According to Cointelegraph, speakers at the Bitcoin Amsterdam 2024 conference have emphasized the significant consequences of misinformation in academic research on Bitcoin. During the 'Beyond Resistance Money' panel discussion on the second day of the conference, participants argued that academic inaccuracies have misled the media, resulting in misguided government policies and harmful regulations.

The panelists, who are advocates of Bitcoin (BTC), discussed how flawed studies on BTC emissions and mining practices contribute to erroneous narratives in journalism and policymaking. Andrew Bailey, a professor at Yale-NUS College and senior fellow at the Bitcoin Policy Institute, highlighted a specific issue in an influential academic paper that inaccurately reports BTC emissions data. Bailey pointed out that the paper contains a 'unit error in the chart' that has not been corrected, even though it continues to be cited as factual. He emphasized that such mistakes can have a lasting impact on public understanding of Bitcoin.

Bradley Rettler, associate professor of philosophy at the University of Wyoming, added that journalists often lack the time to verify or deeply understand academic sources, further spreading these inaccuracies. Rettler noted that the reliance on academic papers by journalists, who may not have the resources to become subject-matter experts, exacerbates the problem. He stated, 'So the journalists read these academic papers, and they translate them into everyday parlance and the problem is, when you start with crap, you end up getting crap.'

Craig Warmke, a member of the Bitcoin Policy Institute, warned that misinformation has real-world implications, particularly in the realm of policymaking. Warmke stated that policymakers and regulators often do not have the time to read academic papers, so they rely on journalism, which has resulted in some attacks on BTC mining, self-custody, and financial privacy. He mentioned that this pattern has led to restrictive proposed legislation, especially in Sweden, aimed at taxing the BTC mining industry out of existence. Warmke also highlighted an 'attack on software developers who are working on technologies that promote financial privacy.' He concluded by suggesting that while academia has historically worked against Bitcoin, it is time for academia to start supporting the cryptocurrency.