Reporting on the FTX and Alameda collapse has been extremely difficult. The revelations have been arriving at light speed and changing by the minute. I may not be perfect, but I look like the world’s greatest journalist compared to The New York Times.
Have you had a chance to read their recent interview with SBF and summary of the events? It’s a doozy.
You can read the article HERE
Before I get into why I am outraged by this article, I will briefly share with you some of the whitewashed lies that they put into print.
Plug your nose, because there’s a lot of bullshit.
Had I been a bit more concentrated on what I was doing, I would have been able to be more thorough,” he said. “That would have allowed me to catch what was going on on the risk side.
Mr. Bankman-Fried’s circle of colleagues was bound by a commitment to effective altruism, a charitable movement that urges adherents to give away their wealth in efficient and logical ways.
And in Washington, he was pushing an ambitious regulatory agenda while speaking critically about Changpeng Zhao, the chief executive of the rival exchange Binance, who eventually mobilized his extensive Twitter following to set off the run on FTX.
Attacking Mr. Zhao “was not a good strategic move on my part,” Mr. Bankman-Fried said on Sunday. “I was pretty frustrated at a lot of what I saw happening, but I should’ve understood that it was not a good decision of me to express that.”
As FTX has crumbled, Mr. Bankman-Fried has been “working constructively with regulators, bankruptcy officials, and the company to try to do what’s best for consumers,” he said on Sunday.
Sam is also getting plenty of sleep and playing video games, although not as much as he would like.
If I had zero knowledge of the situation and the New York Times article was the first piece that I read, then I would assume the following:
*Sam lost control of his exchange because he was too busy being an altruist while a rival tore him down. Furthermore, his largest mistake was in fact the rivalry. Luckily, Sam is doing his best to rectify the problem with regulators.
Could this New York Times synopsis be any further from the truth? Here is a more accurate summary.
*Sam purposely stole user funds and used excessive leverage because he was busy trying to bury the implosion of Alameda and his crimes of the past. He pretended to be an effective altruist to help hide his fraud. His bad acting was rightfully exposed by a rival, who knew that Sam was responsible for many of the implosions in crypto. Now Sam is trying to cover up the evidence while toying with his followers.
It is important that we get this story right. We have worshipped a seemingly endless line of young billionaires who got rich quick on the backs of easy leverage and fraud. If we whitewash the truth, then we are bound to repeat our mistakes again in the future.
It’s time to burn the dead wood so that the forest can thrive.
It is worth noting that The New York Times had no problem writing aggressive hit pieces about the arrested Tornado Cash developer, Brian Armstrong, and Jesse Powell, none of whom have done anything wrong.
Let’s start telling the truth.
If you want a far better account of the FTX saga, scroll down to the news section titled, “What Really Happened With FTX?” The tweet thread is the best synopsis I have seen so far.
Side note: Today will be my last livestream until Friday the 25th, and it is going to be a big one. My community has been asking, so I invited BitBoy to join. He was far ahead of the SBF saga and believes there is far more nonsense coming. While I know he is polarizing, I am interested in hearing his views.
Don’t miss it.