FTX débacle: roles and responsibilities of celebrities in digital advertising

A few days ago the total debacle of the FTX company was announced. The cryptocurrency platform managed by the young multimillionaire Sam Bankman Fried seems to have buried considerable assets (of which exact figures are not yet available, but should be around 10 billions).

There are many legal issues pertaining to the case, both from the point of view of the ease of circumventing controls by the platform, in defiance of any idea of ​​greater security of cryptocurrencies compared to other investment assets considered too classic, and because FTX is the first real case of crypto bankruptcy and opens up disturbing and dangerous scenarios for the future management of similar businesses, as well as numerous questions on the adequacy of current financial regulations regarding the control of credentials and solidity of certain potentially high-risk companies. There is, however, an even more important problem which has aroused concern among investors and those involved in consumer protection: the high propensity of these companies to make themselves extremely attractive in the eyes of the public, and in particular of the public which finances them. and this at any cost. FTX has in fact financed a social and classic advertising campaign concerning some of the most relevant celebrities in the world, to give a message of safety and reliability. If they invest in us, you too, to feel like them, can do the same. The profiles of responsibility here are twofold and bring into play various issues: first of all, is it true that these people have invested in FTX? Or did they do it because, by virtue of an exchange of professional favors, they were rewarded for having promoted the platform's services, with or without conviction?

And here again the question, to be asked instead from the point of view of the current celebrity hired to promote a service: is there a limit to the promotion of paid services or does this limit only pertain to the personal ethical background of the character in question? Was the celebrity involved able to fully assess the risks and consequences of such advocacy? these are the issues that the judges are called to settle in the lawsuit that was filed by a US investor against Gisele Bundchen and others who helped generate profits for FTX, to the detriment, as is evident, of consumers who believed in the reliability only of FTX but of their idols, who have strengthened the brand thanks to their direct intervention.It is partly reminiscent of what happened at the time of the famous Fyre festival, when dozens of celebrities were paid to post the ads of the event on their Instagram profiles, still to be defined and completely sight unseen, in exchange for staggering compensation. there too the advertising vehicle was found guilty of having disseminated an unverified and risky situation (which later actually materialized as a fake event and fraud against consumers). Will it be like this again?