OpenAI is facing internal turmoil as employees allege the company has grown reluctant to publish research highlighting AI's potential negative economic impacts. At least two researchers have left the economic research team in recent months, with one departing staffer claiming the team faces growing tension between rigorous analysis and functioning as a "de facto advocacy arm" for the AI giant.
The departure of Tom Cunningham from OpenAI's economic research team has exposed a brewing conflict at the heart of the AI industry's most influential company. According to four sources familiar with the matter who spoke to WIRED, Cunningham left in September after concluding it had become difficult to publish high-quality research that didn't align with the company's commercial interests.
In his internal parting message, Cunningham wrote that the team faced mounting pressure between conducting rigorous analysis and functioning as what he called a "de facto advocacy arm" for OpenAI. The allegation strikes at the core of how AI companies balance scientific integrity with business imperatives as they reshape the global economy.
Chief strategy officer Jason Kwon quickly responded with an internal memo defending the company's approach. "Rather, because we are not just a research institution, but also an actor in the world (the leading actor in fact) that puts the subject of inquiry (AI) into the world, we are expected to take agency for the outcomes," Kwon wrote on Slack, according to documents obtained by WIRED.
The tension reflects OpenAI's evolution from research lab to commercial powerhouse with multibillion-dollar partnerships spanning corporations and governments. Since 2016, the company has regularly published research on AI's labor impact, including the widely cited 2023 paper "GPTs Are GPTs" that examined automation vulnerability across sectors.
But sources tell WIRED that dynamic has shifted over the past year. Two insiders claim the company has grown more reluctant to release work highlighting economic downsides like job displacement, instead favoring studies that cast AI in a positive light. An outside economist who previously collaborated with OpenAI echoed these concerns, speaking anonymously about the company's increasingly favorable research filter.
The timing coincides with OpenAI's deepening political entanglements. This week, the company published a report surveying enterprise users who claim its AI products save them 40 to 60 minutes daily - precisely the kind of upbeat findings that critics say now dominate the research pipeline.
The controversy isn't isolated to Cunningham's departure. Former head of policy research Miles Brundage left OpenAI in October 2024, saying the company had become "too restrictive" and that it was "hard for me to publish on all the topics that are important to me." The pattern suggests a systematic shift rather than isolated incidents.
OpenAI's approach contrasts sharply with rival Anthropic, whose CEO Dario Amodei has repeatedly warned that AI could automate up to half of entry-level white-collar jobs by 2030. The Trump administration has criticized these warnings, with White House AI adviser David Sacks accusing Anthropic of "fear-mongering."
The political stakes are enormous. While the Trump administration champions AI's potential, roughly 44% of young Americans fear AI will reduce job opportunities, according to a November Harvard Kennedy School survey. AI companies now wield unprecedented authority to self-report their technology's risks and capabilities, backed by $100 million lobbying campaigns fighting state-level regulations.
OpenAI's economic research now runs through chief economist Aaron Chatterji, who reports directly to chief global affairs officer Chris Lehane. Lehane's background as Bill Clinton's "master of disaster" crisis manager and his role in defeating San Francisco's Prop F ballot measure that would have restricted Airbnb signals how tightly research has become integrated with political strategy.
The company's spokesperson Rob Friedlander maintains that OpenAI has "expanded the scope of its economic research" since hiring Chatterji. "The economic research team conducts rigorous analysis that helps OpenAI, policymakers, and the public understand how people are using AI," Friedlander told WIRED, emphasizing the team examines both benefits and potential disruptions.
Yet the exodus of researchers tells a different story. As AI companies consolidate power over economic and policy discourse, questions mount about whether corporate interests are overwhelming scientific rigor at the institutions best positioned to understand AI's societal impact.
The allegations against OpenAI reveal a fundamental tension facing the AI industry: how to balance scientific integrity with commercial success when companies hold unprecedented influence over public policy. As AI reshapes the economy, the pressure on research teams to produce favorable findings may only intensify, making independent oversight more critical than ever. The departure of experienced researchers like Cunningham and Brundage suggests this tension isn't easily resolved - and raises questions about whether the industry can self-regulate while pursuing trillion-dollar opportunities.
