Jackie and Shadow hit $10M fundraising goal after $5.5M donation from OpenAI co-founder 27%

By Popular Science Team12%

7/24/2026, 4:02:10 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 17 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Appeal to Nature, and Loss Aversion, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 19.2% saturation with 118 hits. Analysis detected 554 faulty-reasoning hits from 614 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 38.1% and a BS Rank of 27% (16,157 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 73.80% of the article peer group.

The land bald eagles Jackie and Shadow rely on for survival will remain intact. 
On Friday, Friends of Big Bear Valley (FOBBV), the non-profit behind the pair’s 24/7 live cam, announced that they reached a goal of raising $10 million to purchase land around Big Bear Lake in the San Bernardino Mountains. 
A $5.5 million donation from Anna and Greg Brockman pushed the fundraiser to its goal ahead of a July 31 deadline. 
Greg Brockman is the co-founder and President of OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT. 
Before the Brockmans’ donation, more than 25,000 donations had raised almost half of the necessary funds. 
“Greg and I are grateful to all those who championed saving the home of these majestic eagles, Jackie and Shadow,” Anna Brockman said in a statement. 
“Like many people around the world, we love watching them be amazing partners to one another and raise their young. 
They inspire perseverance and a sense of connectedness to something greater, to nature. 
We are proud to be supportive. 
We are so appreciative of the San Bernardino Mountains Land Trust and everyone who came together to preserve this incredible ecosystem, the life it will help sustain, and the forest that will be protected for generations to come.” 
The land that will be purchased with the $10 million is known as Moon Camp. 
This stretch of land has been a target of luxury housing and marina developers for more than two decades. 
The land sits less than a mile from Jackie and Shadow’s nest, and borders part of the lake that is home to all of the fish that the eagles and their chicks rely on for sustenance. 
It also houses an undisturbed forest that supports birds, squirrels, and other animals, as well as the ash-gray indian paintbrush ( Castilleja cinerea ), a rare and threatened endemic plant only found here. 
Purchasing Moon Camp was a passion project for Sandy Steers, FOBBV’s former executive director and fierce advocate for Jackie and Shadow. 
Steers died on February 11 after a battle with cancer. 
She was life-long wildlife activist, and helped launch the livecams back in 2015 and also served as FOBBV’s resident bald eagle expert. 
Steers and the San Bernardino Mountain Land Trust negotiated a limited purchase agreement with the land’s owner, developer RCK Properties, earlier this year. 
“Sandy passed away right after the agreement was signed, so we’re doing this in her honor,” Jenny Voisard , media manager for FOBBV, told Popular Science earlier this year. 
“She put all of that on her shoulders because she wanted to save everything.” 
“We are beyond grateful for the tireless support of so many people these past six months,” Voisard said. 
“This is a special community that has a real love for Jackie and Shadow’s wellbeing along with nature.” 
While news of the fundraiser is joyful for the thousands of people who have tuned into watch Jackie and Shadow over the years, it comes at a worrisome time for the bald eagle pair. 
Mom Jackie is currently at a r ehabilitation center in Ojai, California , after being found injured following an altercation with two subadult bald eagles . 
Dad Shadow has been caring for their 2026 eaglets, Luna and Sandy , on his own since Jackie’s rescue. 
The chicks will likely fully fledge in the coming weeks. 
Disclosure: Ziff Davis, Popular Science’s parent company, filed a lawsuit against OpenAI in April 2025, alleging it infringed Ziff Davis copyrights in training and operating its AI systems. 
The post Jackie and Shadow hit $10M fundraising goal after $5.5M donation from OpenAI co-founder appeared first on Popular Science . 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.5%Popular Science: 2.2%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.0%Popular Science: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 2.6%Popular Science Team: 1.3%Popular Science: 2.7%Availability Heuristic2.6%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.2%Popular Science: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 2.0%Popular Science: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 1.1%Popular Science: 2.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 5.3%Popular Science: 3.5%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 6.2%Popular Science Team: 0.8%Popular Science: 0.4%Loss Aversion6.2%This article: 2.3%Popular Science Team: 0.3%Popular Science: 0.7%Status Quo Bias2.3%This article: 3.4%Popular Science Team: 0.2%Popular Science: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect3.4%This article: 4.9%Popular Science Team: 0.4%Popular Science: 4.6%Optimism Bias4.9%This article: 5.5%Popular Science Team: 0.6%Popular Science: 0.7%Pessimism Bias5.5%This article: 8.6%Popular Science Team: 2.4%Popular Science: 3.0%Negativity Bias8.6%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.0%Popular Science: 0.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 2.3%Popular Science Team: 0.1%Popular Science: 0.3%Fundamental Attribution Error2.3%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.0%Popular Science: 0.0%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 6.2%Popular Science Team: 0.9%Popular Science: 0.4%In-Group Bias6.2%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.0%Popular Science: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 5.7%Popular Science Team: 3.4%Popular Science: 2.1%Halo Effect5.7%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.0%Popular Science: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.0%Popular Science: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 1.6%Popular Science Team: 0.8%Popular Science: 0.9%Recency Bias1.6%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 1.0%Popular Science: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.0%Popular Science: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.0%Popular Science: 0.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.0%Popular Science: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 5.7%Popular Science Team: 1.7%Popular Science: 4.2%Appeal to Authority5.7%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.4%Popular Science: 0.8%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.0%Popular Science: 0.3%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.0%Popular Science: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 1.7%Popular Science: 4.1%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.0%Popular Science: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.2%Popular Science: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 19.2%Popular Science Team: 4.5%Popular Science: 2.9%Appeal to Emotion19.2%This article: 2.3%Popular Science Team: 0.4%Popular Science: 0.6%Begging the Question2.3%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 1.8%Popular Science: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.0%Popular Science: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.0%Popular Science: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 7.5%Popular Science Team: 0.5%Popular Science: 0.4%Appeal to Nature7.5%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.1%Popular Science: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.3%Popular Science: 2.2%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.0%Popular Science: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 1.6%Popular Science Team: 0.8%Popular Science: 2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)1.6%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.0%Popular Science: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.0%Popular Science: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.0%Popular Science: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.0%Popular Science: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.0%Popular Science: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.0%Popular Science: 1.5%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.3%Popular Science: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 4.6%Popular Science Team: 4.6%Popular Science: 3.8%Biased Writer Voice4.6%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.1%Popular Science: 1.3%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.0%Popular Science: 0.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 0.0%Popular Science: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Popular Science Team: 8.0%Popular Science: 2.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

614 words analyzed.

Speakers

5speakers43%attributed speech353writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageFriends of Big Bear Valley (FOBBV) • 38 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageGreg Brockman • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageAnna Brockman • 26 words • 0.0% coverageAnna Brockman • 20 words • 0.0% coverageAnna Brockman • 13 words • 0.0% coverageAnna Brockman • 6 words • 0.0% coverageAnna Brockman • 38 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageJenny Voisard • 29 words • 0.0% coverageJenny Voisard • 14 words • 0.0% coverageJenny Voisard • 18 words • 0.0% coverageJenny Voisard • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageZiff Davis • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Greg Brockman

100%flagged-word coverage
13 attributed words5.0% of attributed speech51% writer coverage

No manipulation-pattern hits were found in this speaker's attributed words or the writer's voice.

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.