Washington Post, Forbes & Wall Street Journal Criticized Over ‘Puff Piece’ Reports on FTX, Alameda Executives – Bitcoin News

Following the highly criticized New York Times article featuring commentary by former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF), the public continues to slam the mainstream media for publishing “bloated pieces” about SBF and the executive by Alameda Research Caroline Ellison. A number of articles were called out for being too lenient with former FTX and Alameda executives and even complimenting people.

Critics say specific FTX-related articles published by Forbes, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal praise FTX and Alameda executives

On November 15, 2022, Bitcoin.com News published an article about the criticism received by a New York Times (NYT) article after it published an article saying that former FTX executive Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) was asleep better and played video games. People weren’t too happy with the NYT article, and critics at the time said news publishing had become sluggish on SBF. The NYT article isn’t the only mainstream media (MSM) op-ed that has received criticism for being soft on former FTX and Alameda executives and even praising individuals.

For example, critics slammed The Washington Post’s Dan Diamond for his report titled “Before FTX Collapse, Founder Poured Millions Into Pandemic Prevention.” Diamond’s report highlights SBF’s significant donations to initiatives that would prevent another pandemic like Covid-19.

However, when the Washington Post tweeted Diamond’s story, the news outlet was crushed for praising SBF. “Stop making it sound noble. He was a hustler who ran a Ponzi scheme,” up individual he wrote at the Washington Post (WP). Another person replied to WP’s tweet and said, “Where’s the part that says ‘This is a sponsored post.'”

Economist and trader Alex Krüger also shot down the WP article when he has tweeted:

Incredible. The @washingtonpost also decided to write about FTX as if it were a well-meaning charitable entrepreneur, rather than what it is: the most egregious financial fraud of the 21st century. What a shame.

Public opinion has spoken: Nobody cares that the top Alameda executive was a ‘Harry Potter fan’ or a so-called ‘math whiz’

Some people called the clowns of Washington Post reporters and numerous people called Diamond is reporting a “puffy piece”. The NYT article and Washington Post op-ed weren’t the only articles condemned for praising FTX and Alameda executives. A Forbes article was also criticized for endorsing former Alameda Research CEO Caroline Ellison.

At the time, the Twitter account called “Unusual Whales” tweeted: “This is wild for Forbes. Caroline Ellison is described as a ‘math whiz’ and ‘risk-taker’. Unusual Whales added:

Rather than being called an individual who went against FTX’s terms of service, he allegedly used client funds and faced no recourse.

Also, when Forbes shared the Twitter article, the description said FTX’s story was a “new darling of the alt-right.” A person he wrote: “What happened to Forbes? They were better before.”

“This ride is ridiculous. Caroline is ridiculed by everyone left and right,” Wayne Vaughan tweeted in response to Forbes’ opinion of Caroline Ellison. The whistleblower known as “Fatman” also shared his two cents on MSM stories covering Alameda’s SBF and Ellison.

He also shared a screenshot of a Forbes reporter who wanted to report on Ellison in a “nuanced way.” “I believe someone is funding a media campaign to influence the narrative around the crew of FTX, who should be seen as nothing short of super-villains,” Fatman She said. “Here’s a Forbes reporter looking for favorable comments from ‘supporters’ instead of reporting on the real facts.”

The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) was also criticized for reporting favorably on Alameda’s Ellison. On the r/cryptocurrency Reddit forum, Redditor “kindred_asura” shared a WSJ article that focuses on Ellison. “A front page story about Caroline Ellison right now at the WSJ. Not ONE mention of fraud or illegal activity,” the Redditor said. The Reddit post got about 811 upvotes before r/cryptocurrency moderators decided to take down the post.

“I really wish I didn’t ‘find myself’ losing billions in client funds while running a fraudulent business,” commented Redditor u/kindred_asura. Overall, many people seem to believe that MSM purposely dropped the ball when reporting on FTX and Alameda executives.

Additionally, posts on social media and Reddit forums undoubtedly indicate that nobody cares that SBF is donating millions for pandemic prevention. Furthermore, the hundreds of comments on social media and forums suggest that people certainly don’t 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 executives, 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 of the mainstream media reporting so far on the FTX scandal? Let us know what you think about this topic in the comments section below.

Jamie Redman

Jamie Redman is News Lead at Bitcoin.com News and a financial technology journalist based 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, nor a recommendation or endorsement of any product, service or company. Bitcoin.com does not provide investment, tax, legal or accounting advice. Neither the company nor the author is responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damages or losses caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with use of or reliance on any content, goods or services mentioned in this article.

Leave a Reply