CoinDesk Reports CoinDesk

Very Disappointing

As a big fan of Coin Desk news and podcasts, I was very disappointed to listen to Borderless, for the first time, on 15th of March 21. I understand the Coin Desk primarily reports on finance, and block chain related matters, so it would seem to make sense that if you are going to discuss a subject out of your field of expertise, or in this case, that you know literally nothing about, it would be prudent to ask someone who does, to join the conversation.

The sad lack of understanding of not only digital art, but art in general, left me feeling embarrassed to the point I had to turn off the podcast. My 9 year old and my 15 year old could have had a more informed discussion.

Some of the ridiculous assertions made by the hosts included:

The only reason to buy art for its appreciation in value. (Really? You can’t think of one other reason?)

Art is something that you hang on your wall to give you a “warm feeling”. (Sorry, Marcel Duchamp, Anselm Kiefer, Jenny Holzer, Damien Hurst and Banksy, to name but a few.)

A piece of malware is better than a piece of digital art, because at least it has a use. (Just wow. I have no words for that.)

There is no point in owning digital art because it can be copied and distributed. (So, the Mona Lisa is of no value since it has been copied so many times? My son has a poster of a Jasper Johns’ flag, does that devalue the original? MoMA will be disappointed.)

So many ridiculous assertions, they can’t all be listed. How can I take these people seriously?

I just cannot understand why people with a degree of knowledge about one industry feel that they should comment on, and sneer at, another. One which they know nothing about. How can they not understand that they sound as ridiculous as those who comment on cryptocurrency while knowing nothing about blockchain, smart contracts or even broader economics.

I give up. I’ll stick with NLW and The Breakdown.