A man named Edward Snowden, who used to work for the government and told people about some secrets, talked about Bitcoin during a big football game. He wants people to watch how much it is worth and also if they own any of it. Bitcoin is a type of money that you can use on the internet but doesn't belong to anyone country. It has been doing really well lately and some people think it will keep going up in value. Read from source...

1. The title is misleading and sensationalized. It implies that Edward Snowden directly asked the reader to watch the Bitcoin chart during the Super Bowl, when in fact he only tweeted about it after the event. This creates a false sense of urgency and importance, as well as a potential manipulation of emotions for clickbait purposes.
2. The article uses vague terms such as "consistent interest" and "previous critiques" without providing any concrete examples or sources to back up these claims. This makes the argument less credible and trustworthy, as it relies on generalizations and assumptions instead of evidence-based reasoning.
3. The article praises Snowden's endorsement of Bitcoin as "the most significant monetary advance since the creation of coinage", without mentioning any counterarguments or alternative perspectives. This creates a one-sided and biased presentation, which may ignore other factors that could influence the value and adoption of cryptocurrencies.
4. The article mentions Bitcoin's recent achievements in terms of market capitalization and all-time highs in various currencies, but does not provide any context or analysis for these numbers. For example, it does not explain how Bitcoin's performance compares to other assets or what factors could be driving its price movements. This makes the article superficial and lacking depth.
5. The article ends with a quote from Snowden praising Bitcoin as "the most significant monetary advance since the creation of coinage", which is repeated from earlier in the text. This shows a lack of originality and creativity, as well as an attempt to reinforce the author's point without adding any new information or insights.

Overall, the article suffers from several flaws that undermine its quality, credibility, and usefulness for readers who want to learn more about Bitcoin and Snowden's views on it. It relies on sensationalism, generalizations, bias, and superficiality instead of providing a balanced, informed, and engaging analysis.