The media narrative and the social conversation about blockchain and digital assets digital assets have evolved in a substantial way over the course of a period of time relatively short. Which was for years a single narrative halfway between the hype, scepticism and simplification by the media, it has been a while being told with greater accuracy, context and journalistic rigour.

The stories have become more sophisticated. And with them, also the space that occupies the sector in newsrooms. It is increasingly more common to find explanations about models of business, architectural technology, regulatory frameworks or risks associated. Projects are beginning to be characterised by a greater level of depth, which means that there are more and better interactions between founders, coaches and journalists, establishing a channel for conversation that is fluid and constant.

This has led to a shift in the media’s approach to stories about blockchain technology and digital assets, with outlets gradually moving away from marginal coverage focused on sensational headlines and price volatility – or, in some cases, directly linking the technology to illegality or fraud. Instead, a different way of reporting on the sector has emerged: more analytical, more demanding, more connected to the reality of what is being built.Crypto is no longer a marginal issue or one relegated to obscure sections, but is increasingly finding its way onto the pages of business, finance and technology sections. At times, it even makes the front page when the impact is systemic or institutional.

That shift is no small matter and says a great deal about the current situation in which the sector finds itself. But it wasn’t always like that and we should not forget where where we come from.

The transformation of sectoral narratives

For years, the conversation was characterised by an unhealthy mix of overblown promises and speculative narratives from within the ecosystem itself, coupled with constant – and at times self-serving – scepticism from certain traditional quarters. Added to this was a further problem: the genuine difficulty of explaining a complex technology in terms that are easy to understand.

The result was a narrative that was fragmented, polarised and, in many cases, superficial. We saw this clearly in the analysis that we carried out at comma in 2023 on the media coverage of the sector. The discussion was organised into blocks that were practically separate. On one hand, a more technical and sophisticated and constructive, but limited to niche media and audiences specialised. On the other hand, a pillar dominated by the price, trading and speculation, which accounted for a large proportion of the attention.

At the same time, in the mainstream media and also in some financial publications, a significant proportion of the articles linked cryptocurrency with fraud, scams or a crisis of confidence. The technological aspect, meanwhile, was relegated to far more specialised outlets.

Between those worlds there was barely any connection. And when there are no bridges, the story becomes simplified. Or worse: it becomes something else.

That context explains why for, for so a long time, the sector struggled to build a narrative of its own, solid and comprehensible. There was a lack of translators capable of navigate between the technical complexity and the language of the general public. And, without that exercise in mediation, what prevailed was not dialogue, but noise.

In just three years, however, the change has been striking. And, to a large extent, this is down to the fact that both the sector and those covering it have matured at the same time.

There is undeniable credit due to the editorial teams and journalists who have chosen to treat this field for what it is: an intersection of economics, regulation and technology. This has had a direct impact on the quality of the debate. And when the way an issue is covered in the media changes, the questions asked change too.

It is no longer enough simply to know whether an asset is rising or falling. The debate now centres on which parts of this ecosystem constitute infrastructure and which are financial products; what can be integrated into the regulated framework and what cannot; and which risks are technical, which are market-related, and which stem from governance issues.

This transformation of interactions and this greater degree of interest and knowledge on the part of the media is, without any doubt, a clear sign of maturity.

The narratives that are shaping the sector

If one looks at the conversation taking place today in forums, the media and professional circles, several narrative threads that are reshaping the story become quite clear:

• The first is the institutionalisation. The entry of traditional players, whether banks, asset managers or custodians, does not only contribute volume, but also standards, processes and a way different from explaining what is happening.
• The second is regulation and compliance. The sector can no longer operate within the boundaries of the regulatory framework. And this, far from being a limitation, introduces order, rigour and a language that is more precise.
• Keep a close eye on tokenisation and market finance. Here, the focus is shifting towards real-world assets, issuance infrastructure and operational efficiency. Less abstract promise, more concrete application.
• Added to this is a fourth narrative focused on cybersecurity and resilience, which is no longer limited to the headline about ‘hacking’, but now encompasses risk architecture, audits, traceability and accountability.
• The fifth relates to identity, privacy and data: who verifies, how it protect the rights of the user and how are designed systems that are compatible with regulatory frameworks that are becoming increasingly more stringent.
• And, perhaps most significantly in the medium term, is the narrative of real utility: use cases that stand on their own without relying on price, where the value lies in the process, not in the token as a promise.

They all point in the same direction: a growing desire to distinguish between infrastructure and financial products. And that distinction, which for years was blurred, is key to ensuring that the sector is no longer perceived as a homogeneous bloc.

The problem wasn’t the technology

If there’s one thing we’ve learnt on this journey, it’s that the main problem wasn’t technical. It was narrative. For too long, communication was confused with marketing. The promise was prioritised over explanation, the roadmap over risk, and the vision over context. That might have worked during periods of euphoria, but it failed spectacularly when it came to building a reputation.

Because communication in this sector, and in any other sector that aspires to become infrastructure, is a structural component, since without understanding on the part of the general public, adoption is not possible. And without adoption, there is no ecosystem.

Blockchain was created with the aim of reducing the need for intermediaries, but that does not eliminate the need for trust; it simply shifts it. Trust no longer rests solely with a central authority, but lies in the code, in governance, in custody, in regulation… and also in how it communicates.

When that transfer of knowledge is opaque, ambiguous or overly technical, the result is the same as in the traditional system: mistrust.

Professionalisation or noise: the role of intermediaries

In this context, another tension emerges: the one that exists between media and creators of content. It is not a new debate, but in the financial sphere it takes on a dimension different dimension, because here information takes on the dimension of a raw material that directly influences financial decisions.

A reputable specialist media outlet operates according to certain principles: cross-checking sources, providing context, and exercising editorial responsibility. A channel that amplifies trends, on the other hand, is driven by different incentives: clicks, virality, and alignment with a community. And in finance, failing to highlight risk is a form of misinformation.

There is, moreover, a paradox that is hard to ignore: many of those most susceptible to FOMO (Fear of Missing Out), with few tools to understand the complexity of financial markets, tend to mistrust traditional media and rely on voices with no editorial accountability. For this reason, the debate should not be framed in terms of traditional media versus new channels. The underlying issue is quite another: professionalism versus unfiltered amplification. If the sector hopes to mature, it will need more of the former.

The unfinished business: pedagogy

Despite the progress made, there remains a structural shortcoming: a lack of pedagogy. The quality of the debate has certainly improved. But there is still a significant gap between what is constructed and what is understood.

And here it is worth emphasising a point which, although it may seem obvious, remains unresolved: you cannot hope for widespread adoption with language that only a minority understands. The technical discussion will remain technical at its core, but the public narrative must start elsewhere: with the ‘why’ and the ‘who benefits’. When users understand the value in terms of cost, efficiency, access and security, the technology ceases to be exotic. It is that balance that builds trust.

If we project this trend over the medium term, the fundamental shift is quite clear: blockchain will cease to be regarded as a ‘sector’ once it no longer needs to be defined as such. Once it becomes an integral part of the infrastructure that underpins the systems in use. Just as happened with the internet, and as is the case with any layer that supports more complex systems.

This requires better segmentation, moving away from the catch-all category where everything is labelled as crypto, and starting to distinguish precisely what each thing is. It requires prioritising value over technicalities. And, above all, it requires embracing standards: transparency, audits, controls, accountability and clear, understandable language.

But this transition is not automatic. It is a process that requires the sector to maintain a narrative that lives up to its aspirations. For it is in this coherence between what is built, what is explained and how it is perceived that its consolidation truly hinges. And it is precisely there that the role of the media proves decisive: not only in how that reality is projected, but in how it ultimately comes to be understood and accepted by the public.

La entrada Blockchain and digital assets: the evolution of media narratives that are reaching their maturity se publicó primero en Agencia comma.

In recent years, the communications sector has undergone a huge transformation. The modus operandi of media in 2025 has changed due to advances in AI, the rise of so-called independent journalism and transformations in information consumption patterns. However, one thing has remained immune to this new age, virtually unchanged by trends and almost inscrutable to journalistic dogmas of faith: successful PR still depends on having strong links with the media.

Not even the AI or the RRSS will be able to alter -at least in their totality or easily- some concepts intimately associated with journalistic culture.

No doubt there will be many examples. But let’s take a couple of them. One, dedicated to the clients of communication agencies. The other is for the media, those still extremely indispensable vehicles for generating Fourth Estate. Regardless of whether their digital editions are more or less well-oiled or survive with greater or lesser solvency the road traffic that their news offerings provoke.

The first one refers to the temptation of analysts, managers or heads of public or private institutions to activate on their own initiative supposed communication strategies with the media. In reality, they are not guilty of anything. They are only at the mercy of the maelstrom of events. Of an immediacy that overwhelms us all, but which, at the same time, requires tactical calm. The message that first reaches a newsroom is unsuccessful. Nor to a journalist with whom you have established professional ties. Sometimes these manoeuvres can be counterproductive. They can end up with exclusivity tactics or selective choice of media to disseminate a corporate or institutional news item or a special market valuation. Or contravene it through third parties, usually customers, suppliers or knowledgeable management, who leak revealing information without regard to the communication tactic.

The second might seemingly clash with access to the primary sources of a newsworthy subject. But nothing could be further from the truth; A journalist’s contacts and professional agenda are like the Grail (…) undoubtedly sacred. In more frequent and, therefore, less transcendental cases, in the day-to-day news, a stock market, economic, geopolitical or commercial valuation or a relevant corporate novelty can collide with a company’s due diligence policy if it is given to the media without the adequate control and supervision of an agency or a communications specialist. Beyond the designs of SEO managers seeking preferential digital repercussions. Without this oversight, which should be minimal but unavoidable, the communication spigot between companies and the media can be closed without remedy.

The value of journalistic culture

In both cases, there is an underlying guiding principle: the importance of journalistic culture. This is something that must continue to govern communication tactics. It is surprising that in this day and age, where information flows at breakneck speed, company directors and even communication managers demand that agencies stop a news story. As if they had omnipotent power. And, moreover, against the clock. Or that, in the opposite direction, the media entrust them with altering agendas to urgently satisfy a chronicle about to take flight.

It is not that it should be renounced – of course- but, rather, to convey that it is not always feasible. In other words, it is the exception to an unwritten rule that exists and must remain in the journalistic ecosystem.

So the key to properly open this Pandora ‘s Box requires in the first instance confronting the technological avant-garde, accepting the effects, direct, beneficial and harmful, of the RRSS and, above all, preserving journalistic culture. A bit of heritage and tradition is never a bad thing. For which, we leave you with a decalogue of good practice. It never hurts in troubled times when hostile (geopolitical and ideological) attacks proliferate, (economic and financial) headwinds blow, and ( corporate and AI-related ) intellectual property battles rage against the media industry and communication quality standards.

Perhaps this is an opportune moment to put on record a number of recommendations for good journalistic practice in modern times.

The ‘Ten Commandments’ of today’s Communication

1 · Personalisation is non-negotiable. In the past, PR specialists could send press releases to hundreds of journalists and cross their fingers. That strategy is no longer effective. Every day, journalists receive hundreds of submissions and can recognise a generic message at a glance.

2 · Authentic storytelling captures attention. Journalists and the public alike know the difference between a real story and a marketing gimmick in today’s world. Brands that prioritise authenticity over promotion will be the most successful in media relations.

3 · Build relationships, not transactions. Media links are not deals, but connections. Journalists prefer to collaborate with PR specialists who provide genuine value rather than simply a press release when it suits them.

4 · Understanding the new media landscape . YouTube channels, blogs, newsletters, podcasts and micro-influencer platforms have grown in number as traditional media have shrunk. Reaching audiences wherever they are is the goal of media relations. Not just TV stations and newspapers.

5 · Multimedia content is a must. Journalists are often under pressure to produce interesting content. Providing multimedia content, such as images, videos, infographics or short audio clips, makes it easier for them to report on the topic.

6 · Use AI to work smarter. It enhances journalistic practice, but will not replace PR specialists. Instead, it can help with proposal writing, finding journalists, monitoring media and even monitoring coverage in real time.

7 · Speed is essential but not essential. News move faster than ever before. You will miss opportunities if you cannot react quickly. However, you may miss them if the response system loses efficiency and attractiveness by being meteoric. Or leave room for improvisation. Mistakes are paid for.

8 · Transparency is non-negotiable. Attempting to manipulate a situation or hide facts rarely succeeds. Brands that are straightforward, truthful and prepared to face up to their mistakes strengthen their ties with the media.

9 · A long-term strategy trumps short-term victories. A single press release will not be enough to build strong channels of engagement with the media. It is necessary to build permanent bridges of credibility, provide ongoing value and create long-term bridges of connection.

10 · End of the Decalogue. Epilogue: create an annual media relations calendar. This is something that is mainly within the reach of communication agencies that deal with media and clients alternatively.

Commonality of criteria (…) and interests

The search for instruments to increase digital traffic and subscriptions is not guaranteed. Even less so in convulsive times like the present, when information is devoured in an attempt to understand, no more and no less, a change in the international order and in the social relations of coexistence. For this reason, the communion of criteria between agencies and their clients and of interests between the former and the media must not be devalued if journalistic quality and rigour are to be instilled. Or without losing the values of objectivity and, above all, the right to truthfulness, which on too many occasions is confused with a freedom of expression that is not conspicuous by its absence, but is invoked by those who lack rational and weighty arguments to impose their ideas. Not infrequently, moreover, because of hidden interests.

Perhaps if journalistic culture returns to its origins, without renouncing technological progress, the Reuters Institute survey, which states that only four out of ten opinion leaders in Spain (41%) have confidence in the prospects and future of journalism, could be reversed. And only one in six (17%) express little or no faith in the profession.

La entrada Time for change in journalistic culture? Let ‘s not abandon good practice se publicó primero en Agencia comma.

First of all, in order to understand why change is necessary, we must bear in mind the importance of communication in society: it is, no more and no less, what makes it possible for them to see one of their fundamental rights fulfilled: the right to information. And that is why it has to be, if not a pioneer, one of the first to show flexibility, innovation and adaptability in order to offer at all times the information that citizens demand.

In this way, different forms and formats of press releases, press releases, interviews, reports, articles and, the queen of them all: press conferences, have come down to our days. The purpose and objectives of all of them have been changing, but these meetings with journalists have always been the most sensitive, key and important point for companies and institutions. That is the only thing that has not changed.

Press conferences: a little history

Thus, press conferences have followed a path that has gone through markedly institutional, propagandistic, informative and commercial periods, and now it seems that everything seems to come together. There are times when, in fact, the real objective of the call is confused because it is ‘covered’ with one that is, a priori, more striking.

But this confusion has always been played upon. As early as the beginning of the 20th century, Ivy Lee called a press conference at the very spot where two trains of the Pennsylvania Railroad company for which she worked had collided. In this way, Lee prevented a tragic accident from becoming the company’s Achilles’ heel and turned it into its strong point, a true display of transparency whereby he provided journalists with all the information they required on the spot. Information, yellow journalism or both?

Be that as it may, with that press conference, Lee was laying the groundwork for free information and, without realizing it, was giving a master class in crisis management.

How have press conferences changed?

A century later, communication became highly commercial and, as a result, press conferences would come to be dominated by product presentations and the launching of new services. But only a few, among the hundreds that are held daily, stand out above the rest. Thus, in 2007, we find one of the most historic: Steve Jobs starred in the unveiling of the first iPhone. This press conference would mark a turning point, not only in the technology sector, but also in society by turning this mobile device into a true symbol of capitalism and consumerism. Jobs showed the first images of the device at 9.41am and, since then, that is the exact time the iPhone is unveiled at each presentation;

But press conferences must not only adapt their content to the new times, but also their format and how to present it to the press; Exceptional situations such as the one we experienced in 2020 caused face-to-face presence shares the throne with the virtual world. Who said it wasn’t possible?

Over the years we have witnessed the first telematic press conferences, which have now given way to hybrid models where journalists, spokespersons and public relations people can enjoy all kinds of press conferences from wherever they want, which has made us realise the opportunities that lie ahead. To do this, it is key to be clear about 5 things:

Differentiate the objective of your press conference;

It is not the same to summon the press for commercial purposes to present a new product than to summon them to communicate a corporate change or to analyse with them the current news; In fact, in times like these, journalists’ interest is more focused on the latter, so be sure to assess whether the content of the press conference is attractive enough to attract journalists; Otherwise, use other tools; Journalists will thank you;

Keep track of dates

If the press conference is feasible, keep track of important dates and other possible press conferences in the same sector so that your press conference does not coincide with any of them and, therefore, (tele)attendance and interest are higher;

Choose the format that best suits your needs

It can be telematic, face-to-face or hybrid; If it is telematic or hybrid, assess whether you are going to need to share a screen to make it easier for tele-attendees to see the content, whether you want them to see each other or only the press conference spokespersons, whether you want to set up a channel for questions, etc. In the case of an in-person event, make sure that the chosen location meets the logistical, seating and catering requirements you need;

Prepare the agenda, timetable and the interventions of the spokespersons

Both in terms of content (through the arguments and Q&A) and non-verbal language, making sure that all of this is framed within the stipulated time (ideally no more than 60 minutes), and reflect this very well in thebriefing that you need to prepare.

Anticipate possible unforeseen events at the press conference

Make a list of all the probable ones you can think of (there can always be one that you haven’t thought of) and prepare a solution to anticipate each one of them or, if that is not possible, solve them as soon as possible if they do arise: failures with the Internet network, sound coupling, room with a smaller (or larger) capacity than that of the final attendees, controversial/delicate issues in the journalists’ round of questions…

A good example of the latter is in the press conference given on 5 September 2022 by Christophe Galtier, Paris Saint-Germain football coach, and Kylian Mbappé, Paris Saint-Germain player, who were asked about the possibility of the French team travelling by train (instead of by plane) to cities near the French capital to protect the environment, they responded with laughter and irony, showing zero sensitivity to the fight against climate change and a totally disrespectful attitude towards the journalist who asked the question;

This caused a great stir in French society and its institutions, and put the team under the spotlight for totally unfortunate statements on a subject which, apparently and falsely, had nothing to do with the activity of a football team; What is clear is that time is passing and the press conferences remain the most sensitive time for an entity’s public appearance.

Improvising is forbidden at a press conference;

Preparing for them requires a great deal of work beforehand; Contextualisation; preparation of possible questions and their answers; preparation of spokespersons– tboth in terms of content and non-verbal communication -; taking care of off de records, etc.

It is the moment of public exposure from which it is necessary to emerge, at the very least, successful, but it is better if it is done triumphantly and, to do so, no aspect of your press conferences should be left to chance however unlikely you think it is to happen or however controlled you think they are; Otherwise, you could find yourself in a reputation crisis like Paris Saint-Germain;

La entrada Press conferences: renew or die se publicó primero en Agencia comma.