Prominent crypto critic says someone offered bribes to take down a blog post

In August, Web3 Is Going Just Great reported the arrest of Roman Ziemian, founder of the crypto trading platform FutureNet, for allegedly defrauding victims of $21 million. This post by Molly White, the website’s administrator and a noted critic of the crypto industry, was consistent with her longstanding practice of documenting scams and fraudulent activities within the sector.

The situation escalated on October 18 when an unidentified person claimed to represent a “reputation management company” and requested the removal of White’s post regarding FutureNet and Ziemian. This individual offered White a bribe of $200 to delete her coverage but increased the offer to $500 after White refused, maintaining that her reporting was factual and accurate. White remarked that while this was not her first encounter with intimidation, it marked the first instance where someone had attempted to bribe her.

Following this interaction, an individual identifying as a lawyer, Michael Woods, emailed White, invoking the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and alleging infringement of copyright because her content had supposedly been lifted from another website. Woods provided a link to a Blogspot page that contained identical content to White’s post, allegedly authored by him a day prior. However, the Blogspot site appeared to serve as a content farm and contained various articles dated back to 1995, predominantly regarding news events.

Upon examining the Blogspot site, it was noted that it operated partly using Rankify, a service that generates AI-driven SEO-optimized content. In response to Woods, White indicated potential penalties for filing false DMCA claims. Subsequently, Woods offered White $100 to permanently remove her post, which she again declined.

Attempts to verify Woods’ identity revealed discrepancies; the address he provided appeared to be an empty lot and no registered lawyer named Michael Woods could be found in Los Angeles. Additionally, inquiries to FutureNet’s official website yielded no response.

White affirmed her commitment to integrity in reporting, stating she welcomes corrections for genuine errors but would not acquiesce to requests for removal based solely on the dissatisfaction of the reported individuals or companies. She suggested that if compliance was her approach, her website would be largely devoid of content.

Overall, the incidents highlighting potential threats to journalistic integrity in relation to the crypto space underscore the ongoing challenges faced by critics of the industry, as evidenced by White’s experiences with both bribery attempts and questionable legal threats.