I agree that how you word the question, how you define the issue, would make a difference.
Let's look at the basics. Many who claim there is no such thing as a paid basher point out that paid pumpers are supposed to disclaim, and many or perhaps most do, in fact, disclaim what they are getting paid. The argument then takes a leap and claims that there are no posts that say, "hi, I'm a paid basher and I'm here to tell you that this stock is a scam for these reasons....."
Hedge funds now control over 1/2 the US equity trades and more in other markets. We're talking trillions of dollars. For anyone to claim that there is "no such thing" with respect to anything when such large sums and power are involved, I believe, is really quite naive.
Again, not to "ruffle" any feathers, this does not mean that all negative posters or even a high percentage are paid bashers and I do agree that people call names when their own arguments are lacking.
But the "myth" proponents base their argument on the fact that nobody posts admitting to be a paid basher. That's just silly in my opinion.
Just as the argument is based on the comparison with paid pumpers, those who claim "no such thing as paid bashers," may argue that someone posting on behalf of a hedge fund or MM/broker-dealer is not a paid basher. They argue that even if someone posts around the clock bashing a stock that is being traded by the employing entity, that person is not really a paid basher because he's not some random poster who volunteers to bash for a nickel a post.
Again a silly argument in my opinion and semantics.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
