Week in Review: Cluely helps you cheat on everything

Tech Crunch - Apr 26th, 2025

Tesla reported a significant 71% drop in net income for Q1, marking its worst delivery quarter in over two years. The company's struggles are juxtaposed with the emergence of new competition in the electric vehicle market, notably from Slate, a previously low-profile EV maker that has gained attention due to its financial backing from Jeff Bezos and its strategic pricing of $25,000. Slate is generating buzz by placing concept cars around Los Angeles, as it seeks to capture interest in a competitive field.

These developments in the EV sector come amid other notable tech news, including Airbnb's new policy to display total costs upfront and a concerning data breach at Blue Shield of California. The tech landscape continues to evolve rapidly with companies like Chess.com reaching new membership milestones and adaptive coding platforms gaining investment. These stories highlight the dynamic shifts in technology and business, with significant implications for consumer behavior and corporate strategies.

Tesla Electric Vehicles Jeff Bezos Airbnb Data Breach Tech Crunch Slate Ev Chess.Com Q1 Earnings Blue Shield Of California D Do S Attack Flow Proptech Adam Neumann

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

5.2

Moderately Fair

Read with skepticism

The article covers a wide range of current and engaging topics, including Cluely's controversial AI tool, Tesla's financial performance, and Airbnb's pricing updates. While it is timely and captures public interest, the article suffers from a lack of depth and balance, particularly in presenting differing perspectives on ethical issues. The absence of clear sourcing and transparency further undermines the credibility of the information. Despite these weaknesses, the article's engaging style and relevance to ongoing discussions make it a compelling read, though readers should approach it with a critical eye regarding the accuracy and completeness of the claims presented.

Accuracy

The story presents a mix of accurate and potentially misleading information. For instance, the article states that Cluely boasts a $5.3 million monthly ARR, which is incorrect; it refers to the seed funding the company raised, not its monthly revenue. The mention of Cluely's functionality as an AI tool for cheating is accurate, aligning with the company's promotional claims and public information. However, specifics such as the exact number of users and detailed revenue model are lacking, requiring further verification. The story's claim about Tesla's financial struggles is consistent with widely reported facts, but lacks specific data points for verification, such as precise figures from Tesla's earnings report.

Balance

The article attempts to cover a wide range of topics, from Cluely's controversial business model to Tesla's financial issues and Airbnb's pricing updates. However, it lacks depth in presenting differing perspectives, particularly on ethical issues related to Cluely. The narrative seems to lean towards sensationalism, especially in the depiction of Cluely's success and Tesla's challenges, without offering counterpoints or deeper analysis. This imbalance may lead to a skewed understanding of the topics.

Clarity

The article is written in a clear and engaging style, making it accessible to a broad audience. The language is straightforward, and the structure is logical, with distinct sections for each topic. However, the tone is somewhat informal and sensational, which might detract from the perceived seriousness of the issues discussed, particularly regarding ethical concerns.

Source quality

The article does not clearly attribute its information to specific sources, which raises questions about the credibility of the claims. While it references TechCrunch's report on Slate EV, there is no direct citation or link to primary sources or data, such as Tesla's earnings report or Cluely's official statements. This lack of clear sourcing undermines the reliability of the information presented.

Transparency

The article lacks transparency in terms of how information was gathered and the methodology behind the reported claims. There is no disclosure of potential conflicts of interest or the basis for the assertions made about Cluely and Tesla. This absence of transparency makes it difficult for readers to assess the impartiality and credibility of the information.