Based on a January 2026 report, EdgeMode, Inc. (EDGM) issued a statement complaining that a report published by Wall Street Global Research contained materially inaccurate, misleading, and biased information. Fidelity Fidelity Key details of the complaint include: "Pay-to-Play" Allegations: EdgeMode stated that Wall Street Global Research labeled them "blacklisted" and provided negative coverage only after the company declined to pay for research and promotion. Misleading Content: The report allegedly contained inaccuracies regarding EdgeMode’s business model, development strategy, and execution capabilities. Threats of Broader Distribution: Following the initial publication, EdgeMode was informed that the negative article would be distributed more broadly unless a "paid engagement" was approved to rectify it. Credibility Concerns: EdgeMode argued that this structure undermines the credibility of the research, as negative coverage was used as leverage for monetization.
EdgeMode Issues Statement Addressing Inaccurate Third-Party Research Report GlobeNewswire - 9:30 AM ET 1/16/2026 Technology
Facebook. Twitter. LinkedIn. FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla., Jan. 16, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- EdgeMode, Inc. ( EDGM ) , a global Energy and AI data center infrastructure company, today issued a statement correcting the record following the publication of a report that the Company believes contains materially inaccurate characterizations of its business model, development strategy, and European execution capabilities.
A report published by Wall Street Global Research labels EdgeMode ( EDGM ) "blacklisted" and makes a series of claims that are inaccurate, misleading by omission, and distributed after the Company declined to approve paid coverage when approached.
Following publication, we were informed that the article would now be distributed more broadly and that the only path to withdrawal or correction would be through a paid engagement, involving "fresh research" and promoted media placement. That sequence matters. Research credibility is undermined when negative coverage is published first and monetization is offered only after the fact.
In addition, given the tone, timing, and market-facing nature of the report, we believe it is reasonable for investors to question whether motives beyond paid media fees may also be at play, including the potential to influence market sentiment in a manner consistent with short-selling activity. While we make no assertion as to intent, transparency around incentives and positioning is essential for investors assessing the credibility of any purported "research."
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
