I don't have the time to really get into the debate on the existence of paid bashers. I've "discussed" this issue many times and find interesting the intensity, if not depth, of arguments on both sides. I do believe the issue really comes down to semantics. As we learned in high school debate class, how one defines a term determines the outcome of the debate.
I do find it amusing that so many people who want all of us to believe that something is a scam fail to see even a possibility that some who post negatively may not have some manipulative intent. These same people are quick to jump when it is alleged that hedge funds may manipulate or that MM's may play games when volume gets hot and there is lots of money to be made and lost.
As many of you know, I believe that naked shorting, hedge fund manipulation and MM abuse of their NSS exception is a much greater problem in our markets than is generally known. Thankfully, this issue is gaining attention and has gone in a couple of years from being laughed at to being in the headlines of the main stream media.
However, I do want to add with emphasis that I believe these issues often have been hijacked by penny stock managements and insiders to hide their own dilution and dumping of shares. As I've been the brunt of lying posts about my own beliefs and opinions, that's why I am adding with the emphasis here.
And so I don't "ruffle" any feathers,LOL, I don't believe Jim Bishop is a paid basher although he has probably been called one more than anyone who actually (might have) been paid. I've been called a paid pumper by some who often crawl in the dirt so I know what it's like to be accused based on innuendo and lack of substance. Posting positively about a stock does not make one a paid pumper, just as posting negatively does not make one a paid basher. Often times those with the best arguments are called names for lack of a better tactic.
Getting back to the subject of whether or not there exists such a thing as "paid bashers," and my claim that it really comes down to "semantics," tt seems that many believe that all negative posts are made by posters who are not paid in some fashion. I.e., there exists no such individual posting anywhere negatively and who does not get paid directly or indirectly by an individual, an entity or an association of traders or others who may have an interest in the trading of the stock of the company about which negative comment has been made.
If you trade a stock, you have an interest that it goes up or down, so I would exclude regular traders and investors from this discussion. Then the issue becomes one where it is claimed perhaps that an entity, such as a hedge fund, or a group of traders, work the message boards to bash, either with employees or associates. Does this happen? If it happens, will people admit it? Will people generally admit if they do something they don't want people to know they do? These are interesting questions, and I suggest, that there are no clear cut answers, only opinions.
Another thing I'd like to express here is that many of us have no real problem with posting by bashers, be they paid or unpaid. We welcome negative posts. We prefer substantive posts to the type of stuff that seems to be pervasive. That is, we like posts that make us think and evaluate, as opposed to the type of posts that are "to the moon" or "it's a scam" or "look who is posting" or old boilerplate stuff that seems to find its way to and which clogs many message boards. Many of us here are quite able to knock holes in weak generic repetitive and out-dated arguments.
As to the issue of whether or not a stock's price is affected by bashing, I have to admit that I have often learned from bashers and have avoided or mitigated losses after reading a compelling bash post. On the other hand, I've also sold after reading a great post, only to find, that it was totally wrong. I make my own decisions, do my own research, and I don't blame the "bashers" when they are wrong, just as I don't blame positive posters when they are wrong.
Bashers, despite the claim, are not always right. I'd be the first to admit that so-called pumpers are not always right. It's the reason why I skip the vast majority of posts. I always urge diversification and, consequently, don't have the time to read all posts on all boards. I spend more time on bash posts and focus on the arguments there. I skip the hundreds of "to the moon" or "chart says double tomorrow" stuff and pay attention to the "it's a scam" posts. That's why bashing is effective and why discussions such as this are useful in my opinion.
With that as a basis, and getting back to the question of whether or not there exists any individual anywhere that may be paid to bash, without answering the instant question but as background, I would respectfully refer readers to
Jeffrey Thorpe - if you "google" and look over on SI, you will find some very interesting information about this hedge fund manager and the SEC in particular.
Auric Goldfinger - active poster on SI and purportedly hedge fund manager.
the attorney who posted on message boards with respect to the Matrixx case and who was reprimanded by the court
CEO of Whole Foods who bashed the competition before the company made a bid to take over that competition.
Anthony@Pacific board on SI, where it is believed that many hedge fund employees have posted over the years. At one point, there was a connection between the person who moderated that board and his private website. Individuals paid as much as $600-$1000/month for information, typically negative, and hedge funds allegedly paid more than individuals. For more information, see posts, comments, news articles and transcripts of the case against Anthony Elgindy, who was convicted in a federal trial where the allegations included claims of manipulative shorting, conspiracies, and extortion of CEO's (to call off the shorts and attacks,) as well as the wrongful use of FBI data. I believe that this well-known posting short seller is appealing what was a sentence of more than a decade.
Also check out information with respect to the case filed by hedge funds against prime brokers last year alleging, inter alia, naked shorting, as well as claims made in the Overstock case with respect to paid bash pieces.
This is admittedly a very difficult area to discuss as those who may be paid, or who have financial associations, likely don't admit that this is the case. Also even if they did, that does not mean that most or all "bashers" are paid bashers, just as the existence of paid promotion does not mean that most or all positive posters are paid as is often claimed.
A lot of this stuff really comes down to emotion and, as much as experienced traders try to get rid of emotion, we all have our failings when we trade and we tend to get emotional. Often we get emotional when someone disagrees with us and attacks us in a way that we feel is unfair. I think that's what you see so often here. Someone "bashes." In a way, that basher is saying that this investment you put your hard earned money into is a scam and that, indirectly, he is smart and you are stupid. So he is attacked. I'm glad there are boards such as this which provide for discussion and analysis and, then perhaps, the emotional responses will be less numerous and less vitriolic.
And yes, all of this post is my opinion, which may be wrong in part or in toto.
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
