"Mr. Bankman-Fried, who became a billionaire as FTX soared and was viewed as a wunderkind, faces significant legal trouble. The Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission are investigating FTX’s transfer of funds to Alameda. The chief executive of Alameda, Caroline Ellison, told staff this month that the trading firm had dipped into FTX customer funds to finance its own trading activity, The Times and others have reported.
Mr. Bankman-Fried has since come under heavy criticism. In court filings, FTX’s new chief executive, who is managing the company’s bankruptcy, said he had never seen “such a complete failure of corporate control” and listed a series of “unacceptable management practices.”
On Wednesday, Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen called FTX’s collapse a “Lehman moment” for the cryptocurrency industry, referring to the bankruptcy of the Wall Street bank Lehman Brothers at the start of the 2008 financial crisis. She indicated that she viewed cryptocurrencies with skepticism..."
The narrative you have does not equate with what is actually in the articles.
Conspiracy sees what conspiracy sees. Girlfriend bit and weird behavior was already covered extensively by NYT. He's the CEO with no management practices. Lehman an unmitigated disaster of ethics as you say. I would read this as laying at all at the feet of SBF - which the NYT has done consistently.
Mostly I believe people don't know how to read news vs opinion. Matt Levine can speculate and call him a thief, as he's an opinion journalist. Straight news can have an edge but has to mostly report facts. (edited here to add:) You will notice that each of those paragraphs has quotes, sourced to people. That's called reporting, not deflecting.
Deflecting is a type of reporting. It's one where you focus on anything and everything except the core of the problem in order to try to deflect attention from it. This issue isn't a matter of management practices or ethics, it's a matter of the head of a company engaging in widespread criminal behavior. To frame it as the former is like arguing that Madoff was just a case of "poor accounting practices."
I don't think there is winning this with you, but you are comparing apples to oranges. The TFA mentioned above is "news" because it was reporting on the interview SBF just did, not a recap of the whole thing.
The CNBC article is "news" because it was breaking the news on the back door, transfer of funds, etc. It was new news at the time. Here is CNBCs coverage of the interview where you can compare to NYT apples to apples: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/30/former-ftx-ceo-sam-bankman-f...
There is a cadence to the news cycle. Not every articles is summative. Some are reporting on latest developments, hot takes, etc.
"Mr. Bankman-Fried, who became a billionaire as FTX soared and was viewed as a wunderkind, faces significant legal trouble. The Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission are investigating FTX’s transfer of funds to Alameda. The chief executive of Alameda, Caroline Ellison, told staff this month that the trading firm had dipped into FTX customer funds to finance its own trading activity, The Times and others have reported.
Mr. Bankman-Fried has since come under heavy criticism. In court filings, FTX’s new chief executive, who is managing the company’s bankruptcy, said he had never seen “such a complete failure of corporate control” and listed a series of “unacceptable management practices.”
On Wednesday, Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen called FTX’s collapse a “Lehman moment” for the cryptocurrency industry, referring to the bankruptcy of the Wall Street bank Lehman Brothers at the start of the 2008 financial crisis. She indicated that she viewed cryptocurrencies with skepticism..."
The narrative you have does not equate with what is actually in the articles.