YouTube star Hank Green says he's relied 'too heavily' on AI in an apology to fans 17%

By Lauren Edmonds24%

8/1/2026, 12:55:38 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 19 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Post Hoc (False Cause), and Self-Serving Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 17.7% saturation with 137 hits. Analysis detected 851 faulty-reasoning hits from 772 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 27.6% and a BS Rank of 17% (21,818 of 26,281 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 83.00% of the article peer group.

Hank Green said he uses AI as a research aid while creating his content. 
Monica Schipper/Getty Images 
YouTuber Hank Green apologized to fans for using AI as a research aid for his content. 
Green runs popular YouTube channels that host accessible explainers on science and other subjects. 
Green said he will slow down or pause making content for his YouTube channels and web games. 
Hank Green , one of the internet's most steadfast and reliable content creators, said he's slowing down production after fans criticized him for using AI. 
In addition to his personal account, Green hosts the educational YouTube channels SciShow and Crash Course . 
SciShow is a collection of YouTube channels focused on different scientific disciplines, while Crash Course offers videos that break down topics like Latin American literature and reading statistics. 
He also created the Vlogbrothers YouTube channel with his brother, John Green . 
Green said in a lengthy Reddit comment on Friday that fans can expect fewer YouTube videos for the foreseeable future. 
"Expect less hankschannel. 
It may need to pause for a while," Green wrote. 
"It may be that Hankschannel comes back with writing and research support. 
It may be that it comes back with just way fewer videos." 
Green said SMUSH and 4x3, two online daily word games he produces, will be paused. 
The fresh discourse surrounding Green's use of AI was sparked earlier that day on X, where he told users he had used OpenAI's ChatGPT to research a script. 
The revelation shocked some X users, who suggested that Green undermined his credibility by using AI without disclosing it to viewers. 
As tensions grew on X, Green deleted that post and pivoted to Reddit to address the situation. 
He told Redditors he's "mortified" that he's "let so many people down." 
"I have been relying too heavily on AI as a research aid. 
It can be very useful for this task, giving me access to a lot of papers I didn't know existed really fast, but I think that has been to the detriment of my work because it has not given me the freedom to find all of my own ways into and around a topic," Green said. 
As tech companies push AI to become a ubiquitous part of daily life, critics have voiced concern that it could impact critical thinking skills. 
In 2025, a survey published by Workday found that nearly half of respondents worried the tech would cause a decline in critical thinking. 
There are also concerns around mental health. 
OpenAI is facing several lawsuits related to users' mental health, including those that say the chatbot encouraged suicide. 
In June, a coalition of states launched an investigation into ChatGPT's impact on young users. 
AI hallucinations, or when LLMs generate inaccurate outputs, are another problem. 
They've begun popping up in court documents, forcing lawyers and law firms to apologize for including false or misleading information. 
They've also shown up in reports from some of the world's largest consulting firms. 
Green said he uses AI to find resources to research different topics. 
He said, however, that fans deserve to know when his words are his own or a chatbot's. 
"I've been moving so fast that my own process isn't actually clear to me and I want to have it be a guarantee moving forward," Green said. 
Green told fans that he's not anti-AI but understands some of their concerns, such as how the tech is trained, its environmental implications, and the consolidation of economic power by tech companies. 
He ultimately apologized. 
"It is very likely that you (the reader) and I disagree on how or even whether AI should be used," Green said. 
"I think it makes sense for that disagreement to exist. 
But I have also always believed that my audience is more likely to be right than I am. 
You know what this feels like in a way I can't. 
And I am so sorry for diluting myself in this way and harming the thing that we have all built together." 
In the post, Green said he feels pressure when creating content and will strive to manage himself more effectively. 
He'll also address his interactions with AI, which he described as unhealthy. 
"But mostly I need to come to terms with the fact that the level of dopamine I've been getting from interacting with LLMs...with doing more and more and more and more...is not healthy for me or good for the world," Green said. 
"It is careless, and has disconnected me from where people are on this." 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.7%Business Insider: 2.2%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.2%Business Insider: 0.6%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 7.5%Lauren Edmonds: 2.8%Business Insider: 2.8%Availability Heuristic7.5%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.2%Business Insider: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.3%Business Insider: 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 1.2%Business Insider: 1.6%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 6.2%Lauren Edmonds: 3.7%Business Insider: 3.8%Framing Effect6.2%This article: 4.9%Lauren Edmonds: 0.7%Business Insider: 0.7%Loss Aversion4.9%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.2%Business Insider: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.3%Business Insider: 2.8%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 5.4%Lauren Edmonds: 1.0%Business Insider: 1.4%Pessimism Bias5.4%This article: 17.7%Lauren Edmonds: 4.5%Business Insider: 4.1%Negativity Bias17.7%This article: 8.8%Lauren Edmonds: 1.9%Business Insider: 2.0%Self-Serving Bias8.8%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.6%Business Insider: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.3%Business Insider: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 2.3%Lauren Edmonds: 1.1%Business Insider: 0.6%In-Group Bias2.3%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.4%Business Insider: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 3.2%Lauren Edmonds: 2.4%Business Insider: 2.5%Halo Effect3.2%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.3%Business Insider: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.4%Business Insider: 1.1%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 2.6%Lauren Edmonds: 0.2%Business Insider: 0.3%Primacy Effect2.6%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 1.0%Business Insider: 0.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 4.4%Lauren Edmonds: 0.7%Business Insider: 2.6%Appeal to Authority4.4%This article: 2.8%Lauren Edmonds: 0.6%Business Insider: 1.1%False Dilemma2.8%This article: 3.1%Lauren Edmonds: 0.7%Business Insider: 0.5%Slippery Slope3.1%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 5.7%Lauren Edmonds: 3.7%Business Insider: 3.4%Hasty Generalization5.7%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.5%Business Insider: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 12.8%Lauren Edmonds: 4.4%Business Insider: 2.6%Appeal to Emotion12.8%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.5%Business Insider: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 12.7%Lauren Edmonds: 1.8%Business Insider: 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)12.7%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.2%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.1%Business Insider: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 2.3%Lauren Edmonds: 0.7%Business Insider: 3.1%Anecdotal2.3%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 1.7%Lauren Edmonds: 0.1%Business Insider: 1.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)1.7%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.1%Business Insider: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.5%Business Insider: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.3%Business Insider: 1.0%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.4%Lauren Edmonds: 0.4%Business Insider: 0.6%Quote-first Misdirection0.4%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 1.5%Business Insider: 2.5%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 5.4%Lauren Edmonds: 0.4%Business Insider: 1.0%Indoctrination5.4%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.6%Business Insider: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Edmonds: 0.1%Business Insider: 1.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

772 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker53%attributed speech364writer words
Selected voice

Hank Green

65%flagged-word coverage
408 attributed words100% of attributed speech46% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Indoctrination+10.3 ptsWriter: 0.0%Hank Green: 10.3%10.3%Quote-first Misdirection+0.7 ptsWriter: 0.0%Hank Green: 0.7%0.7%

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.