KQED⁠61%

Inside Elon Musk and Sam Altman's Battle Over OpenAI ⁠67%

By Ericka Cruz Guevarra⁠0% Rachael Myrow⁠42% Alan Montecillo⁠0% Jessica Kariisa⁠0%

5/6/2026, 10:00:36 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 5 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Begging the Question, and Appeal to Emotion, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 33.9% saturation with 42 hits. Analysis detected 120 faulty-reasoning hits from 124 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 61% and a BS Rank of ⁠67% (6,984 of 21,175 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 67.00% of the article peer group.

Jurors and journalists are getting a peak behind the world of OpenAI and its founding as two of the richest, most powerful men in tech duke it out in an Oakland federal courthouse. 
At issue is whether Sam Altman and other co-founders of OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity. 
But does anyone here really have our best interests at heart? 
KQED’s Rachael Myrow takes us inside. 
Links: 
How to Unscramble an Omelet in Silicon Valley: The Musk v. 
Altman Trial That Will Try 
Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 1.4%CalMatters: 1.9%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 1.6%CalMatters: 0.9%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 4.7%CalMatters: 3.0%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 1.8%CalMatters: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.1%CalMatters: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.0%CalMatters: 1.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 33.9%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 13.1%CalMatters: 6.3%Framing Effect33.9%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.8%CalMatters: 1.0%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.5%CalMatters: 0.7%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 2.2%CalMatters: 3.5%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 2.8%CalMatters: 1.4%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 26.6%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 10.4%CalMatters: 6.4%Negativity Bias26.6%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.2%CalMatters: 1.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.3%CalMatters: 0.7%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 3.1%CalMatters: 1.7%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 1.4%CalMatters: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 4.2%CalMatters: 2.7%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.3%CalMatters: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 2.4%CalMatters: 0.9%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.7%CalMatters: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.5%CalMatters: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.3%CalMatters: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 1.7%CalMatters: 3.1%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 2.6%CalMatters: 1.1%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.1%CalMatters: 0.8%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 3.9%CalMatters: 3.6%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.4%CalMatters: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.3%CalMatters: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 8.9%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 4.1%CalMatters: 5.3%Appeal to Emotion8.9%This article: 18.5%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.4%CalMatters: 0.6%Begging the Question18.5%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 2.5%CalMatters: 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.5%CalMatters: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.2%CalMatters: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.3%CalMatters: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.4%CalMatters: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 2.7%CalMatters: 3.1%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 1.1%CalMatters: 1.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.1%CalMatters: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.6%CalMatters: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 4.2%CalMatters: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 1.0%CalMatters: 0.6%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 7.9%CalMatters: 3.1%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 8.9%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.9%CalMatters: 1.9%Indoctrination8.9%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 2.0%CalMatters: 1.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 0.3%CalMatters: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ericka Cruz Guevarra: 1.4%CalMatters: 1.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

124 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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