategic.

This imbalance has consequences. It helps maintain a divide between those who understand bitcoin’s technological stakes and those who, lacking reliable information, still see it as an irrational bubble or a criminal tool. This media inertia creates a gap between the market’s real evolution and the public perception.

But as is often the case with silent revolutions, it is not the most prestigious media that hold the pen of History. It is those who dare to look where others turn away their eyes.

At a time when Bitcoin is shaping a new global financial architecture, the absence of coverage in major media is not an oversight but a signal. A refusal to see change. Yet, history moves forward, with or without their pen, and investments have exploded.

Maximize your Cointribune experience with our "Read to Earn" program! For every article you read, earn points and access exclusive rewards. Sign up now and start earning benefits.