A woman accuses blogger Danny De Hek of engaging in "abusive" and "manipulative" behavior in his recent articles. He coerced a woman to publicly attack a criminal enterprise under her real name, thus endangering her safety. Previously, a prominent cult conference disinvited De Hek over concerns about his reckless behavior.

Be Scofield is a prominent cult reporter who exposed Love Has Won, which led to the hit HBO series. She is mentioned in the NY Times, Rolling Stone, People, the Washington Post, and more. Netflix based an episode of the series "Unwell" on her original reporting.

By BE SCOFIELD

7/6/25

"Cult Survivor Event EXPOSED," blogger Danny De Hek wrote in an article attacking Anke Richter's DeCult Conference. Richter is the author of the book Cult Trip and a noted speaker about cults. De Hek was disinvited from the conference after concerns about his treatment of former cult survivors surfaced. He proceeded to lash out and then "EXPOSED" the well-respected conference and Anke Richter.

I'm De Hek's latest target for an aggressive and unhinged character assassination. I had originally reached out to him about the SmartLab crypto Ponzi scheme, as he's written a few blog posts about it.

A week ago I met a man in the park who told me he invested $140,000 into SmartLab. That's how I discovered the scam. De Hek, in a state of paranoia or delusion, now thinks I didn't actually meet him. "I am not sure if I believe her story of having met a SmartLab victim randomly in the park," he writes. "Thinking back on it, it feels like the whole thing was a ruse to get me to engage."

This man is clearly unwell and divorced from reality. I could stop here, but since he's launched a tirade against me, I need to explain.

As we were exchanging WhatsApp messages, he received numerous emails threatening to sue him for defamation from people who had attended SmartLab events. De Hek had recklessly published the full names of people who attended a SmartLab event and accused them of enabling criminal activity. He said they were “enabling a money-laundering scheme” and “actively endorsing SmartLab’s operations, which include alleged gambling and money laundering.” He was determined to "publicly shame" them merely for having attended a SmartLab event.

It's clear that De Hek is unable to engage in ethical and professional journalism and instead wildly attacks anyone and anything he thinks is loosely associated with his target.

I interviewed one of the women named on De Hek’s list. She was a financial advisor to a client that was exploring investing in SmartLab. She had spent months trying to dissuade her client from investing in SmartLab. She sent numerous emails to De Hek explaining the situation. Her name appeared in his articles in search results, which accused her of enabling a money-laundering scheme and endorsing criminal activities. As a financial advisor to nonprofits and small businesses, she was deeply concerned.

De Hek's response was to publish every email she wrote to him without her permission. He did the same with the other attendees of the SmartLab event who emailed him.

I was shocked to see how reckless and irresponsible Danny De Hek was in the process of going after a scam like SmartLab.

I then told De Hek he should remove this woman’s name and private emails from his blog, as she was innocent. I told him I spoke with her for several hours. His response was highly defensive, and he accused me of trying to control him.

De Hek then coerced this woman to issue a statement publicly attacking SmartLab in exchange for removing her private emails to him. I told De Hek that these actions would endanger her, as forcing someone to publicly attack a criminal organization under their real name is dangerous. He didn't care.

This woman wanted nothing to do with this situation and has told me De Hek was being “abusive and manipulative.” She said he was “holding” her “reputation hostage in exchange for his website content.” She described it as blackmail. “I’m basically being blackmailed into providing content for his website that he benefits from,” she told me. 

“I’m basically being blackmailed into providing content for his website that he benefits from."

After I raised my concerns, De Hek quietly changed his articles from accusing attendees of enabling criminal behavior to saying things like “some may be attending in ignorance.” His concession of the language proves my original point: it’s reckless to accuse any random person who attended a SmartLab event of enabling criminal activity. Those in attendance could be someone’s assistant, secretary, financial advisor, or someone curious about a potential investment.

Despite him changing the language, he's now unleashed an unhinged and paranoid rant against me. He's trying to undermine my reputation as a journalist for having advocated for this woman, who is being manipulated and coerced into being in De Hek's articles. I advocated for her because De Hek is endangering her safety.

I've never experienced behavior so erratic and delusional from a supposed colleague in the scam-exposing space. I've worked with very reputable journalists, directors, and producers, and I've never encountered this. I hope Danny De Hek uses more caution in his reporting going forward and gets the help he needs.

Be Scofield, founder of the Guru Magazine