A number of distinguishing characteristics can be identified in these manipulative practices.

1. Transactions are based on recommendations from closed, paid Telegram channels, which creates the impression of exclusive access to valuable information [Judge, P., Alperovich, D. and Yang, W., 2005].
2. Investors are required to pay a fee to participate in these channels, which creates the perception of gaining insider knowledge or a competitive advantage.
3. Channels frequently provide consensus forecasts for highly liquid assets with the objective of establishing trust, while individual forecasts target low-liquid assets that are more susceptible to manipulation [Nelson, K.K., Price, R.A. and Rountree, B.R., 2013].
4. A series of initially successful trades serves to reinforce the credibility and trustworthiness of the forecasts, thereby encouraging further investor participation.

The impact of information insularity on investor actions

The perception of receiving exclusive insider information significantly influences investor behaviour. When private investors believe they are gaining access to secret, privileged information, their actions are determined by a number of psychological and financial factors.

1. An enhanced perception of value.

Investors frequently ascribe greater value to information that is perceived as exclusive or limited in availability. This bias causes them to favour and act on such information more readily than on publicly available data. Additionally, investors may exhibit confirmation bias, interpreting exclusive information in a manner that is consistent with their pre-existing beliefs or desires for profitable investments.

1. Increased credibility and trustworthiness.

Exclusive outlets frequently present their forecasts in a manner that conveys an aura of authority and expertise, which increases investor confidence. Investors may believe that paying for access to information correlates with its higher quality and reliability. The first successful trades based on such forecasts build trust and credibility, leading to repeated and increased use of exclusive information.

1. Accelerated decision-making.

The exclusivity of information engenders a sense of urgency. Investors are fearful of missing out on profitable opportunities, which encourages them to make decisions and act promptly. The perceived insider nature of information can cause investors to bypass scrutiny, relying solely on the advice provided.

1. Collective behaviour and herd behaviour.

Investors within these exclusive channels frequently observe and emulate the actions of other group members, thereby reinforcing the collective influence on the share price. This herd behaviour can result in significant market movements, particularly in low-liquidity stocks. The positive feedback generated by the initial profits generated by the group's actions serves to reinforce the belief in the accuracy of the information, thereby supporting the collective buying or selling cycle.

1. Overconfidence and risk-taking.

The conviction that one possesses privileged information may engender the impression of control over market outcomes, prompting investors to undertake greater risks, execute larger trades, and utilise greater leverage. The belief in the exceptional worth of exclusive information may prompt investors to concentrate their portfolios on recommended assets, thereby neglecting diversification and heightening exposure to market manipulation risks.

1. A possibility of substantial financial losses.

In instances where information is employed as a means of manipulation, the initial artificial price rise is often accompanied by a surge in investor interest. However, subsequent to the sale of positions by the manipulators, the stock price frequently declines, resulting in substantial losses for those who have acquired the stock at a later stage. The abrupt realisation of the manipulation and the subsequent losses can give rise to emotional distress, panic selling and a loss of confidence in future investment opportunities.

Legal and ethical implications of the aforementioned methods.

The aforementioned methods constitute forms of market manipulation that are both illegal and unethical for a number of reasons. The recommendations are not based on genuine financial analyses; rather, they are designed to generate artificial demand and inflate stock prices. Furthermore, private investors are misled into entering into transactions that primarily benefit the creators of the channel, to the detriment of the investors. These manipulative practices distort the natural price discovery mechanism of the stock market, thereby undermining its integrity and efficiency.

Measures to combat market manipulation.

The most effective method of combating manipulative practices is a multi-pronged approach that engages the participation of regulators, platforms, and investors.

1. It is recommended that regulators enhance their monitoring of social media and messaging platforms with a view to identifying any suspicious activity related to stock recommendations. This may be achieved by utilising advanced analytics and artificial intelligence to discern patterns that are indicative of manipulation.
2. The legislative framework should be reinforced with the specific intention of addressing and penalising manipulative activity. This should include the imposition of rigorous sanctions and the filing of lawsuits against individuals and entities involved in market manipulation.
3. Regulators should collaborate with messaging platforms, such as Telegram, to guarantee that they have established procedures to monitor and report suspicious activities related to financial advice and share trading [Siering, M., Clapham, B., Engel, O. and Gomber, P., 2017].
4. It is imperative that comprehensive information campaigns be implemented to educate investors about the inherent risks associated with receiving investment advice through unregulated channels. These campaigns must emphasise the potential dangers of manipulation and the vital importance of due diligence.
5. The necessity of conducting independent research and seeking counsel from duly licensed financial advisers in lieu of relying on unverified sources should be elucidated.
6. It is necessary to educate investors on how to verify the credibility of sources providing financial forecasts and advice.
7. The implementation of systems to verify individuals and entities providing financial advice on the platform is required. Vetted advisers must meet certain criteria and adhere to ethical standards.
8. It is necessary to implement user-friendly reporting mechanisms that allow individuals to flag any suspicious activity or recommendations that appear manipulative [Zahedi, F.M., Abbasi, A. and Chen, Y., 2015].
9. The utilisation of artificial intelligence and machine learning to monitor and moderate content related to financial advice, thereby ensuring compliance with regulatory requirements and ethical standards, can also assist in combating manipulative practices.

Conclusion

The perception of receiving exclusive insider information has a profound impact on investor behaviour, often leading to quick decision-making, overconfidence and exposure to market manipulation. In order to protect investors from the negative effects of manipulative practices, it is essential to understand the psychological and financial implications of such practices and to combine the efforts of regulators, educational initiatives and platform policies. It is therefore necessary to raise awareness and vigilance in order to preserve market integrity.