Crypto advertising has often tried to sell a revolution.
“If everything is fine, nothing changes,” says TV Coinbase, while Britain falls apart in the background. Larry David’s FTX announcement compared cryptography with the invention of the wheel, although his character was not convinced.
But even the campaigns that are not so provocative are still inseparable from the world of industry vision. A worldview that challenges the financial and social norms for which we live.
Crypto’s products ask questions about control, access and trust. And that is why the messages and industry ads are often read as a defense. This political worldview is also one of the reasons why the industry and its advertising have faced so much suppression over the years.
Since its inception, the digital asset industry has positioned itself as an empowering and democratizing force. He has questioned centralized monetary policy and has proposed alternatives to how traditional financial systems operate. These are not neutral positions.
This threat to entrenched systems raised by the industry is a factor on why regulation around which digital asset companies can do or say that it has taken so long to develop. Even today, when the ads of cryptographic companies mention those systemic criticisms, some members of the public are offended and regulators get in the path of distribution.
The now infamous announcement of the United Kingdom of Coinbase, which carries the spirit of cryptographic defense to its logical and creative conclusion, is a perfect example. His message, which Crypto offers a potential response to a broken economy, may not have mentioned a party or candidate, but still made a strong claim on politics and pointed out what does not work in Modern Britain.
Clearcast, the body that says yes or not to which ads can be executed in the United Kingdom television networks, disapproved the announcement with the argument that “the cryptocurrency presented as a potential solution to economic challenges, without sufficient evidence for this statement or any warning about volatility and potential risks.”
However, although cryptographic messaging faces the rejection of regulators and transmission platforms, the main political actors, especially in the United States, are beginning to accept it.
Not despite his political tone, but for that.
In a recent panel, Trump’s strategist, Chris Lacivita, and Democratic activist David Plouffe found a rare agreement: Crypto is now a political issue that is worth supporting. Lacivita called him a “classic growth problem”, opening doors to young and minority voters, while Plouffe warned:
“Dozens of millions of Americans have a great desire to be part of this. Therefore, as a political, it is very dangerous to say: we will ignore it.”
Both Lacivita and Plouffe said that the property of cryptography has become such an important social problem that it can influence the whole blockages of voters. The holidays are realizing, positions and remodeling financial ecosystems when they win.
In a world where even the idea of a single -topic cryptographic voter is taken seriously by campaign strategists, how can anyone be surprised that the industry sounds political?
The argument about whether to discuss the advertising played by political issues has been destroyed for more than a decade, since social networks became a dominant force in American modern electoral cycles. What began as a concern about transparency in Democratic campaigns has since become a much broader question: who can speak, and in what terms, when the message challenges the status quo?
Regulators and distribution platforms often affirm that there is a clear and technical line between political and non -political content. In practice, this is not how it works. What counts as a politician often depends on the climate of the moment. The messages that are allowed one year can be blocked in the next, since the rules change to social media platforms or legislative bodies.
Take the EU incoming Transparency and targeting of the Political Advertising Law As an example. This new rule that will enter into force in October 2025 will harden what is considered political content, expanding the definition to include any announcement that can influence public opinion on politics. In response to this, Meta and Google have already said that all the publicity of political, electoral and social problems in the EU will end when the rules enter into force in October. This is a perfect example of a regulation that, although well -intentioned, could one day cause unfortunate obstacles.
If cryptographic ads sound more and more like a political discourse, it is not an error. It is a reflection of what the product really represents, and online media platforms should not be brought along the way.
The future of the industry is one in which digital assets become an increasingly present part of our daily lives. As these technologies are rooted more deeply, the alternatives they offer will only become more important to people. The domain of the “cryptolectorized” in the electoral cycle of 2024 of the United States, without a doubt, will be replicated in other democracies worldwide and more parties will make it part of their political platforms.
There will be more and more cryptographic ads that speak directly of the social problems that the industry represents. This is something that must be expected, and hug, not fear or suppress. In order for innovations to have an impact, we need to allow their communications to be provocative, open and, of course, policies.
It is only then that we can have open and honest conversations about what is broken in our current system and how we can solve it.
