The Verge⁠70%

Fenix Flexin isn’t even denying using AI to make ‘Rubberz’ anymore ⁠79%

By Terrence O'Brien⁠77%

8/7/2026, 1:01:51 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 16 faulty reasoning types, including Fundamental Attribution Error, Anecdotal, and Ambiguity (Equivocation), with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 31.1% saturation with 92 hits. Analysis detected 577 faulty-reasoning hits from 296 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 62.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠79% (6,450 of 30,584 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 78.90% of the article peer group.

It took long enough, but now LA rapper Fenix Flexin appears to have admitted using AI for the 80s synth pop-themed song “Rubberz.” 
His comments follow the producer Medasin’s videos claiming that an AI tool called Treblo (formerly Sonauto) was used to make the song, and the company releasing an AI detector that identifies it as Treblo AI-created. 
In a reply to a comment pointing out that Tyga admitted to relying on AI for his own controversial ’80s-influenced album $tarface, on one of his Instagram posts, Fenix said: 
> never said I didn’t use AI , i said it had nun to do w recording process . 
I didn’t even know what da app was till we mixed it and erbody started commenting . ain’t nothing wrong w using new technology as a tool keep up w the times or get left behind 
The comment insists he never denied using AI, but last month on Hot 97’s Mornings With Mero when asked directly about AI use by interviewer Kazeem Famuyide, he stated clearly that there’s “no AI on it.” 
[Media: https://youtu.be/P9UWXE8pk0Y? 
si=DtnPbXty7IvH-BL3&t=52] 
He’s repeatedly gone out of his way to try and dispel the AI allegations publicly since the song was released, despite what he says now. 
Fenix and his team have posted what they claimed were clips of the recording session files, popped into the comments to insist the song was made by two humans recording in his living room with “pro tools auto tune and some reverb,” and said he’s actually singing in clips where it looks like he’s lip syncing. 
[Image: I suppose technically AI had nothing to do with the recording process if the song was generated. https://platform.theverge.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2026/08/Screenshot-2026-08-07-at-11.53.08-AM.png? 
quality=90&strip=all] 
[Media: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/fzkoENoDrbs] 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 8.4%Terrence O'Brien: 4.1%The Verge: 3.1%Confirmation Bias8.4%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 1.6%The Verge: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 11.8%Terrence O'Brien: 3.5%The Verge: 3.2%Availability Heuristic11.8%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.7%The Verge: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.8%The Verge: 0.6%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.7%The Verge: 1.5%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 8.9%The Verge: 5.0%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.9%The Verge: 0.8%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.3%The Verge: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.2%The Verge: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 12.2%Terrence O'Brien: 2.4%The Verge: 3.6%Optimism Bias12.2%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 1.8%The Verge: 2.1%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 31.1%Terrence O'Brien: 11.5%The Verge: 7.9%Negativity Bias31.1%This article: 6.4%Terrence O'Brien: 1.2%The Verge: 1.4%Self-Serving Bias6.4%This article: 18.9%Terrence O'Brien: 0.5%The Verge: 0.7%Fundamental Attribution Error18.9%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.2%The Verge: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.5%The Verge: 0.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 1.1%The Verge: 0.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 2.1%The Verge: 2.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.5%The Verge: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.0%The Verge: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 12.2%Terrence O'Brien: 1.4%The Verge: 1.6%Recency Bias12.2%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.8%The Verge: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.0%The Verge: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 2.4%The Verge: 0.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.7%The Verge: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 5.2%The Verge: 3.2%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 1.3%The Verge: 1.4%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 1.2%The Verge: 1.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.3%The Verge: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 8.4%Terrence O'Brien: 5.5%The Verge: 5.9%Hasty Generalization8.4%This article: 10.1%Terrence O'Brien: 0.5%The Verge: 0.2%Red Herring10.1%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 1.3%The Verge: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 4.8%The Verge: 3.3%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 1.2%The Verge: 0.8%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 2.8%The Verge: 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 12.2%Terrence O'Brien: 0.4%The Verge: 0.2%Tu Quoque12.2%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.4%The Verge: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 12.2%Terrence O'Brien: 0.2%The Verge: 0.2%Appeal to Nature12.2%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.1%The Verge: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 18.9%Terrence O'Brien: 2.7%The Verge: 3.2%Anecdotal18.9%This article: 6.4%Terrence O'Brien: 0.3%The Verge: 0.1%No True Scotsman6.4%This article: 12.8%Terrence O'Brien: 2.6%The Verge: 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)12.8%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.0%The Verge: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.1%The Verge: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.2%The Verge: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.0%The Verge: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.2%The Verge: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 6.4%Terrence O'Brien: 2.9%The Verge: 2.2%Unattributed Quote6.4%This article: 6.4%Terrence O'Brien: 2.1%The Verge: 1.0%Quote-first Misdirection6.4%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 9.9%The Verge: 8.7%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 1.4%The Verge: 1.0%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 2.5%The Verge: 1.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.2%The Verge: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 2.6%The Verge: 3.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

296 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker19%attributed speech241writer words
Selected voice

Fenix Flexin

100%flagged-word coverage
55 attributed words100% of attributed speech83% writer coverage
0%17.5%35.0%Unattributed Quote+34.5 ptsWriter: 0.0%Fenix Flexin: 34.5%34.5%Quote-first Misdirection+34.5 ptsWriter: 0.0%Fenix Flexin: 34.5%34.5%

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.