"Last year I lost 300,000, and only then did I understand the true purpose of KOLs/media" ———————— The motivation for writing this article is simple; there has been a wave of "disillusionment" on Twitter: Some people criticize that 99% of Chinese KOLs/news agencies' articles are "long-winded and stinky rags," and then conclude: Whenever "something happens," what you actually need to do is block the media. 01: Last year, I was also criticizing the media ——— If it were me last year, seeing such a post, I would definitely have liked and shared it madly, nodding my head while cursing: stupid media only sells anxiety, KOLs only lead the rhythm to harvest, news is always a lagging indicator—whoever believes it is a fool. But after losing nearly 300,000 last year, I realized: Blocking the media does not bring us closer to the truth; It only makes it easier for you to fall into your own illusions. Because blocking the media is cutting off the reference system that can help us calibrate our cognition; without external input, we can easily get trapped in our own obsessions, expectations, and fantasies, continuously imploding—ultimately becoming the liquidity that others exit from. Of course, today’s article is not meant to discuss theories, I want to look at a real case with you: $Labubu. Let’s try to review this round of the golden dog market, To dissect how a seemingly ordinary tweet can influence trading decisions and change emotional structures at critical points. Let’s see together how we should coexist with "news" in this information-dense era. 02: Timeline Review: How did the news "precede" the decline? ———— Let’s rewind to June 1, Labubu surged 44% amidst a lot of noise. Popularity, coin price, and topicality all took off, The entire Twitter community began a collective celebration of the "birth of a new king": But on the same day, Teacher Ab posted a message calmly pointing out: "The popularity of Labubu is continuously declining; participants should pay attention to risks." If you were a holder at that time, seeing this statement would make you very unhappy—because he said the Twitter community is obviously FUDing your position and Bag? You might even think, "You’re telling me the popularity is declining after such a rise? Are you blind?" This emotion is understandable; after all, we are all used to naturally rejecting any negative voices when holding positions. However, what is truly worth reviewing is— Starting from June 2, Labubu indeed began a noticeable downward trend. It wasn’t a fluctuation, it wasn’t a sideways movement; it was a straightforward decline, and this decline was not due to the overall correction of Solana, which occurred on June 5. In other words: this round of Labubu's correction was due to its own collapse, not dragged down by the market. Of course, you could also say: "What if AB posted a peak warning and it continued to rise afterward? Aren’t we just talking about hindsight?" Well, there is always hindsight in the market; if it rises, it’s insight; if it falls, it’s hindsight; winning is consensus, losing is fantasy. But trading is not about the correctness of explaining market trends, It’s about how we respond to uncertainty. When an influential blogger, On the day of the coin price surge, issues a reminder of "declining popularity," and you can actually see signals of peak popularity on Web2 hot searches and Google trends, with even more people starting to quietly issue similar reminders— At this point, if we are still obsessively entangled in "Is what they said true?" we have actually missed the point a bit. Because in the crypto space, the truth of the news doesn’t matter, the motives of KOLs don’t matter; what matters is: the internal emotional consistency of the market has begun to show divergence. When the market starts to have "some people no longer believe," we need to start being cautious, not to mention don’t forget: Labubu had already risen 44% that day. Are we still expecting another +44% the next day? So going back to Teacher Ab’s post on June 1: Is it the direct driving force behind Labubu's decline? It doesn’t matter. Is it hindsight, preemptive, or a divine prediction? It also doesn’t matter. What matters is—at a critical moment, it provided a clear signal: "The bullish and bearish emotions in the market have begun to tear apart." 03: The fracture of faith occurs: it’s not that it "fell," but that "some people have started to lose faith" ————— Whether you are willing to reduce your position to lock in profits or not, whether it’s a peak signal or not, whether it’s a confirmation of bad news, You shouldn’t be adding to your position at this time, Because prices and emotions are no longer in sync, the market enters an awkward phase of "more shouting, less buying." Don’t believe it? Looking back at June 3 and June 4, Labubu did not experience sudden FUD, nor was there systemic bad news, but the price began to decline continuously, trading volume gradually shrank, and the voices on Twitter became sparse. The popularity was still there, but the liquidity was gone. At this point, going back to find out "why it fell" is actually too late; many people have already lost money, and it’s really unnecessary to look for reasons after losing. However, if we had paused to think about our positions when we saw Teacher Ab’s reminder on June 1, For example: reduce some leverage, take some profits, make minor adjustments, hit the brakes a bit, perhaps we could have navigated this subsequent correction more calmly. As for whether the coin price would rise again afterward, that is already a judgment logic in another trading system, but being able to stabilize the first segment of profits is a problem we must face every time after a surge. But if you ignore KOLs, ignore the media, and disregard mainstream FUD, the actual result often is: we finish the first segment with Labubu, but continue to add to our positions during the most critical phase, ultimately either losing money or having most of our profits wiped out, watching our wealth slip away without understanding why. Ultimately, we always think we are blocking interference, but sometimes what we are really blocking is an opportunity to recalibrate market cognition. When we refuse external information and only immerse ourselves in our own logic and narrative, we think we are staying awake, but often we are just trapping ourselves in a box of information composed of obsessions, expectations, and closed narratives. In this box, we repeatedly confirm our beliefs, repeatedly reinforce our existing assumptions, until finally, we realize: We have become the liquidity outlet for others. 03: Labubu is not an isolated case; it is a microcosm of the entire market cycle ———— Ultimately, the media is indeed always lagging. Even the frontline reporters capturing scenes on the battlefield only show us what happened after the event. So it is meaningless to criticize the media for being "hindsight"—because the media is not a prophet; what we should truly be wary of is when a piece of negative news hits your Bag, do we immediately start emotionally cursing the media, denying the market, or do we calmly review: For example: does this news amplify the bad news, or is it a short-term adjustment? Or is it a peak? For example: do the tweets/reports from big scholars/media/KOLs reflect a certain emotion of the players, and will this emotion spread lead to a short-term adjustment? If there is an adjustment, should I reduce my position, and when should I add back? These questions are what we should spend time thinking about. The essence of trading has never been about arguing right or wrong, but about your response mechanism to uncertainty. The media is not the enemy; it is part of the signal. Instead of angrily cursing, it’s better to review. Cursing the media won’t protect your position, but calm thinking can help us lose less. So, there is a lot of information on Twitter, and it can even be said that many times it is information overload. KOLs speak much faster than the evolution of the market; every seemingly "shared" statement may be mixed with position stances, short-term emotions, flow considerations, or even pressure to maintain a certain persona. This does not mean they have malicious intent—they are just part of the market, Every participant expressing themselves is actually resonating with the market in their own way. But as individual traders, we cannot expect to "find someone who is always right"; what we can do is practice identifying signals related to market structure amidst a massive amount of information, filtering out the noise that only amplifies emotions. What matters is not what we see, but how we see, how we perceive, and what reactions we have after seeing. However, how to execute this is another abstract concept— I found my thoughts from the beginning of the year and want to share them with everyone— 1/5 Many people read the news to seek "confirmation," but seeking "emotional fractures" is what I need to learn, because the value of news lies not in right or wrong, but in whether it can reveal that the market is beginning to "no longer be consistent." 2/5 News is not fact; it is a selection of which facts are worth spreading. If the truth of information is no longer important, should I speculate short-term or keep my position unchanged? 3/5 What truly matters is not what the news says, but who’s expectations it influences and how I should make reflexive adjustments. 4/5 If FUD appears on Twitter, it may not be the peak of the K-line, but it is definitely the short-term emotional high point of the market. I must identify the short-term nodes to reduce positions, lock in profits, and shrink risks, even though I may not be right; but if some people have started to lose faith, I must take short-term profits. 5/5 Emotional fractures are the only golden signals I can identify in advance from the news. I need to ask myself more often, who will adjust their positions because of this news? Is it the climax node of MeMe or a short-term node? If I want to buy/sell, am I going to leverage the momentum or actively FUD to short? 04: Reflecting on oneself ———— To be honest, last year I couldn’t understand these questions. Last year, I also viewed the media as an "enemy": thinking KOLs were all harvesting, the media only created anxiety, and the news was simply a pit for retail investors. At that time, I thought that as long as I stayed away from these "noises," I could avoid interference and make purer decisions. But gradually I realized that this understanding was somewhat overly simplistic and emotional. In fact, the media/KOLs/big scholars do not have an absolute role of "good" or "evil"; they are more like a structural existence—part of the market's own operation, not external invaders. They are the emotional transmission layer of liquidity: responsible for creating hotspots, but also potentially amplifying panic; they can drive FOMO and ignite narratives; Sometimes they create bubbles, and sometimes they release pressure. They are certainly not perfect, even filled with biases, games, and the bloggers' own position tendencies, But it is undeniable— They genuinely participate in the generation of market emotions and the construction of rhythm. We can certainly choose to temporarily ignore certain information sources and stay away from overly emotional KOLs, but we can never block the "market." The core of the crypto market is the flow of information and emotions—and the media is precisely the most representative "information map" of emotional flow. So as we walk along, we will find—independence is not about not listening to news, but about maintaining the ability to judge amidst the flood of information, learning how to use the media to judge structure, identify rhythm, and observe the marginal fluctuations of signals. If we only seek emotional affirmation through information, we can easily be led by the rhythm and pushed along; But if we can see the anomalies and turning points in the market through changes in information, then the media becomes an aid rather than an interference. After all, what we trade is never just price, but how the market "perceives price" itself. The media is the dimension where "perceptions" are created, disseminated, and structured. So I increasingly believe that the deeper function of the media may not be to let us "see the world clearly," but to provide an entry point of possibilities—allowing us to decide whether we are willing to see another version of the world. And this decision is ultimately not something the media can make for us; It only provides the entrance, And those who walk in must be ourselves. Peace!