Truth Social: Shady Deals Lead to a Federal Investigation (2022)

ABSTRACT:

    The relatively new, conservative based social media app, Truth Social, has been sparking controversy since the time of its development in early 2021. This application, headed by Donald Trump and his company Trump Media, has raised questions about not only how it is being run and moderated, but also the dealings behind the scenes that have led to a federal investigation. Investors, developers, and users, and even those who have left the company have been affected by this, and some who continue to be involved are dealing with the consequences.

    Despite the polarizing topic of the app’s political nature, this paper is intended to be an objective look into how the situation is viewed by four ethical theories: Individualism, Utilitarianism, Kantianism, and Virtue Theory. Only after considering the teachings of each theory will a verdict be able to be placed on Truth Social, and in turn, their parent company, Trump Media. After looking into each of the theories and their teachings, the acts from Trump Media and Truth Social will clearly be seen as more unethical that not.

CASE CONTROVERSY:

Final tweets from former president Donald Trump

    Before discussing the controversy of Truth Social, its conception must be understood. On January 8^th, 2021, closely following the January 6^th insurrection of the U.S. Capitol Building, Donald Trump posted several tweets further spreading the message that the election was stolen and denying a peaceful transfer of power. According to a statement by Twitter, “We assessed the two Tweets referenced above under our Glorification of Violence policy, which aims to prevent the glorification of violence that could inspire others to replicate violent acts and determined that they were highly likely to encourage and inspire people to replicate the criminal acts that took place at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021” (Twitter). Many other forms of social media followed this act, banning the former president on their respective apps. Due to Trump using these sites as his major form of reaching his political followers, he was forced to use far smaller platforms. This caused him to look for an alternative, and eventually to create a competitor of his own: Truth Social.

    However, to launch such an app, they needed financial support from external sources, so Trump Media looked to investors for help. In late 2021, a deal was struck between Trump Media and the company Digital World Acquisition. Specifically, Trump Media would get $300 million for agreeing to a merger with Digital World (Goldstein and Thompson). This was a surprise to many, as there was nothing publicly stated before this time about a merger. However, this, in addition to $1 billion from several hedge funds, would be more than enough to fund Trump’s passion project and not many more eyebrows were raised.

The waitlist for Truth Social from https://ichef.bbci
.co.uk/news/640/cpsprodpb/1407C/production/_
123944028_screenshot2022-03-29at15.14.28.png

    Launching just over a year after the permanent bans took place, Truth Social was marketed as a right-wing app that was highlighted by its lack of moderation, labeled by the developers as free speech. While this seemed like a safe haven for far-right wing Americans, in February of 2022, they were met with a host of issues with the interface of the app. The launch was “plagued by technical glitches and a 13-hour outage” (Kelly) and a month after its release, “new users are still being put on an ever-expanding million-person or more waitlist to join the app” (Kelly). While all major apps have technical difficulties in their early stages, this seemed to be more than expected. Reportedly, two executives of Truth Social resigned from their positions due to the nature of the launch. Josh Adams, the Chief Technology Officer, and Billy Boozer, the Head of Product Development, did not make a comment on specifics about their swift resignations.

Ricky Shiffer at the attack on the U.S. Capitol. 
https://www.sportskeeda.com/pop-culture/what
-ricky-walter-shiffer-do-armed-man-killed
-police
-standoff-attempted-ohio-fbi-office-breach

    In addition, the budding social media app was gaining more users, but this meant more of a chance for misuse. Following the FBI’s search of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home in August of 2022, there was an uproar on the app, including messages from a man by the name of Ricky Shiffer. One of these posts read “get whatever you need to be ready for combat” (Thompson and Goldstein). Later, he was killed attempting to break into an FBI office in retaliation to the search. While some point to Donald Trump for fueling some of this hatred, the senior research manager for Institute for Strategic Dialogue, Jared Holt, has another view of it. He indicated that, “the unfortunate truth is that any platform — once it gets big enough — has to deal with somebody doing something like that” (Thompson and Goldstein). This death made it difficult to justify one of its largest draws for the userbase: the lack of moderation.

Timeline of Events

    These were not the only issues with the company however, as internally there were surfacing problems surrounding the merger with Digital World. A whistleblower by the name of William Wilkerson claims that there were “fraudulent misrepresentations … in violation of federal securities laws” (Harwell). Based on Special Purpose Acquisition Company (SPAC) guidelines, talks of mergers between parties must be disclosed to the public. While Digital World did later acknowledge that there had been undisclosed talks of the Merger between representatives of each company, they “argue that those talks were too preliminary to meet the threshold for disclosure” (Goldstein). But with these admissions in addition to the whistleblower, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has launched an investigation into the deal. This process is far from over, but at this point, anything else would be pure speculation as those concerned with the company are waiting for the result of the investigation. As of now, the merger still has not gone through, but Digital World’s shareholders have extended the deadline of the merger a few months, and are looking at other long term options, to accommodate the company during the investigation.

STAKEHOLDERS:

    This process, from the deal with Digital World to those resigning because of too many technical issues, has affected many people, whether it be in a positive or negative manner. It is important to highlight some of these individuals and groups to acknowledge their level of involvement. This will help to adequately represent all parties involved when thinking about each ethical theory. The most obvious of these is Truth Social and by extension Trump Media. Based on the results of the Federal investigation, they could lose out on their promised $1.3 billion. Digital World is in a similar situation, as they would be forced to return the $300 million initially raised by the investors. Directly following this, the investors and contributing hedge fund managers would be affected by their money returning to them without payout. Another set of stakeholders are those using the app. While many are satisfied with the experience, the host of problems with other users and technical issues must be taken into consideration. Some individuals associated with the groups above are Donald Trump, Josh Adams, Billy Boozer, William Wilkerson, and Ricky Shiffer.

INDIVIDUALISM:

    This ethical theory is among the simplest to understand and can be broken down into two main parts. To be ethical under Individualism, an action must be profitable for the company, and in tandem, there must be no laws broken. From the perspective of Truth Social and Trump Media, this merger with Digital World was indeed a quite profitable idea. They would be gaining a total of $1.3 billion. To satisfy the second characteristic of Individualism, Trump Media claims that everything was done legally. If they are to be taken at their word, this would be an ethical action.

    However, there is more to this than it seems at first glance. If it proves that there were deceptive dealings between Digital World and Trump Media, the verdict would shift. The aforementioned result of Trump Media being innocent, and hence the merger being ethical is only one of two possible outcomes. The other is that they are guilty of fraudulent behavior. It is unclear which laws they are being investigated for, but if they have carried out illegal activity, the merger would not go through, and the money would be returned to the respective investors. This in turn would violate both the necessities behind individualism. The obvious part of them being guilty would imply that the law has been broken. As a result, profitability would be diminished greatly if not fully taken away. They would lose the money promised by the merger, making the action unethical. This cannot be reasoned whether it is ethical or not, but it is entirely based off the investigation.

UTILITARIANISM:

    Contrary to Individualism where only the company taking action is considered, Utilitarianism takes the wellbeing of all stakeholders into account. The major tenant of this theory is to maximize happiness. If the action does not maximize happiness, then it is considered unethical. Similar to the last analysis, two cases will be considered regarding the outcome of the federal investigation. However, some stakeholders in the process are not particularly interested parties when it comes to the investigation, and hence they will be listed first. The main reason many of them are no longer linked to the company and its dealings is because they have been taken out of the equation in one way or another. Josh Adams and Billy Boozer were unhappy with the company and how the technical issues were being handled, as this was their reported reason for leaving. Another former executive, William Wilkerson the whistleblower, was so unhappy with the dealings at the company that he felt the need to file a formal complaint with the SEC. The final consideration for the currently uninterested parties is Ricky Shiffer. While he theoretically cannot feel happiness nor the contrary, his death presumably caused despair among family and friends. In this category, there were no feelings of happiness, but before an ethical judgment can be placed, the other two cases must be presented.

    If Trump Media is not guilty, it is reasonable to assume they would be happy as the long-awaited merger would finally be able to go through. This would give them access to funds to run Truth Social and potentially work on further ventures. It would equally make Digital World and their investors happy as they would make a profit from this just as much as Trump Media would. Taking the first group of people into account, there are more people who are happy simply because of the quantity associated with the deal that outweigh those who have been burned leading to the merger. On the contrary, if this deal is found to be illegitimate, all mentioned parties would completely flip and be unhappy. Truth Social could be at risk of shutting down with a lack of finances to run successfully, which would make all the employees generally unhappy. The same logical reasoning can explain the displeasure of all associated with Digital World and the investors funding the merger. In this case, all parties are not happy, so it would be unethical. Due to the divide in the cases, it is left up to the investigations results.

KANTANIANISM:

    While both of the past ethical theories were fairly simple, they also had some sizeable shortcomings that can create holes in their logical arguments. To make up for a lapse in the inadequacies of these theories, Kantianism is slightly more complicated and less black and white. There are a few important principal thoughts associated with this way of ethical analysis. The primary ones are to act rationally and to respect others’ rationality. All other rules of Kantianism can be derived from these two statements. If you are not helping people to be rational, or worse, obstructing their rationality by lying, this is not showing respect to their rationality. In addition to this, there are two important formulas to live by: the Formula of Humanity and the Formula of Universal Law.  The first of these claims that one must respect another’s humanity and never use them as a means to some end. The second of the formulas says to act according to a maxim and if you can universalize this maxim without contradictions to rationality, it is permissible.

    There is more to the teachings of Kant, however, this is more than enough information to pick out several violations by the heads of each company. One such infringement is the deceit behind the talks between representatives of Trump Media and Digital World that were not disclosed to the public. This does not respect the rationality of the public. Despite the companies not explicitly being dishonest, they were lying by omission. This also fails the Formula of Universal Law. Consider the maxim as not disclosing the talks to the public. Universalizing this, it can be seen that there is some information that could be useful that is unknown to people, hence lapsing their rationality.

    Another such violation is the idea of Truth Social as a whole. Trump Media is using those who work at the company, as well as the users of the site, as mere means to complete a merger that will profit Trump Media primarily. While Truth Social will also see some of the benefits, it will be less direct, contradicting the Formula of Humanity. Opposed to the last two ethical theories, Kantianism does not hinge on the federal investigation heavily. However, if found guilty, this would go against all what Kant believed to be ethical, as lying is an impermissible act. Therefore, it can be reasoned that this deal is unethical under the teaching of Kantianism.

VIRTUE THEORY:

    The final analysis that will be considered is that of Virtue Theory. When discussing this way of thinking, the first logical question is determining what a virtue is. It can be expressed as a characteristic that allows something to function as it is intended to. In humans, there are four major characteristics: courage, temperance, justice, and honesty. It can be seen quite easily that one must strive for these virtues, but they are each on their own spectrum. Take courage for instance; it sits on the spectrum between the vices of cowardice and recklessness. Despite these being qualities of an honorable person, humans are not inherently virtuous. The process to become virtuous has four steps. One must model themselves after a virtuous person, thus making it easier to know what habits to follow. Next, it must be acknowledged that most people are weak willed, and hence, the transformation will be difficult. Once this is realized, it is important to attempt to act with the virtuous qualities in mind. Once these actions become habit, they develop into character traits and in turn virtues.

    As honesty is one of the cardinal virtues, the argument for why the merger is not ethical follows similar logic to that of Kantianism. It is quite clear that those representing Trump Media and Digital World have failed one or more of the aforementioned steps. It would only be speculation to figure out where the error was, but no matter which step was missed or ignored, the outcome was the same. They were dishonest with the public about their talks of a merger behind closed doors. This also relies slightly on the result of the investigation, as it could violate the cardinal virtue of justice as well. If they are found to be guilty of fraudulent activity, this would directly contradict this virtue. Based on all the presented information, the teachings of Virtue Theory would undoubtedly condemn the merger between Trump Media and Digital World as being unethical.

JUSTIFICATION OF ETHICS:    

    Reviewing the verdicts of the four considered theories, we have two that outright would label the merger unethical. The other two are somewhat inconclusive due to the fact that they rely so heavily on the outcome of the federal investigation. But to determine if it truly can be labeled one way or another, the ethical theories must be combined in some way to adequately judge them. One such method of combination could be to give each theory an equal weight. This approach would rely on the investigation so it will again be broken into cases. If the merger is found to be legitimate, the divide between theories claiming ethical and unethical will be two on one side and two on the other. Alternatively, if the deal is found to be illegal, all four theories label it as unethical. However, there is one final instance to examine. In the case of this current time, two theories label it as being unethical and two cases are undetermined. This can be modeled by looking at the probabilities of certain events. If we say each ethical theory is equal to one if unethical and zero if ethical, and the expectation is greater than two, the act is more likely to be unethical. Since major news sites are writing about it, it is reasonable to assume the probability of the investigation yielding a guilty verdict is greater than zero and hence, the expectation for the two undetermined theories is greater than zero. Added to the two that would define it as unethical, it can be seen that the expectation is greater than two. Therefore, the merger is more likely to be unethical currently.  

CONCLUSION:

    It must be noted that this has been researched and written from the information available by December 2, 2022. As seen throughout the paper, much of it relies on the results of the federal investigation. However, it was written in such a way that hopefully the reader may easily convert the ethical theories to one way or another once the results are established. The covered scenarios are not necessarily comprehensive of all possibilities, but simply the most probable ones.

Owen Boyns

REFERENCES:         

Goldstein, Matthew. “SPAC Tied to Trump Media Says Early Talks Were Not 'Substantive'.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 25 Oct. 2022, https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/25/business/trump-media-spac-sec.html. 

Harwell, Drew. “Co-Founder of Trump's Media Company Details Truth Social's Bitter Infighting.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 16 Oct. 2022, https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/10/15/truth-social-trump-animosity-whistleblower/.

Kelly, Makena. “Two Top Truth Social Execs Resign from the Company.” The Verge, The Verge, 4 Apr. 2022, https://www.theverge.com/2022/4/4/23010005/truth-social-billy-boozer-josh-adams-donald-trump-social-media-rumble-tmtg.

“Permanent Suspension of @RealDonaldTrump.” Twitter, Twitter, https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspension.

Thompson, Stuart A., and Matthew Goldstein. “Truth Social's Influence Grows despite Its Business Problems.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 1 Nov. 2022, https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/01/technology/truth-social-conservative-social-app.html.

The Growth of Truth Social (2022)

ABSTRACT

    Truth Social is the newest conservative marketed social media

Truth Social CEO Devin Nunes 

platform. Owned by Trump Media & Technology Group. Has had a massive growth since its launch in February of 2022. It had a total number of 1.7 million unique users compared to its competitors only averaging 360,000 unique users. The company had a rocky start with two executives quitting and another executive being fired in October by filing a whistleblower complaint to the Securities and Exchange Commission that Truth’s parent company was relying on fraudulent misrepresentations. The four different ethical belief systems have different beliefs of whether this platform is ethical. Individualism loves this platform, utilitarianism believes this site is good but its user base is unethical, Kanianism believes that the platform is unethical because of an unwillingness to limit what people say, and lastly virtue theory again believes the platform is bad based on understanding basic human actions. This site is seen as ethical, the concept is very ethical because the people are what make this platform unethical, humans by nature are unethical beings and the internet makes people think they can say whatever they wish without consequences so it brings out the worst habits and behaviors of human beings.

ETHICS CASE CONTROVERSY

Truth Social Star and Trump Media & Technology Group
CEO Donald J. Trump

Truth Social joined the already full social platform race on February 21, 2022, created by the Trump Media & Technology Group. It is a right-wing social network which already faces two federal investigations with uncertain financial future. With this they have still managed to outpace rival social media platforms. Though it doesn’t compare with Twitter, and Facebook. Compared to its closest rivals such as Gab, Parler, Gettr, MeWe and Minds who averaged about 360,000 unique visitors in September Truth Social towers over them with a number of 1.7 million unique visitors all from the US. The right-wing social media platform has faced problems after problems since its launch date, one of those being two executives resigning after the app was launched still full of problems. A third executive was fired after filing a whistle-blower complaint which was that Truth’s parent company was relying on fraudulent misrepresentations. The company is currently under two separate federal investigations which is putting a $1.3 billion constraint on the already financially drained company. Much of Truth’s growth is owed to former President Donald J. Trump who is one of Truth’s founders and the star of the app. He is not the only well known right-wing politician or celebrity on this app; he is joined by Dan Bongino, Marjorie Taylor Greene and numerous conspiracy theorists, far-right influencers and many other Republican voters. The platform has had significant growth especially among the right-wing political party. This has made the platform bigger than anticipated. It is growing at a far faster rate than any of the social media platforms currently out there for consumer use. It does have its issues on the financial front which is why the company has its hopes set on a deal made with Digital World Acquisitions. The company successfully raised $300 million with their initial public offering of stock. They later received money from three dozen hedge funds which came to an additional $1 billion in finances upon the completion of the merger between the two companies. Though this deal will most likely fall through which will lead to Truth going from hoping to gain $1.3 billion to nothing. The reason for this is because Digital World is currently under investigations by both federal prosecutors and securities regulators which could lead to them having to liquidate themselves in early December and force them to return to shareholders the money raided in its I.P.O. The fact of the matter is if this deal falls through Trump Media will have to scavenge for financing to be able to keep Truth Social running. 

Unique monthly visits over the past year

William Wilkerson, former executive of Trump Media was fired in October after publicly admitting to have filed a whistle-blower complaint with the Securities and Exchange Commission or SEC. He admitted that the company was using up about $1.7 million in cash each month. Truth has recently started running advertisements. This high amount of cash to keep this app running is probably one of the main reasons they finally started to run advertisements. Mr. Wilkerson said that if the deal with Digital World did end up falling through then “a plausible alternative would be for Trump Media to consider a merger with Rumble, a conservative video-sharing alternative to YouTube, which has emerged as Trump Media’s main business partner”(NYTimes). As shared to us through Mr. Wilkerson and a second person with knowledge of Truth Social’s operations about half the people that work at Trump Media’s office in Sarasota Florida, are Rumble employees. Rumble provides most of the backbone that allows Truth Social to function as well as it does. With Rumble having just completed its own merger with SPAC, giving the company roughly $400 million in cash and now being a publicly traded entity they will likely have a merger with Truth Social. 

With Elon Musk completing his takeover of Twitter he has promised more lenient policies which could lead to some conservatives leaving Truth and heading back to Twitter. With Kanye West who plans to buy Parler there could be two new competitive apps that will be eye catching to conservatives which is the primary target of Truth Social. Though Truth is still on the rise and with the release of Truth Social on Android devices, it has granted access to a bigger population of people. About 40 percent of Americans use an Android operating system. Truth Social is still a very new platform. They are still trying to figure out their financial situation and they have grown at a faster pace than their competitors did at their age. The true test of what will happen to the company will be within the next couple of months. If they can successfully get funding to keep running then they will have a massive impact on what happens with the presidential election. If they flop and end up shutting down then it will go to show that even with a great amount of people and followers without proper financial backing a company is doomed to fail.

Chris Pavlovski CEO Rumble

STAKEHOLDERS 

The primary stakeholders of Truth Social are Chris Pavlovski the founder and CEO of Rumble, who provides technology and services to Trump Media & Technology Group. Another one would be Devin Nunes former congressman and CEO of Truth Social who is the one who has the most to either gain or lose based on how Truth does, another one would be Donald J. Trump former president as the CEO of Trump Media & Technology Group who owns the rights to Truth Social. There are also all the employees that have been hired and all of those who own stock in the company.

INDIVIDUALISM

From an individualist’s perspective, the actions that Truth Social is performing are exactly their ideals. The reason this is, is because truth social is all about protecting freedom of speech and allowing the users to say whatever they wish without reprimand or punishment. Similar to how other platforms react. Individualism has a couple key values that they follow, they believe that all values are human centered and each individual person is of extreme importance, and all individuals are morally equal so no matter who you are your voice matters, your opinions matter. Nobody should be able to tell you what you can and cannot say. The second amendment of the US constitution is a main value of an individualist. Truth Social markets themselves as protecting the First Amendment through an online platform which is rarely seen on most online platforms because of being forced to follow international laws. Most platforms have to create their sites under laws that appease all countries or risk being blocked in that country. Truth Social is primarily focused in America and marketed in America, plus it was created to follow American laws. This site has the highest amount of public freedom with what they can say. The application is also free to use which means they are not limiting who can use the app. Most apps view the needs of the group over the individual. They market themselves towards a target group which is usually a set age group, though they do have to put into consideration that people of other ages will probably access the site so they have to censor certain topics or discussions. These online platforms can have toxic people which cause issues and they have trolls who try to cause issues for the masses. Which sites try to stop by banning them or deleting what they have said so the masses cannot see what they have said. This app does not do this; they have marketed themselves as a platform where people can say whatever they wish whether that information is true or not. It will not be limited. People can view the site and choose to either believe or not to believe what they have read on their own. Which is exactly what an individualist wants from the world.

UTILITARIANISM 

Truth Social Apple download

From a utilitarian perspective this social network platform can go against what they believe and follow their beliefs. The reason for this seemingly contradiction is because of what their moral beliefs are. They believe morality is meant to foster happiness and pleasure, though they oppose actions that lead to unhappiness. They believe an act is good if it truly benefits the majority. The utilitarian belief states there are always two sides of a story like a coin, so if something promotes happiness but also spreads false information by lying they would see nothing wrong with it because it is spreading a positive image. But if something tells the truth but it causes unhappiness then they would see something wrong with it and disagree with it. What this means for this platform is that if what people talk about on the site leads to happiness for others they will see nothing wrong with what is said whether it's the truth or fiction. Though if it is discriminatory, or racist, or meant to antagonize either a group or everybody then they will be displeased and be against it. So their perspective will not see anything wrong with the app itself but how the users of the app use it. They would see true freedom of speech as a good thing upon people using it to create happiness and not anger. Though this will be difficult as there have been numerous accounts of racism, homophobia and antagonism already posted and spread about the application. This application was used to identify an armed assailant in a FBI office in Cincinnati. “Ricky Shiffer, had posted about the Mar-a-Lago search and told followers to “get whatever you need to be ready for combat.” The same account also appeared to confess to an attack on the F.B.I.”(NYTimes). Users like these would go against the utilitarian perspective through research done by Pew Research, which found some statistics on how users are being treated on the platform, 

A large share of those who regularly get news on Truth Social (57%) say they are very or somewhat satisfied with the experience, while 25% are very or somewhat dissatisfied and the rest give a neutral assessment. Additionally, 59% of these news consumers say the discussions they see on the site are mostly friendly, while 16% see mostly unfriendly discussions and 25% say they see about an equal mix of friendly and unfriendly discussions. (PewResearch)

These statistics would help a utilitarian to decide whether they agree with the existence of this social network platform or not. Based on these statistics, 41% of consumers are seeing unfriendly discussions so this would go against a utilitarian belief. If that number was zero or at least a lower percent they would probably find this site to be okay and follow their beliefs. That percentage is too high and they would not agree with this even though a majority of users are seeing positive and friendly results. 

KANTIANISM 

A Kantian thinker would see this site as immoral. The reason for this is because the site does not even try and limit what a person can say or act. People will act in a way that will be immoral to a Kantian thinker. The Kantian Ethics follow very set rules at a moral level to always act rationally. What this means is that they believe all humans have an inherent worth of respect, dignity, and morality. Kantians believe that you should always act in the most rational way and do what is right even if there are negative consequences. But true freedom of speech does not follow this moral because humans by nature are liars. What's worse is that there are people lying and being extremely mean on the internet, the internet brings out the worst in humanity. People are more likely to be rude, mean, and act immoral when they believe that there are no consequences for their actions and that they can do it anonymously. Especially on a social media platform that is all about letting people have free reign and doing and saying as they please. People act in an extremely immoral way when they see no consequences to their actions. The categorical imperative formula of humanity is to “act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same time as an end and never simply as a means” (Kant429). Most humans do not act in this way though, which is why this site will bring out the worst in people and likely become what Twitter used to be before they started to monitor what can and cannot be said on their site. It will become a mosh pit of the internet's very worst and just spiral into madness. This is exactly what the Kantian perspective wants to avoid and is the reason they will not like this social media platform.

                                                                                    VIRTUE THEORY 

Truth Social User Friendly

A virtue theorist would view Truth Social as bad and against their beliefs because Virtue Theory is an ethical mindset that you shouldn’t focus on the rules of the world but on what kind of people we should be, and what ethical examples we should copy. Someone who follows this ethical view before partaking in a particular activity or behavior would more than likely ask themselves whether someone who's engaging in this activity is manifesting appropriate virtues or character traits, is this something a kind, brave, generous, or compassionate person would do? A virtue theorist would view this platform as wrong because the internet is already filled with liars and bad behaviors and now that the lies won’t be stopped or removed it will be difficult to tell the difference between truth and lies. When we lie we create a behavior of lying and that can turn into a habit. The internet makes it easy to do this and turn good honest people into liars for attention or any number of reasons. The virtue theory is all about repetition, to repeat good activities and avoid bad ones. 

Through repetition, we acquire the habit of truth-telling. This gives special significance to individual actions. The problem with telling a lie is not (as a utilitarian would say) the damage that it does, nor (as a Kantian would say) the fact that lying amounts to disrespecting someone, but rather that in telling a lie we are likely acting in a way that we do not think is worthy of imitation, and we are contributing to the process of building ourselves into liars (concise Encyclopedia). 

So when somebody repeatedly tells lies they are more likely to lie and to think it is acceptable. So when there are 1.7 million users on a site that has said that they will not limit speech and stop lies and false information than a virtue theorist will see it as an evil construction and not use it.

JUSTIFICATIED ETHICS EVALUATION 

In my opinion the actions and decisions made by this company to make the site completely under the rules of free speech is completely ethical. The site itself and the ideology of it do go against some of the ethical beliefs but to be able to completely follow all four ethical beliefs is very difficult. I do believe that most of the reason why the social media platform fails to be ethical is not the site itself but the people who use the platform. They fail to follow ethical beliefs. The right to free speech is ethical because people should not be limited by their personal beliefs and political views. Everyone should be allowed to say what they believe under the presumption that it is the truth. The fault of this platform is that it incites liars and misinformation like the onion. This site is just 4chan but for politicians and marketed towards conservatives. People may think that they are unethical because of what is said on the sites by the users but the platform in what it is going for is ethical. 

This site would be considered ethical by all four ethics beliefs if humans were not liars and said harmful things and if people could think in a way that would be kind and nice to everybody. It is not the site that is unethical, it is the user base. To quote Robert Wright, "We are far from the only dishonest species, but we are surely the most dishonest, if only because we do the most talking." (ABC.Net) We as humans like to lie and hurt others. This is why I view the people of this site as unethical and not the concept or the site as unethical.

Truth Social now on Android

CONCLUSION

Truth Social, is a platform that was created by Donald J. Trump and it is being used primarily by conservatives, a majority of the users have a positive experience with the platform. The platform is marketed toward conservatives because they are the ones who are affected the most by how other social media platforms censor what is said and how these platforms delete messages or ban members for saying racist, homophobic, transphobic or spreading misinformation. This platform has marketed that they will do none of these things and that you as an individual can say whatever your heart desires. If you wish to lie and spread misinformation, you can. If you wish to be racist, you can, the site will not stop you. The flaw of this site is that they are having financial issues and by most ethical beliefs the users themselves are unethical. This site and its beliefs are not viewed as being unethical. This platform has had one of the fastest growths among social media platforms in recent years and it had a total of 1.7 million unique users access the site in September. This was before Android users had access to the social media platform who make up 40% of US residences. With a greater number of possible users now the site is likely to continue growing and will likely be a platform of free speech with no limitation as long as they can figure out how to gain financial stability.

REFERENCES

DesJardins, Joseph R. An Introduction to Business Ethics. McGraw-Hill Education, 2020.

“Ethical Theory: Virtue Theory.” The Concise Encyclopedia of Business Ethics, 8 Aug. 2022, conciseencyclopedia.org/entries/ethical-theory-virtue-theory/#:~:text=Virtue%20Theory%20is%20an%20ethical,exemplars%20we%20ought%20to%20imitate.

Forman-Katz, Naomi, and Galen Stocking. “Key Facts about Truth Social.” Pew Research Center, Pew Research Center, 2 Dec. 2022, www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/11/18/key-facts-about-truth-social-as-donald-trump-runs-for-u-s-president-again/.

Moynihan, Lydia, and Josh Kosman. “CEO behind Trump's Truth Social IPO Begs Small Investors for Support: Source.” New York Post, New York Post, 17 Nov. 2022, nypost.com/2022/11/17/ceo-behind-trumps-truth-social-ipo-begs-small-investors-for-support-source/.

Salazar, Heather. The Business Ethics Case Manual. N.d.

Steffens, Maryke. “Natural Born Liars.” ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation), 30 July 2003, www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2003/07/31/2857387.htm. 

Thompson, Stuart A., and Matthew Goldstein. “Truth Social's Influence Grows despite Its Business Problems.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 1 Nov. 2022, www.nytimes.com/2022/11/01/technology/truth-social-conservative-social-app.html.

Trump Media & Technology Group. “Trump Media & Technology Group Announces Partnership With Rumble Inc..” GlobeNewswire News Room, Trump Media & Technology Group, 14 Dec. 2021, www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2021/12/14/2352123/0/en/Trump-Media-Technology-Group-Announces-Partnership-with-Rumble-Inc.html.

Trump’s Truth Social Has Suddenly Shot to the Top of the App Store Rankings. www.fastcompany.com/90746113/trumps-truth-social-has-suddenly-shot-to-the-top-of-the-app-store-rankings.

FTX: Mishandling of Funds (2022)

FTX Logo (17)

Abstract:       

It’s a quiet morning in 1945, George Bailey opens Bailey Brother’s Bank and Loan for the day ahead. All is well until the unexpected happened. Swarms of customers come running into the bank demanding their money to be withdrawn from the bank. George is stunned, he doesn’t have enough money in the bank to pay out to everyone. What’s happened is a classic bank run, something everyone in the industry dreads. Although, these events are entirely fictional taking place in Christmas classic “It’s a Wonderful Life”, the threat of a bank run is very real. On November 6th, 2022, the unexpected happened and crypto exchange giant FTX’s coin “FTT” lost 80% of its value causing a six-billion-dollar bank run on the firm, crippling it in the process. This paper will delve into if FTX operated in an ethical manner, using four different principles: Individualism, Utilitarianism, Kantianism, and Virtue Theory.

Background of FTX:

            FTX’s journey from a small exchange within a separate finance company, Alameda Research to the fastest growing crypto exchange in the world to a smoking wreck is rocky one. Founded in 2019 by Sam Bankman-Fried, FTX began its slow climb as a subsidiary of Alameda Research, an investment firm. Sam, the founder, and CEO got to work, raising capital for his fledgling company through venture capitalists. By July of 2020 FTX was valued at eighteen billion dollars, fast forward two years, thirty-two billion dollars. One important early investor in the company was Binance CEO, Changpeng Zhao. He bought a twenty percent stake in the company. From its founding to August of 2022, FTX grew exponentially. In March of 2021, FTX bought the naming rights to the Miami Heat’s stadium. By 2022 it was the second biggest crypto currency exchange in the world, only surpasses by Changpeng Zhao’s company, Binance. Importantly, FTX bought back the share’s Zhao purchased using a crypto currency they created, FTT. FTT is used by FTX to fulfill customer’s exchanges of currency on their platform. As an exchange FTX’s business model is to serve as a middleman between one form of currency and another. Simply put, “A cryptocurrency exchange is simply where buyers and sellers can trade crypto. If you want to trade crypto, you need to do it via a crypto exchange” (10). This leads to the events that took place in November 2022.

The controversy:

            In the early hours of November 2nd, 2022, CoinDesk a popular website that covers the cryptocurrency market released an article on Alameda Research the company from which FTX was founded. Within the article it was revealed that Alameda Research held nearly fifteen billion dollars’ worth of assets. Of that fifteen billion about eight billion dollars was in FTX’s coin FTT. As another crypto currency CEO and expert Cory Klippsten puts it, “It’s fascinating to see that the majority of the net equity in the Alameda business is actually FTX’s own centrally controlled and printed-out-of-thin-air token)(2). What is important about this revelation is that according to FTX themselves, there is only five billion dollars’ worth of FTT coin in circulation, yet on Alameda’s books they had eight billion dollars’ worth of the coin. Zhao who was previously paid FTT for his twenty percent of FTX announced his was selling all FTT in his company’s possession not long after the article came out. The combination of the imbalances on the sheets and Zhao’s announcement caused the value of FTT to plummet, losing nearly eighty percent of its value in the following days of the article being released. On top of that, Sam Bankman- Fried’s FTX had more to worry about, a classic bank run. The New York times described the event as a, “ sudden cataclysm [that] prompted comparisons to the collapse of Lehman Brothers, the investment bank whose implosion helped set off the 2008 financial crisis.”(12). Much like the big banks going under in 2008 crisis, the crypto giant looked for a bailout. This bailout tentatively came from Changpeng Zhao and Binance. Zhao, Binance’s CEO went to twitter to say, “This afternoon, FTX asked for our help. There is a significant liquidity crunch. To protect users, we signed a non-binding LOI, intending to fully acquire http://FTX.com” (14). He also added that the company would be doing its due diligence into FTX before finalizing any deal. It was a good thing that Zhao did so, as what was uncovered was that FTX had been mishandling funds associated with customers. According to Fox Business an FTX lawyer was quoted to saying, “Bankman-Fried used the firm as his "personal fiefdom". (13). Unsurprisingly, the deal between FTX and Binance fell through, and on November 11^th FTX, along with Alameda Research filed for bankruptcy. Bankman-Fried went to twitter to say,” I'm sorry. That's the biggest thing. I f**ked up and should have done better.” (3). Following this announcement Sam stepped down from CEO of FTX and

John J. Ray III who handled Enron’s bankruptcy in 2001 stepped up to helm the company. John after looking at the company financials stated, “Never in my career have I seen such a complete failure of corporate controls and such a complete absence of trustworthy financial information as occurred here” (Fox) As of the writing of this paper, FTX owes, “its creditors at least $3.1 billion, according to court documents filed by the bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange” (5).

Stakeholders:

Sam Bankman-Fried: CEO and founder of FTX. Controlled FTX during its downfall. Lost a large majority of his net worth with the collapse of his company.

Timeline of Events

Sam Bankman Fried (15)

Changpeng Zhao: CEO of Binance. Early Investor in FTX, now is the rival company to FTX. Gains

near complete market control of crypto currency exchange markets with collapse of FTX.

Changpeng Zhao  (16)

Timeline Part II

Sequoia Capital and other investment firms: Invested funds in FTX, with the bankruptcy are likely to get pennies on the dollar of their investments.

Alameda Research: Sister Company to FTX. Very closely related, is also tied up in bankruptcy process

Individuals: Everyday users of the platform. Likely to have lost their funds they had with FTX if they did not withdraw in time. All users of the platform are due to be compensated if funds can be found.

Individualism:

            An individualistic perspective on how FTX operated would show that they failed. Individualism argues for the business and its owners to maximize its own profits and gains. With a net worth of over fifteen billion dollars before the collapse of FTX, Sam Bankman-Fried was one of wealthiest crypto investors in the world, not to mention straight up one of the wealthiest people in the world. After FTX went under due to the negligence of the company he, is currently valued at just over one billion dollars (11). The management of the firm was not in line with their own gain as it resulted in the company going belly up.

             FTX was poorly operated. The company routinely inflated FTT’s value, thereby raising its own value, as they operated the coin and had control of the flow of it. While this tactic worked in the short term, once the Coinbase article came out the value of FTT sank, bankrupting FTX. Essentially FTX shot themselves in the foot and was short sighted in their business strategy, the opposite of serving themselves. The market that FTX was in is essentially unregulated. Crypto currency is an extremely new concept, and governments have not caught up to the times. This left FTX with essentially unlimited avenues to succeed. Unfortunately, they built as Fox Business described them, “A house of Cards” (7). FTX couldn’t even save itself, let alone their customers failing to follow individualism.

Utilitarianism:

Under the guise of Utilitarianism, FTX’s actions are not acceptable. Utilitarianism demands that the majority is “happy” under all circumstances. The classic movie trope of the protagonist exclaiming “It’s for the greater good!” is a perfect example of Utilitarianism in action. In the case of FTX, they failed everyone. Due to their negligence over two billion dollars of assets are unaccounted for, and three billion is owed to customers and investors. Everyone the company effected was hurt by it in some way. No one wants to lose money on an investment, and through the companies’ misguided hand many people have. Others will get their money back, however, must go through the company’s bankruptcy process to do so. This not only is a headache for these investors but also could be costing them even more money due to legal fees and court procedures. Utilitarian thought is fundamentally upside down with the state the company is in. Employees are affected negatively without a job, investors and investment firms are hurt as they have not lost a portion of their portfolio. Not to mention, FTX has affected other investors and business with their recent collapse.

            FTX was the second largest crypto currency exchange in the world when they declared bankruptcy in November. This large of an exchange causes ripples in the crypto currency market. In financial terms, it will and did cause a downturn in the market in general. In fact, the crypto currency market has taken a hit in the last few weeks. Bitcoin the most popular crypto currency has dropped in price due to FTX’s bankruptcy. Time Investing reports, “Prior to FTX’s unraveling, bitcoin’s price was holding steady for most of October. Prices remained low at around $19,000 [per coin]” (8) Compare this with the price of Bitcoin as of December 1^st, 2022, which is listed at just under seventeen thousand dollars per coin (10).

Bitcoin's Price Dec.2 2022 (1)

 That is an eleven percent drop in value in just under a month sense FTX has collapsed. Admittedly this is circumstantial evidence, however a similar event occurred when the investment bank goliath Lehman Brothers collapsed in the 2008 financial crisis. From the BBC, “The consequences for the world economy were extreme. Lehmans' fall contributed to a loss of confidence in other banks, a worldwide financial crisis and a deep recession in many countries” (4). FTX’s collapse has caused mistrust in the market. This as a result creates a downturn in the market. This downturn has affected an untold number of investors as small as individuals to as large as firms. The majority has been affected more in a negative way than the minority has. The rules of Utilitarianism have therefore been violated.

Kantianism:  

            Kantianism argues that the means of actions are more important that the result of an action. Not only this but the meaning behind the action is also equally important. Kant described the meaning behind the action as “Good Will”. For a business’s actions to be ethical permissible the actions the business takes must be first good, and second their intention must also be good, or at least neutral. In the case of FTX, the company’s bankruptcy isn’t the center of the controversy, being merely a consequence of the company’s actions. FTX’s management was poor. They took risks that were not necessary. Sam Bankman-Fried was even quoted to saying, “I wasn't spending any time or effort trying to manage risk on FTX” (6). Of course, this boils down to downright negligent management of a multibillion-dollar corporation. Without FTX releasing a statement as to why they took the actions they that inevitably bankrupted them, it can only be left to speculation. One theory would show that FTX violated Kantianism ethical procedure for pure greed of the company. FTX was shown to purposely inflate the market value of FTT by selling a small portion of the coin at a certain favorable price, then using that value to calculate their net worth (7). An analogy by Ben McMillan shows the flaw in this method, “imagine someone owns every house in a 100-home neighborhood and forces the sale of one home for $1 million, then uses that sale to show they have $100 million in "equity." But then, the owner is forced to sell all the remaining 99 homes, and the houses only sell for $100,000 each – meaning $90 million of their so-called equity disappears” (7). By inflating their net worth FTX could theoretically get more capital through loans, thereby giving the company more cash. Ethically through the guise of Kant, this isn’t permissible. It is misleading, FTX doesn’t have nearly the amount of equity as they claim, instead they misled customers and investors by having the inflated numbers on the books. This tactic is shady and impermissible by Kantian thought as the means that the company used to get larger is misleading, automatically violating Kant’s philosophy.

Virtue Theory:

            Virtue theory is an ethical theory that takes one’s character traits into account, to determine if one’s actions are ethical or not. Traits that help one flourish and grow as a person are good, or “virtues”. Whilst traits that hinder people’s growth and happiness are “vices”. Putting FTX under the microscope, they displayed both virtues and vices. Looking at Sam Bankman-Fried’s twitter shows the man at least at the public level is remorseful for what has occurred, and how it affected his customers; tweeting, “My goal—my one goal—is to do right by customers… after that investors. But first, customers” (3).

Tweet from Sam Bankman-Freid (3)

 While this is after the fact, he as the de facto head of the company does show willingness to fix what he self admittedly blundered. Being virtuous after the fact, however, does not make up for greed the company heads had before bankruptcy. As previously stated, FTX had no risk management, it routinely pumped FTT’s value increasing FTX’s on paper equity, and it also gave out messy loans to sister firm, Alameda Research. The New York Times claims that FTX could have loaned as much as 10 billion dollars to Alameda Research, much of that being customer funds (9). Of course, investment bankers loan out money all the time, it is their way of making money. However, the big difference here is that FTX’s ties to Alameda Research made it so FTX heads made money too when Alameda Research made money. FTX was greedy, it pushed risky investments and inflated their own revenues to the point where when hardship hit in the form of FTT tanking in price, the whole system collapsed around it. By falling to the vice, FTX doomed itself, and its unethical practices tarnished the company. Even before the collapse, other companies pulled out of loans with Alameda Research, which in extension is FTX. For instance, the New York Times reported, “Blockchain.com, a leading seller of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, closed out a loan it had made to Alameda, concerned about “too many illiquid-related assets” (9). At the end of the day companies exist to make money, so it shows the risk that FTX and Alameda Research were taking for one to pull out. The risk taken was backed only by the greed of the firm’s leaders.

Justified Ethics Evaluation:

            FTX during its operation seemed too good to be true, and as the adage goes, if it seems too good to be true it is. Being the fastest growing exchange for crypto currency in the world is lucrative and enticing. Figures like Sam Bank
man-Fried took the world by the reins, capitalized on a budging market to make as much money as possible. The company clearly was a personal piggy bank for Sam and his cronies. The company was run with a loose cannon at the wheel, it is no wonder why it collapsed. Playing fast and loose with billions of customers dollars shows no regard to one’s customers. As a result, FTX is unable to pay back their customers and investors, loosing three billion dollars’ worth of assets. Sam’s actions as CEO were downright negligent. He ran FTX into the ground through his risky investments with Alameda and the self-inflation of FTX’s main asset, FTT. It doesn’t take a genius in economics to realize artificially pumping up the value of FTT would cause a market correction eventually. This tactic was used by Jorden too Belfort, better known as The Wolf of Wall Street with his investment firm, Stratton Oakmont. He pushed his customers to buy cheap stock on mass, inflating the price of it. It's out of pure greed to capitalize and make as much money as possible. Both firms ended in the same fate, bankrupt. If FTX were to go back and redo their past, they could easily be in business today if they didn’t do a measure of actions. One; FTX needed to cease their grey area relations with Alameda Research. This relationship in a non-crypto related market would’ve been under lots of scrutiny from investors and regulatory agencies. Second, FTX needed to practice ethical business practices, such as being honest about actual revenue, not inflating their net worth through shady means. The mix of negligence and FTX’s more dubious business practices marked their downfall. The company was mismanaged to the point that they had no idea of the amount of liquidity they had to pay debts owed. When FTX’s house of cards toppled, their customers paid the price.

Conclusion:

            FTX’s bankruptcy comes as no surprise in hindsight. Under the scrutiny of four different ethical theories, the company failed to show any sort of ethical actions. It didn’t serve itself by making poor decisions that ended the company, failing Individualism. The company did not serve the greater good either, instead plunging the market into distress and hurting the wallets of potentially millions of people. This breaks the rules of Utilitarianism. The company’s actions were not out of the good will either, they mislead customers and investors about the net worth of the company and thereby it’s security, breaking the rules of Kant. FTX was also not virtuous, operating out of pure greed, again pumping up its net worth and investing funds in risky bets. Truly, the fall of FTX is a shame, not because the company itself was anything particularly special, but the fall of FTX marks a new struggle in the crypto market and may delay its adoption into the mainstream. The concept of crypto is heavily intertwined in what experts are calling the “Internet 3.0” and this fall may falter a new renaissance in the development of the internet and humanity as whole.

 

References

1. (n.d.). CoinDesk. <a href='https://www.coindesk.com/price/bitcoin/'>https://www.coindesk.com/price/bitcoin/</a>   

2. Allison, I. (2022, November 2). Divisions in Sam Bankman-Fried‚Äôs Crypto Empire Blur on His Trading Titan Alameda‚Äôs Balance Sheet. CoinDesk. <a href='https://www.coindesk.com/business/2022/11/02/divisions-in-sam-bankman-frieds-crypto-empire-blur-on-his-trading-titan-alamedas-balance-sheet/https://www.coindesk.com/business/2022/11/02/divisions-in-sa'>https://www.coindesk.com/business/2022/11/02/divisions-in-sam-bankman-frieds-crypto-empire-blur-on-his-trading-titan-alamedas-balance-sheet/https://www.coindesk.com/business/2022/11/02/divisions-in-sa</a>   

3. Bankman-Freid, S. (n.d.). Twitter. <a href='https://twitter.com/SBF_FTX'>https://twitter.com/SBF_FTX</a>   

4. Blythe, N. (2010, September 15). How did Lehman's collapse affect the world of finance?. BBC. <a href='https://www.bbc.com/news/business-11310143'>https://www.bbc.com/news/business-11310143</a>   

5. Brooks, K. J. (2022, November 21). Bankrupt FTX Trading owes creditors more than $3 billion. CBS News. <a href='https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ftx-bankruptcy-3-billion-crypto-sam-bankman-fried/'>https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ftx-bankruptcy-3-billion-crypto-sam-bankman-fried/</a>   

6. Dean, G. (2022, December 1). Sam Bankman-Fried said that if he'd spent 'an hour a day' thinking about risk management FTX might not have collapsed. Yahoo Entertainment. <a href='https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/sam-bankman-fried-said-hed-131733118.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall'>https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/sam-bankman-fried-said-hed-131733118.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall</a>   

7. Dumas, B. (2022, November 23). FTX: How Sam Bankman-Fried built a house of cards. Fox Business. <a href='https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/ftx-sam-bankman-frieds-house-cards-came-tumbling-down'>https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/ftx-sam-bankman-frieds-house-cards-came-tumbling-down</a>   

8. Gailey, A., & Cabello, M. (2022, December 2). Bitcoin‚Äôs Price Remains Low as FTX Contagion Continues. How Investors Should React. Time. <a href='https://time.com/nextadvisor/investing/cryptocurrency/bitcoin-crash-continues/#:~:text=Despite%20the%20ups%20and%20downs%2C%20bitcoin%E2%80%99s%20price%20has,winding%20down%20pandemic%20measures%20to%'>https://time.com/nextadvisor/investing/cryptocurrency/bitcoin-crash-continues/#:~:text=Despite%20the%20ups%20and%20downs%2C%20bitcoin%E2%80%99s%20price%20has,winding%20down%20pandemic%20measures%20to%</a>   

9. Goldstein, M., Stevenson, A., Farrell, M., Yaffe-Bellany, D. (2022, November 18). How FTX‚Äôs Sister Firm Brought the Crypto Exchange Down. New York Times. <a href='https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/18/business/ftx-alameda-ties.html?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article'>https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/18/business/ftx-alameda-ties.html?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article</a>   

10. How Does a Crypto Exchange Work? (2022, September 23). Sofi Learn. <a href='https://www.sofi.com/learn/content/how-crypto-exchanges-work/'>https://www.sofi.com/learn/content/how-crypto-exchanges-work/</a>   

11. Morrow, A. (2022, November 10). Crypto‚Äôs white knight lost 94% of his wealth in a single day. CNN. <a href='https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/09/business/sam-bankman-fried-wealth-ftx-ctrp/index.html'>https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/09/business/sam-bankman-fried-wealth-ftx-ctrp/index.html</a>   

12. Yaffe-Belany, D., & Grithiff, E. (2022, November 8). Crypto World Is Rocked as World‚Äôs Largest Exchange Rescues Rival. New York Times. <a href='https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/08/technology/binance-ftx-deal-crypto.html'>https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/08/technology/binance-ftx-deal-crypto.html</a>   

13. O'Halloran, S. (2022, November 28). FTX bankruptcy unique, losses hard to determine: Ken Feinberg. Fox Business. <a href='https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/ftx-bankruptcy-unique-losses-hard-to-determine-ken-feinberg'>https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/ftx-bankruptcy-unique-losses-hard-to-determine-ken-feinberg</a>   

14. Zhao, C. (n.d.). Twitter . https://twitter.com/cz_binance

15. Sam Bankman-Fried Image (n.d.). https://miningtechnology.in/sam-bankman-fried-denies-fraud-in-ftx-collapse-rolling-stone/

16. Changpeng Zhao Image (n.d.). https://noticierobitcoin.net/noticia/changpeng-zhao-traders-binance-eludir-bloqueo-estados-unidos/

17. (n.d.). FTX Logo. https://thefipharmacist.com/tools/ftx/