Kevin O'Leary says Utah AI data center project will shrink after lawmakers demand cuts ⁠19%

By Greg Wehner⁠0%

6/5/2026, 12:07:52 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 26 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Ad Hominem, and Biased Writer Voice, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 16.3% saturation with 83 hits. Analysis detected 820 faulty-reasoning hits from 509 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 33.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠19% (16,710 of 20,408 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 81.90% of the article peer group.

"Shark Tank" investor Kevin O'Leary says he is prepared to shrink a sprawling artificial intelligence data center development in Utah after top state lawmakers pushed for major reductions and additional environmental safeguards, according to reports. 
O'Leary told NBC News on Wednesday that he is willing to reduce the size of the proposed Stratos data center project after Utah Senate President J. 
Stuart Adams called for a 75% reduction in its footprint. 
"I have no choice," O'Leary told NBC News at the Washington AI Network's AI Honors gala. 
The project, which has been promoted as one of the largest AI-focused data center developments in the world, would span roughly 40,000 acres in Box Elder County. 
KEVIN O'LEARY DETAILS MASSIVE UTAH AI DATA CENTER TO RIVAL CHINA'S TECH DOMINANCE 
In a letter sent Monday, Adams urged O'Leary to reduce the project area to approximately 10,000 acres and adopt additional environmental safeguards before moving forward. 
"I've sent a letter directly to Kevin O'Leary calling for a 75% reduction in the proposed data center project area, from 40,000 acres to approximately 10,000 acres," Adams said in a statement. 
The Republican Senate president also called for stronger conservation measures, greater public transparency and protections for Utah's natural resources. 
FOX NEWS AI NEWSLETTER: BACKLASH OVER MYSTERY COMPANY'S DATA CENTER 
Among his requests, Adams said the project should commit to using the latest technology to minimize water consumption, dedicate any excess treated water to the Great Salt Lake and enter into agreements with state officials to preserve wildlife habitat and agricultural land. 
"Utah can pursue economic opportunity while protecting our water, air, wildlife and communities," Adams said. 
"We can and must do both." 
O'Leary suggested the demand was driven in part by political pressure as opposition to the project continues to grow. 
KEVIN O'LEARY REVEALS THE ONLY TWO CRYPTOCURRENCIES HE SAYS ARE WORTH OWNING 
"I know he did it for political reasons," O'Leary told NBC News. 
"He has to address those issues, and so do I." 
Residents and environmental advocates have raised concerns about the project's potential demands on water supplies, power infrastructure and nearby communities. 
O'Leary has previously dismissed some of those concerns as misinformation and accused opponents of spreading false claims about the project. 
US BANS NEW FOREIGN-MADE CONSUMER INTERNET ROUTERS OVER SECURITY CONCERNS 
"All these people have a right to get information," O'Leary told NBC News. 
"Why are they getting it from a false initiative? 
Who is spending all this money to put out all these falsehoods and straight-out misinformation and lies and agitate these people?" 
Adams noted that several legislative committees are examining how large-scale developments could affect Utah's water supply, energy system, land use and environmental resources. 
GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE 
Utah has also invested more than $1 billion in water conservation and infrastructure projects while increasing oversight of large-scale developments, Adams said. 
O'Leary told NBC News he plans to formally respond to Adams by Friday with details of a revised proposal. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 15.5%Greg Wehner: 2.2%FoxBusiness: 4.4%Confirmation Bias15.5%This article: 11.2%Greg Wehner: 1.1%FoxBusiness: 3.5%Anchoring Bias11.2%This article: 5.3%Greg Wehner: 3.0%FoxBusiness: 4.1%Availability Heuristic5.3%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 1.1%FoxBusiness: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 0.6%FoxBusiness: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 2.4%Greg Wehner: 3.2%FoxBusiness: 3.8%Overconfidence Bias2.4%This article: 5.3%Greg Wehner: 9.5%FoxBusiness: 13.0%Framing Effect5.3%This article: 3.1%Greg Wehner: 0.7%FoxBusiness: 1.5%Loss Aversion3.1%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 0.7%FoxBusiness: 1.1%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 4.3%Greg Wehner: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect4.3%This article: 9.4%Greg Wehner: 3.4%FoxBusiness: 8.9%Optimism Bias9.4%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 0.9%FoxBusiness: 2.0%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 16.3%Greg Wehner: 7.1%FoxBusiness: 7.8%Negativity Bias16.3%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 2.5%FoxBusiness: 4.5%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 2.4%Greg Wehner: 0.8%FoxBusiness: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error2.4%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 3.7%Greg Wehner: 1.7%FoxBusiness: 1.7%In-Group Bias3.7%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 1.5%FoxBusiness: 0.8%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 3.2%FoxBusiness: 3.9%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 0.2%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 0.8%FoxBusiness: 2.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 2.0%Greg Wehner: 0.3%FoxBusiness: 0.4%Primacy Effect2.0%This article: 3.9%Greg Wehner: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias3.9%This article: 14.1%Greg Wehner: 1.2%FoxBusiness: 0.8%Ad Hominem14.1%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 0.2%FoxBusiness: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 9.6%Greg Wehner: 4.1%FoxBusiness: 7.2%Appeal to Authority9.6%This article: 2.4%Greg Wehner: 0.7%FoxBusiness: 1.6%False Dilemma2.4%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 1.2%FoxBusiness: 1.2%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 3.4%FoxBusiness: 6.3%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 0.3%FoxBusiness: 0.8%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 0.3%FoxBusiness: 1.2%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 8.1%Greg Wehner: 6.9%FoxBusiness: 6.1%Appeal to Emotion8.1%This article: 2.9%Greg Wehner: 0.7%FoxBusiness: 1.2%Begging the Question2.9%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 2.2%FoxBusiness: 4.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 2.0%Greg Wehner: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Tu Quoque2.0%This article: 2.4%Greg Wehner: 0.3%FoxBusiness: 0.4%Burden of Proof2.4%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 0.2%FoxBusiness: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 1.3%FoxBusiness: 2.4%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 1.0%FoxBusiness: 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 2.9%Greg Wehner: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Middle Ground2.9%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 3.1%Greg Wehner: 0.2%FoxBusiness: 0.3%Special Pleading3.1%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 0.3%FoxBusiness: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 0.7%FoxBusiness: 1.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 7.3%Greg Wehner: 0.6%FoxBusiness: 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection7.3%This article: 12.2%Greg Wehner: 1.0%FoxBusiness: 4.1%Biased Writer Voice12.2%This article: 1.2%Greg Wehner: 1.0%FoxBusiness: 1.7%Indoctrination1.2%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Greg Wehner: 1.8%FoxBusiness: 2.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 8.1%Greg Wehner: 1.0%FoxBusiness: 4.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…8.1%

509 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers71%attributed speech150writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 100.0% coverageKevin O'Leary • 26 words • 0.0% coverageJ. Stuart Adams • 10 words • 0.0% coverageKevin O'Leary • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageJ. Stuart Adams • 25 words • 0.0% coverageJ. Stuart Adams • 32 words • 0.0% coverageJ. Stuart Adams • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageJ. Stuart Adams • 42 words • 0.0% coverageJ. Stuart Adams • 15 words • 0.0% coverageJ. Stuart Adams • 6 words • 100.0% coverageKevin O'Leary • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageKevin O'Leary • 12 words • 0.0% coverageKevin O'Leary • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageKevin O'Leary • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageKevin O'Leary • 13 words • 0.0% coverageKevin O'Leary • 9 words • 0.0% coverageKevin O'Leary • 21 words • 100.0% coverageJ. Stuart Adams • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageJ. Stuart Adams • 22 words • 0.0% coverageKevin O'Leary • 19 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Kevin O'Leary

65%flagged-word coverage
165 attributed words46% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%22.5%45.0%Biased Writer Voice-41.3 ptsWriter: 41.3%Kevin O'Leary: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -27.3 ptsWriter: 27.3%Kevin O'Leary: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection+22.4 ptsWriter: 0.0%Kevin O'Leary: 22.4%22.4%

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

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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