Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitches2Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errors3Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteOpenAI economist Tom Cunningham left the company in September 2025 after concluding that publishing high-quality research had become difficult, according to WIRED. The report’s central claim—that OpenAI had grown more hesitant to publish research on AI’s possible negative economic effects—rests on four anonymous sources. OpenAI disputes the implication, saying its economic research scope expanded to study both benefits and disruptions. The reporting describes a disagreement over research priorities and publication; it does not establish that OpenAI suppressed a particular study or adopted a formal ban on negative findings.
What WIRED reported about Cunningham’s departure
In a December 9, 2025 report, WIRED’s Maxwell Zeff wrote that at least two members of OpenAI’s economic research team had left in recent months. Cunningham left in September. WIRED said he concluded that publishing high-quality research had become difficult, and that his internal parting message described tension between rigorous analysis and serving as a de facto advocacy arm. Cunningham declined WIRED’s request for comment. WIRED’s report is the primary account of the underlying reporting.
Four people familiar with the situation told WIRED that OpenAI had become increasingly reluctant to publish research emphasizing AI’s potentially negative economic effects. That is an allegation from anonymous sources, not an established finding about a company-wide policy. The reporting reviewed here does not include the full parting message, a specific unpublished study, or an explanation from Cunningham.
Why OpenAI says its research scope changed
OpenAI spokesperson Rob Friedlander gave WIRED a different account: the team’s remit had expanded, rather than narrowed. He said: “The economic research team conducts rigorous analysis that helps OpenAI, policymakers, and the public understand how people are using AI and how it is shaping the broader economy, including where benefits are emerging and where societal impacts or disruptions may arise as the technology evolves.”
#1 Best Overall
Friedlander also said OpenAI hired its first chief economist, Aaron Chatterji, in the previous year and that the team studies AI use and effects on the broader economy, including benefits and possible societal impacts or disruptions. The two accounts make different claims about publication incentives and the team’s work. The anonymous-source allegation concerns reluctance to publish negative-impact research; the named company response describes a broader research scope. Neither account, on the evidence presented in WIRED’s article, independently settles what happened to any particular study.
What Jason Kwon’s reported message adds
WIRED reported that after Cunningham’s departure, OpenAI chief strategy officer Jason Kwon addressed concerns in an internal memo. The article said it obtained a copy; it also reproduced a statement attributed to Kwon in a Slack message. This is a reported internal statement, not a direct interview:
Rank #2
“My POV on hard subjects is not that we shouldn’t talk about them,” Kwon said on Slack. “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’s reported position frames the issue as more than whether research should be published: OpenAI should discuss difficult subjects while accepting responsibility for outcomes as a company that develops and deploys AI. It does not by itself confirm or disprove the sources’ claims about publication reluctance.
Rank #3
Did OpenAI stop publishing research about AI job losses?
WIRED reported anonymous-source claims that OpenAI had grown more hesitant to publish work on negative economic effects, but its account does not establish that the company stopped publishing such research. Nor does it document a formal prohibition or identify a specific finding that was withheld.
WIRED also reported that Cunningham was listed as an author on an OpenAI report about how people use ChatGPT. That publication complicates any simple claim that OpenAI stopped publishing economic work, but does not resolve whether particular topics or findings faced resistance. Futurism’s December 12 follow-up summarized the WIRED report; it is secondary context rather than a separate basis for the central allegations. Read Futurism’s follow-up.
Rank #4
Why the dispute matters to readers
The question is consequential because public discussion of AI’s economic effects involves both potential gains and disruption to work. WIRED reported that roughly 44 percent of young people in the United States feared AI would reduce job opportunities, citing a November 2025 survey by Harvard Kennedy School’s Institute of Politics. That figure is presented here as WIRED reported it; the poll methodology is not independently established in the reporting summarized above.
For readers trying to judge the headline, the key distinction is between a documented departure and a disputed explanation of the company’s publication practices. Cunningham’s September 2025 departure and the competing statements are reported facts; a company policy to hide negative findings is not proven by the available account.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREEClear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEFix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Quick Recap
Best Value
- Ideal for Gifting
- Ideal for a bookworm
- Compact for travelling
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
