Gemini is a place where people buy and sell digital money, called cryptocurrency. They had a program that let people lend their cryptocurrency to Gemini and earn extra money from it. But the program ended when there was a big problem in the crypto market and another company involved, Genesis, went bankrupt. Now, Gemini has to give back at least $1.1 billion to the people who were part of that program and also pay a fine of $37 million because they didn't follow some rules. Read from source...

1. The headline is misleading and sensationalized. It implies that Gemini was doing something wrong or illegal with its Earn program, when in reality it was a victim of the Genesis bankruptcy and market crash. A more accurate headline would be "Gemini to Refund Customers Due to Genesis Bankruptcy".
2. The article does not provide enough context or background information about the Gemini Earn program, Genesis Global Capital, or the crypto lending market in general. It assumes that the reader is already familiar with these concepts and terms, which may confuse or misinform newcomers to the crypto space.
3. The article uses vague and ambiguous language throughout, such as "a prominent cryptocurrency exchange" and "the NYDFS". These phrases do not clearly identify or define the entities involved in the story, making it harder for readers to understand who is who and what is at stake.
4. The article fails to mention any positive aspects of Gemini's Earn program, such as its high interest rates, transparency, and security features. It only focuses on the negative outcome of the Genesis bankruptcy, which may create a biased and unfair impression of the program in the readers' minds.
5. The article relies heavily on external sources, such as Reuters and Benzinga Neuro, without providing any direct quotes or evidence from these sources. This makes it seem like the author did not do their own research or investigation into the story, but rather copy-pasted information from other outlets.
6. The article ends with a cliffhang

There are a few possible ways to approach this task, but one reasonable method is to use the following criteria:

- If the article reports on some kind of adverse event or outcome for the company or its customers, such as fines, lawsuits, bankruptcies, scandals, etc., then the sentiment is negative.
- If the article reports on some kind of favorable event or outcome for the company or its customers, such as profits, growth, partnerships, awards, etc., then the sentiment is positive.
- If the article does not report any specific events or outcomes for the company or its customers, but rather provides general information, analysis, or opinion about the industry or the market, then the sentiment is neutral.
- If the article expresses some kind of doubt, uncertainty, or criticism about the company or its customers, such as questioning their credibility, performance, or viability, then the sentiment is bearish.
- If the article expresses some kind of enthusiasm, optimism, or praise for the company or its customers, such as highlighting their achievements, potential, or innovation, then the sentiment is bullish.

Using this method, I would assign a negative sentiment to the article, because it reports on a settlement that involves a fine and a refund for Gemini's customers, which are both adverse events for the company. The article does not mention any positive aspects of the situation, such as how Gemini plans to recover from this setback or what benefits it might bring to its customers or the industry. Therefore, the overall tone of the article is negative towards Gemini and its Earn program.