Facebook is bubbling over: Why it’s about more than just crypto advertising guidelines
Facebook has revised its advertising policies regarding crypto currencies and blockchain so that crypto advertising, with the exception of ICOs and binary options, is permitted again. The news has led to many rumors in the social media, as some see much more in this resolution than just a small change in advertising policy. So how are the rumors to be classified and what implications might they have for the crypto market and its users?
The behavior of Bitcoin profit was and is quite understandable
In order to counter the mass of dubious ICO advertising including Bitcoin profit snowball systems, the Internet giant pulled the rip cord in January of this year and temporarily issued a general advertising ban for the entire crypto economy: https://www.geldplus.net/en/bitcoin-profit-review/ A short time later, Google, Twitter and Instagram joined in and also decided on a no-crypto ads policy. Quite a few had supported this policy, as it had helped to slow down the inflation of scam ICOs and insubstantial crypto products.
The downside, on the other hand, was that serious players have also fallen under censorship. If, for example, a state university wanted to advertise its own blockchain event, this was prevented, as was advertising for snowball systems – exceptions, if any, were difficult to obtain. A situation that cannot be tolerated in the long run, as Facebook itself admits. The guidelines have now been revised accordingly so that companies can now again place crypto advertising if their application is approved.
A Like for the Bitcoin profit
From now on, applications must be submitted to Facebook if you want to place Bitcoin profit advertisements. Although the applications are paperless, not much information is expected from the advertising Bitcoin profit companies – a deliberate hurdle, as Rob Leathern, Product Management Director at Facebook, says: „Within the restrictions, not everyone who intends to advertise will be able to do so. It is unclear how strictly the administrators and algorithms will evaluate and process applications. The processing time is also unknown so far.
If the procedure proves to be practicable and not too costly, this could at least temporarily be a decent compromise between Wild West and censorship. But it’s equally conceivable that the whole process and application criteria will look completely different in a few weeks‘ time.
Is Facebook leading the herd?
When Facebook issued the crypto advertising ban in January, Google, Twitter and Instagram followed suit with their own anti-crypto advertising guidelines. This raises the question of whether the other Internet companies will now also relax their policy in line with Facebook. Numerous such posts can be read on Twitter:
Even if official statements are still missing and these are speculations of various people, it is obvious that the other players Facebook will not simply leave the crypto advertising field. Even if ICOs and binary options, which make up a considerable part of the crypto advertising budget, should be left out, the advertising of crypto exchanges alone would generate decent income – money that even the Silicon Valley giants are reluctant to miss out on.
What does this mean for the crypto market?
When the Facebook crypto advertising ban was announced in January and Google followed suit in March, the crypto market reacted with a correction. Of course, other external factors may also have played a role here, but the impulse of the announcement of the resolutions tended to have a negative effect on prices. Conversely, a relaxation of the crypto advertising policy should have a positive effect on the crypto market. After all, the Internet giants reach several billion people who now come into contact with the crypto economy through advertising of any kind. Thus, even people with Bitcoin & Co. who previously had no or only a few points of contact are confronted – a clear hint towards mainstream adaptation.
Nevertheless, the question of independence arises in this context. Where does consumer protection stop and where does censorship begin? Can Facebook really be trusted to provide a largely fair and independent assessment