This is not the first time that mainstream Western media has poured dirty water on Crypto, especially Binance and @ cz-binance. The last time they blatantly did this was Bloomberg in 2022, who was then pursued and sued by Binance for 2 years. In the end, they lost the lawsuit and had to apologize, losing face. In July 2022, Bloomberg Businessweek's Chinese edition published a cover story about CZ (Zhao Changpeng) and Binance, with the title directly using the phrase "Changpeng Zhao's Ponzi Scheme". The article was accused of containing multiple negative accusations about Binance's operating model, compliance, and other aspects, including implying that it operates like a Ponzi scheme. On July 25, 2022, CZ personally sued Modern Media (the publisher of Bloomberg's Chinese version) in the High Court of Hong Kong, demanding retraction, public apology, and compensation for losses. Meanwhile, CZ has filed a discovery motion against Bloomberg LP (Bloomberg's parent company) in the Southern District Federal Court of New York, requesting evidence to support its reporting source. This lawsuit attracted a lot of attention at the time, as it was seen as CZ's tough response of "tooth for tooth", and also because the encryption industry was often criticized by mainstream media FUD but rarely counterattacked. After nearly two years of legal proceedings (including evidence exchange and out of court negotiations), in July 2024, Bloomberg Chinese officially published a public apology statement in the 250th issue of the magazine. Since then, Bloomberg has significantly restrained its attacks on Crypto. I have read this WSJ report and it is actually very cheesy. It heavily relies on anonymous sources and "company documents", but does not provide specific evidence details. The focus is heavily on sensory elements (such as' funding terrorist groups'), while the coverage of Binance's compliance improvements (such as reducing exposure and reporting activities) is insufficient. People who write articles understand that with a slight change in perspective and tone, the same thing can shift from objective news reporting to one-sided guidance, leading to reader misjudgment. Although this lawsuit may be more difficult than the previous lawsuit against Bloomberg (after all, it was really a slap in the face), I think it is necessary and should be supported, otherwise this kind of thing will be taken advantage of. Crypto has always performed weakly in mainstream media, after all, it was in a regulatory gray area before. Binance's choice of legal means to combat negative reports is effective for the entire industry to stand up (at least in the reputation war), unlike many people and platforms who can only silently endure FUD.