Following the highly criticized New York Times article that features commentary from the former CEO of FTX, Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF), the public continues to give the mainstream media flak for publishing “puff pieces” about SBF and the Alameda Research executive Caroline Ellison. A number of articles have been called out for being too lenient on the former FTX and Alameda executives and even going as far complimenting the individuals.
Critics Say Specific FTX-Related Articles Published by Forbes, Washington Post, and the Wall Street Journal Give Praise to FTX and Alameda Execs
On Nov. 15, 2022, Bitcoin.com News published an article about the criticism a New York Times (NYT) article received after it published an article that said the former FTX executive Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) was sleeping better and playing video games. People were not too pleased with the NYT article, and critics said at the time that the news publication went soft on SBF. The NYT article is not the only editorial that mainstream media (MSM) outlets have published that has caught flak for being soft on former FTX and Alameda executives and even praising the individuals.
For instance, critics slammed the Washington Post’s Dan Diamond for his report called “Before FTX collapse, founder poured millions into pandemic prevention.” Diamond’s report highlights SBF’s significant donations toward initiatives that would prevent another pandemic like Covid-19.
However, when the Washington Post tweeted Diamond’s story, the news outlet was dunked on for giving SBF praise. “Stop making him look noble. He was a crook running a Ponzi scheme,” on individual wrote to the Washington Post (WP). Another person replied to the WP’s tweet and said: “Where is the part that says ‘This Is a Sponsored Post.’”
The economist and trader Alex Krüger also knocked the WP article when he tweeted:
Incredible. The @washingtonpost also decided to write about FTX as if it were the case of a well intentioned charitable entrepreneur, rather than what it is: the most egregious financial fraud of the 21th century. What a disgrace.
Public Opinion Has Spoken: No One Cares That Alameda’s Top Exec Was a ‘Harry Potter Fan’ or So-Called ‘Math Whiz’
Some people called the Washington Post reporters clowns, and numerous people called Diamond’s reporting a “puff piece.” The NYT article and the Washington Post editorial were not the only articles condemned for singing praise to FTX and Alameda executives. A Forbes article was also slammed for propping up the former Alameda Research CEO Caroline Ellison.
At the time, the Twitter account called “Unusual Whales” tweeted: “This is wild by Forbes. Caroline Ellison is called a ‘math whiz’ and a person who ‘takes big risks.’” Unusual Whales added:
Rather than being called an individual who went against FTX’s own terms of services, allegedly used customer funds, and has not faced recourse.
Furthermore, when Forbes shared the article on Twitter, the description said that the FTX story was a “new darling of the alt-right.” One person wrote: “What happened to Forbes? They used to be better.”
“This spin is ridiculous. Caroline is ridiculed by everyone on the right and left,” Wayne Vaughan tweeted in reply to the Forbes’ take on Caroline Ellison. The whistleblower known as “Fatman” also shared his two cents on the MSM stories covering SBF and Alameda’s Ellison.
He also shared a screenshot of a reporter from Forbes that wanted to report on Ellison in a “nuanced way.” “I believe someone is funding a media campaign to influence the narrative around the FTX crew – who should be seen as nothing short of supervillains,” Fatman said. “Here is a Forbes reporter seeking favourable comments from ‘supporters’ instead of reporting on the actual facts.”
The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) has also been grilled for reporting on Alameda’s Ellison in a favorable manner. On the Reddit forum r/cryptocurrency, the Redditor “kindred_asura” shared a WSJ article that concentrates on Ellison. “Front page puff-piece about Caroline Ellison right now at the WSJ. Not ONE mention of fraud or illegal activities,” the Redditor said. The Reddit post got roughly 811 upvotes before r/cryptocurrency moderators decided to removed the post.
“I sure wish I never just ‘find myself’ losing billions of customers’ funds while running a fraudulent business,” the Redditor u/kindred_asura commented. Overall, a great deal of people seem to believe that MSM has purposely dropped the ball when reporting on FTX and Alameda executives.
Moreover, social media and Reddit forum posts arguably indicate that no one cares about SBF donating millions for pandemic prevention. Further, the hundreds of comments on social media and forums suggest that people certainly do not care about Ellison’s so-called “nerdy” behavior and the fact that she likes Harry Potter.
Tags in this story
Alameda executives, Alameda Research, Alex Kruger, Articles, Caroline Ellison, Critics, Dan Diamond, Fatman, Forbes, ftx, FTX execs, FTX executives, Mainstream media, msm, NYT, pandemic prevention, r/Cryptocurrency, Reddit forum, Sam Bankman-Fried, sbf, Unusual Whales, Wall Street Journal, washington post, Wayne Vaughan, WP reporter Dan Diamond, WSJ
What do you think about the reporting mainstream media has done so far on the FTX scandal? Let us know what you think about this subject in the comments section below.
Jamie Redman is the News Lead at Bitcoin.com News and a financial tech journalist living in Florida. Redman has been an active member of the cryptocurrency community since 2011. He has a passion for Bitcoin, open-source code, and decentralized applications. Since September 2015, Redman has written more than 6,000 articles for Bitcoin.com News about the disruptive protocols emerging today.
Image Credits: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons, Twitter,
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. It is not a direct offer or solicitation of an offer to buy or sell, or a recommendation or endorsement of any products, services, or companies. Bitcoin.com does not provide investment, tax, legal, or accounting advice. Neither the company nor the author is responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any content, goods or services mentioned in this article.