After FTX co-founder Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) was released on bail and traveled to his parent’s home in California, it has been reported that SBF was visited by the crypto advocate Tiffany Fong, and also the “Big Short” author Michael Lewis while he’s been on house arrest. Fong detailed she managed to interview SBF, while Lewis visited to presumably get information on the downfall of the FTX empire for the writer’s upcoming book.
SBF Gets 2 Visitors While on House Arrest and Before His Jan. 3 Arraignment in New York
Since SBF was released on bail, reports note that two people have been granted access to visit the disgraced former FTX CEO while he’s on house arrest. Tiffany Fong disclosed that she met with SBF and noted that she had not written anything yet when she tweeted about her discussion with SBF on Dec. 28.
The following day, The New York Post published an article about Fong’s visit, and the article’s authors Selim Algar, Andy Tillett, and Patrick Reilly decided to call Fong a “sexy crypto influencer.” The Post also used a picture of Fong wearing a bikini and when the article was published, Fong was not pleased with the depiction. “Jesus fkn christ,” Fong said, sharing the article.
Fong also detailed that she “obviously was not wearing a bikini” when she interviewed SBF, and she said The Post “decided to creep [through her] old pics.” In addition to The Post, the Daily Mail also published an article about her visit, and Fong said the Daily Mail reporters noted that she was not pleased with the use of an irrelevant old bikini photo in The Post’s article.
“As soon as I offered a sliver of commentary in response to their questions, [Daily Mail] immediately switched their photo of me to a bikini photo,” Fong said, sharing a screenshot of the original article and then the changed version. In addition to Fong’s statements, Taylor Lorenz from the Washington Post tweeted about the treatment Fong received from The Post and Daily Mail.
“[Tiffany Fong] has gotten big scoops while tirelessly covering FTX,” Lorenz tweeted. “She’s respected by mainstream tech/finance journalists at Wapo, NYT, etc. What she does is journalism, but because she’s a young woman (& using the internet to reach her audience) this is how the media treats her.”
Fong also tweeted about how The Post wrote an article about the “Big Short” author Michael Lewis’s visit with SBF when she said:
Michael Lewis actually ‘spent several hours’ with Sam Bankman-Fried before I did. Is Michael Lewis being sexualized [and] bombarded with questions about whether or not they ‘banged?’
The article featuring Lewis and published by The New York Post is a whole lot different than Fong’s article, and it does not show Lewis in his swim trunks or speedos. The Post editorial about Lewis is quite similar to a great deal of the write-ups concerning the “Big Short,” “Moneyball,” and “Flash Boys” author getting to spend six months with SBF before FTX collapsed.
The Post’s article highlights how Lewis’s “publishing agency [is] pitching the book to potential movie rights buyers” and reports of the pitch sale were disclosed well before SBF was arrested. The news of SBF having two visitors, after being released on house arrest, also follows accusations that allege the former FTX CEO moved $684K in crypto assets associated with Alameda addresses. In The Post’s article, the authors detailed that Fong had further noted that SBF was on his computer during the duo’s discussion.
What do you think about the reports concerning SBF’s visitors after he was released on house arrest? Let us know what you think about this subject in the comments section below.
Image Credits: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons, Editorial photo credit: SAUL LOEB / AFP
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. It is not a direct offer or solicitation of an offer to buy or sell, or a recommendation or endorsement of any products, services, or companies. Bitcoin.com does not provide investment, tax, legal, or accounting advice. Neither the company nor the author is responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any content, goods or services mentioned in this article.
