The targeted campaign against AMC and GameStop: A wall street media manipulation?
Stocks like AMC and GameStop (GME) have been the target of an unusually intense and persistent negative media campaign, raising concerns about the underlying motives of those involved.

Over the past few years, retail investors in AMC Entertainment and GameStop (GME) have been embroiled in a financial tug-of-war with institutional investors and media outlets. What started as a grassroots movement to prop up struggling companies has since turned into a full-fledged battle that has exposed the lengths to which Wall Street and its media allies will go to suppress stock prices.
From relentless media bashing to questionable social media accounts dedicated solely to undermining these stocks, it’s clear that something more than simple financial analysis is at play. At the heart of this coordinated effort are powerful financial interests, short-sellers, and a media machine aimed at driving down the stock prices of AMC and GameStop, stocks that at any moment could soar, leaving Wall Street’s short positions in financial ruin.
The Media’s Role: Relentless Bashing of AMC and GameStop
In 2021, Motley Fool, a financial blog often seen as a resource for retail investors, published an astounding 1,300 negative articles about AMC alone. This pattern of negative coverage extended to other outlets such as Seeking Alpha and InvestorPlace, which seem to have an unusual fixation on disparaging both AMC and GameStop. The sheer volume of articles, many of which contained similar talking points about why these stocks are doomed, raises the question: why are these media outlets so focused on two stocks, if they truly believe they are bad investments?
Motley Fool’s Sean Williams, who also runs the Twitter account “amcscam,” is a key figure in this narrative. His account exists almost solely to criticize AMC and GameStop, labeling them as bad investments while pushing the narrative that retail investors are misguided in supporting these companies.
This is not just a single individual’s opinion, but part of a broader, coordinated effort by financial media to manipulate public sentiment.
Furthermore, InvestorPlace, another financial blog known for its extensive negative coverage of these stocks, hosts contributors with tarnished reputations. One such contributor is Louis Navellier, an investment adviser who was charged by the SEC for fraud and ordered to pay $30 million in fines.
Navellier’s firm, Navellier & Associates, was found guilty of defrauding clients by providing false and misleading information in its marketing materials. Given the legal troubles surrounding some of its contributors, InvestorPlace’s role in bashing AMC and GameStop becomes even more suspect.
On the social media front, Charles Gasparino, a journalist known for his work on Fox Business, has used his Twitter account to consistently attack retail investors and their investments in AMC and GameStop. His account often features posts bashing the potential of these stocks, portraying retail investors as naive and misguided. Gasparino’s relentless focus on these stocks stands out, considering he has a platform that could be used to cover a broad spectrum of financial topics. Instead, his Twitter feed reads like an extended critique of AMC and GameStop, leading to suspicions about his motivations.
Gasparino’s behavior on X (formerly Twitter), coupled with his media appearances, creates a reinforcing cycle where his tweets and reports influence market sentiment. This strategy appears aimed at discouraging retail investors from holding these stocks, further pushing the narrative that AMC and GameStop are not worth the investment. The constant negativity not only undermines retail investors but also reinforces the short-seller’s position by helping to depress stock prices.
Wall Street’s Deep Involvement: Virtu Financial’s Douglas Cifu
While media figures and financial blogs may be the public face of the attack on AMC and GameStop, the real power behind this campaign comes from Wall Street itself. Douglas Cifu, CEO of Virtu Financial, a high-frequency trading firm, has been particularly vocal about AMC and GameStop, often belittling retail investors and their investments in these companies.
The CEO of Virtu Financial, a publicly traded company, posts a disrespectful comment regarding individuals with special needs.$VIRT pic.twitter.com/P0g35n1DeX — InvestorTurf (@InvestorTurf) March 22, 2024
His Twitter posts are littered with derogatory comments aimed at the retail community, dismissing their efforts as misguided. But Cifu’s involvement goes beyond rhetoric; Virtu Financial has a direct financial interest in the suppression of these stocks.
Virtu, like many other trading firms, stands to benefit from high levels of volatility and the success of short-sellers. By helping to drive down stock prices, firms like Virtu can generate profits from short positions, further incentivizing them to engage in activities that suppress stock prices. Cifu’s attacks on retail investors are not merely opinions—they are part of a broader strategy to ensure that the interests of hedge funds and short-sellers are protected.
Naked Short-Selling: The Root of the Manipulation
Naked short-selling has emerged as one of Wall Street’s most insidious tools for manipulating stock prices, especially in the case of companies like AMC and GameStop. Unlike traditional short-selling, where an investor borrows shares and sells them with the hope of repurchasing them at a lower price, naked short-selling occurs when shares are sold without actually being borrowed. This illegal practice creates counterfeit shares, artificially increasing the supply in the market and driving down the stock price.
At the core of naked short-selling is the sale of shares that do not exist. When an investor sells a stock short, they usually borrow the shares from another account to cover the transaction. However, in naked short-selling, these shares are never borrowed, leaving the transaction “naked.” The broker involved in the trade records the sale, but no actual share is delivered within the regulatory three-day settlement period. This results in what is known as a fail-to-deliver (FTD), where the sold shares never materialize.
The practice effectively creates counterfeit shares, flooding the market with supply and driving down the stock price. As the stock price falls, the short-sellers, including hedge funds and financial institutions, can buy back shares at the lower price to close their positions, reaping enormous profits. This manipulation of supply and demand distorts market prices and can ruin companies targeted by these attacks.
The major participants in naked short-selling include prime brokers, market makers, and hedge funds, all of whom play a key role in facilitating this form of stock manipulation. These entities work in concert to manipulate the market:
- Prime Brokers: Large financial institutions such as Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and Citigroup act as prime brokers, clearing and settling trades for their clients, which include hedge funds. They are instrumental in facilitating naked short-selling by allowing short-sellers to bypass the requirement of borrowing shares. In many cases, they are also directly involved in these trades, profiting from lending fees, commissions, and their own proprietary trading.
- Hedge Funds: Hedge funds are among the most aggressive users of naked short-selling. These unregulated pools of capital frequently take large, concentrated short positions in stocks they believe will decline in price. By working with prime brokers, hedge funds can sell shares they do not own, driving down the price of the targeted stock. David Rocker and Marc Cohodes are notorious examples of hedge fund managers who have used naked shorting to attack companies.
- Depository Trust Clearing Corporation (DTCC): The DTCC plays a critical role in stock clearing and settlement and is owned by the very brokers it is supposed to regulate. The DTCC has been accused of enabling naked short-selling by clearing trades that result in FTDs without enforcing buy-ins or penalties for these discrepancies. The DTCC’s Continuous Net Settlement (CNS) system ensures that these counterfeit shares remain in circulation, allowing market makers and hedge funds to create an unlimited supply of naked short positions.
Naked short-selling has a devastating effect on stock prices. By artificially increasing the supply of shares through the creation of counterfeit shares, short-sellers can overwhelm demand and cause prices to plummet. This manipulation often targets small-cap and mid-cap stocks, which are more vulnerable to price movements due to their lower trading volumes. The influx of counterfeit shares causes the stock to fall, creating a downward spiral as more and more short-sellers pile on.
For companies like AMC and GameStop, this manipulation has resulted in extreme volatility and severe price suppression. Despite strong retail investor interest and occasional spikes in demand, the relentless pressure from naked short-sellers prevents these stocks from realizing their full potential.
Naked short-selling persists due to regulatory loopholes and a lack of stringent enforcement by authorities like the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). For example, Regulation SHO, introduced in 2005 to curb abusive short-selling, contains numerous exemptions that allow market makers to sell shares without borrowing them. Additionally, the regulation’s lack of teeth—such as the failure to enforce buy-ins for FTDs—means that naked short-sellers can operate with impunity.
The SEC’s enforcement efforts have been weak, and the agency has been criticized for being too closely aligned with Wall Street interests. High-profile investigations into naked short-selling have often been stymied by industry lobbying and legal obfuscation, leaving retail investors and emerging companies vulnerable to these predatory practices.
Naked short-selling is not just a technical market tactic—it is a form of stock counterfeiting that allows powerful financial institutions to manipulate stock prices, often to the detriment of small investors and emerging companies. The system, as it currently exists, is designed to benefit the brokers, hedge funds, and clearinghouses that profit from these manipulative practices.
The lack of regulatory oversight and enforcement allows this fraud to continue unabated, distorting markets and robbing retail investors of fair opportunities. As AMC, GameStop, and other companies continue to face this attack, it remains to be seen whether regulatory bodies will step up to address these abuses or continue to turn a blind eye to one of the largest financial manipulations of our time.
The Financial Risk to Wall Street
Despite the relentless media and financial campaign to suppress these stocks, there remains a looming threat to Wall Street: at any moment, the prices of AMC and GameStop could skyrocket. Should this happen, hedge funds and financial institutions that have bet heavily against these stocks could find themselves in serious financial trouble.
The most notable example of this occurred with Melvin Capital, which suffered enormous losses during the initial GameStop short squeeze in January 2021. If a similar event were to occur again, particularly with the vast number of naked short positions still outstanding, it could send shockwaves through the financial system and bankrupt many firms with short exposure.
The possibility of a sudden price surge is exactly why Wall Street and its allies in the media are so determined to maintain a negative narrative around these stocks. Forcing retail investors to sell and driving the price down ensures that hedge funds can close out their short positions before they are caught in another short squeeze. This is not just about protecting profits—it’s about survival.
Conclusion: A Coordinated Effort to Control the Narrative
The coordinated campaign against AMC and GameStop is not the result of objective financial analysis. Instead, it appears to be part of a broader strategy to manipulate public sentiment, suppress stock prices, and protect the interests of Wall Street’s short-sellers. From media outlets like Motley Fool and Seeking Alpha to high-profile figures like Charles Gasparino and Douglas Cifu, a wide range of players are involved in this effort to undermine these stocks.
At the heart of the issue is the practice of naked short-selling, which has allowed hedge funds to flood the market with counterfeit shares and suppress prices. Despite these efforts, the risk to Wall Street remains high. Should these stocks experience another meteoric rise, it could result in significant financial losses for hedge funds and financial institutions, potentially triggering another financial crisis.
For retail investors, the battle over AMC and GameStop has become more than just a financial play—it’s about exposing the manipulation and corruption that pervades Wall Street. As this fight continues, it remains to be seen whether regulatory bodies like the SEC will step in to protect the integrity of the markets, or whether Wall Street will continue to exploit loopholes to maintain its stranglehold on these stocks.
Fighting for Truth: Support Independent Journalism
When Twitter accounts like "fuggabaggie" spend their days attacking AMC and GameStop shareholders, calling independent outlets like ours “goofy blogs with no revenue,” they’re half right—we don’t generate anywhere near the revenue of media giants like Motley Fool or InvestorPlace. But there’s one thing they’ll never admit: we’re honest.
Your goofy blog has no revenue to share, loser. — fuggabaggie (@fuggabaggie) October 21, 2024
Unlike the major outlets pushing the narratives of Wall Street, we aren’t backed by hedge funds or advertisers looking to line their pockets. Our reporting is driven by truth and independence, not by profit or manipulation. We stand by the retail investors and refuse to be another voice for the short-selling elite.
This is why we need your support. Every dollar you contribute helps us stay independent, allowing us to continue our investigative journalism and fight back against the smear campaigns run by big-money interests. Whether it’s $1 or more, your donation sends a message to the fuggabaggies of the world: we won’t back down, and we won’t sell out. Support independent journalism and help us keep pushing for transparency—because the truth is worth fighting for.