MMNTM logo
Return to Index
Research

The Narrative War: How Anthropic and OpenAI Are Covered Differently

OpenAI dominates volume. Anthropic dominates sentiment. Analysis of 90,000 articles reveals two companies executing fundamentally different media strategies—and both are winning.

MMNTM Research
14 min read
#Research#Anthropic#OpenAI#AI Trends#Media Analysis

Two Strategies, Both Working

OpenAI is everywhere. Anthropic is quieter. Conventional wisdom says OpenAI is winning.

The data tells a more interesting story.

FeatureMetricOpenAIAnthropicWho Wins
volumeTotal coverage1,608 articles347 articlesOpenAI (4.6x)
sentimentNet sentiment+4.8%+9.7%Anthropic (2x)
safetySafety framing %4.7%9.2%Anthropic (2x)
controversyMajor controversies71Anthropic
momentumCoverage ratio trend19x → 3.4xGainingAnthropic

OpenAI won the volume game. Anthropic is winning the quality game. Both strategies are coherent.


The Volume Gap (And Why It's Narrowing)

The Raw Numbers

FeatureQuarterOpenAIAnthropicRatio
2023q12023Q196519.2x
2023q42023Q41351211.2x
2024q42024Q4136373.7x
2025q42025Q4216643.4x

The ratio dropped from 19x to 3.4x in two years. Anthropic didn't just grow—it grew faster than OpenAI.

Coverage Ratio

19x → 3.4x

OpenAI lead narrowed 82% since 2023Q1

Why OpenAI Dominates Volume

ChatGPT created a category. The November 2022 launch wasn't just a product—it was the moment AI entered mainstream consciousness. ChatGPT became the generic term for AI assistants, the way "Google" became the verb for search.

Sam Altman is a celebrity CEO. Altman receives 8x more coverage than Dario Amodei. The firing saga alone (November 2023) generated 76 related articles—more than Anthropic's entire quarterly coverage.

Microsoft's partnership is a media magnet. Microsoft's $1B investment in 2019 established the template. Microsoft + OpenAI coverage: 248 articles. Google + Amazon + Anthropic combined: 94 articles. Microsoft's aggressive integration narrative feeds constant coverage.

Why Anthropic Is Catching Up

Claude found its niche. Claude coverage grew from 1 article (2023Q1) to 38 (2025Q4)—a 38x increase. ChatGPT grew 85 → 81 in the same period. Claude is growing; ChatGPT is plateauing.

Enterprise deals generate steady coverage. Amazon's $4B investment, the AWS Bedrock integration, Azure capacity commitment—enterprise deals create durable coverage without controversy.

Safety positioning differentiates. In a field racing toward capability, Anthropic's safety-first messaging stands out. It's a positioning that enterprises trust.


The Sentiment Asymmetry

Here's where the narrative diverges sharply.

FeatureMetricOpenAIAnthropic
positivePositive coverage11.0%13.1%
negativeNegative coverage6.2%3.4%
netNet sentiment+4.8%+9.7%

Anthropic's net sentiment is 2x better than OpenAI's. Higher positive rate, lower negative rate.

OpenAI's Controversy Burden

OpenAI has had 7 major controversies (35+ related articles each):

  1. Altman Firing (Nov 2023) — 76 related articles
  2. Staff Letter Threatening Resignation — 52 related
  3. Board Negotiations — 49 related
  4. Musk Lawsuit — 42 related
  5. NYT Copyright Lawsuit — 40 related
  6. Larry Summers Resignation (2025) — 35 related
  7. Musk Bid Rejection (2025) — 35 related

The November 2023 Effect: The Altman firing saga generated more coverage than Anthropic's entire year. High volume, but much of it negative or chaotic.

Anthropic's Controversy Avoidance

Anthropic has had 1 major controversy:

  1. $1.5B Copyright Settlement (Sep 2025) — 52 related articles

That's it. Three years of coverage, one significant negative story.

This isn't luck. It's strategy. Lower profile, less drama, more positive per article.


The Safety Framing Paradox

Anthropic positions itself as the "safety company." Does coverage reflect this?

In absolute terms: OpenAI has MORE safety-framed coverage (76 articles vs 32).

As a percentage: Anthropic's coverage is 2x more safety-concentrated.

CompanySafety ArticlesTotal ArticlesSafety %
OpenAI761,6084.7%
Anthropic323479.2%

The Safety Narrative Trade-off: OpenAI gets more safety coverage because it gets more of everything. But Anthropic's brand is more tightly associated with safety—nearly 1 in 10 articles mention it.

The Safety Team Exodus

OpenAI's safety narrative took a hit in 2024:

DateEventCoverage
May 2024Sutskever leaves OpenAI30 related
May 2024Jan Leike resigns, criticizes OpenAI publicly22 related
May 2024Superalignment team disbanded3 related
May 2024Anthropic hires Jan Leike13 related

Anthropic directly capitalized on OpenAI's safety credibility problem by hiring their most prominent safety critic.


The Leadership Asymmetry

Altman vs Amodei

8x

Sam Altman receives 8x more coverage than Dario Amodei

The Celebrity CEO Trade-off

Altman (2025): 108 mentions Amodei (2025): 14 mentions

Altman is AI's public face. He testifies before Congress. He tweets. He gets fired and rehired in the same week.

Amodei is deliberately invisible. He publishes safety research. He avoids controversy. He lets the product speak.

The trade-off is real:

  • Altman's celebrity drives coverage → more volume
  • Altman's celebrity attracts controversy → worse sentiment
  • Amodei's low profile reduces coverage → less volume
  • Amodei's low profile avoids controversy → better sentiment

Both are coherent strategies. Altman chose the consumer path. Amodei chose the enterprise path.


Escaping the "Ex-OpenAI" Narrative

Anthropic was founded by former OpenAI employees. Early coverage framed them as a spinoff—"the safety-focused OpenAI alternative."

When did they escape this framing?

YearStandalone Coverage %
202250%
202355%
202482%
202581%

By 2024, Anthropic was its own story. 82% of coverage made no mention of OpenAI. The "ex-OpenAI" framing faded as Claude established independent credibility.

Only 7 articles in the entire dataset explicitly frame Anthropic as "ex-OpenAI" or "former OpenAI." The spinoff narrative is dead.


The Cloud Partnership Gap

Microsoft's early, exclusive partnership with OpenAI dominates cloud AI coverage:

PartnershipArticle Count
Microsoft + OpenAI248
Google + Anthropic56
Amazon + Anthropic38
Combined Anthropic94

Microsoft + OpenAI gets 2.6x the coverage of all Anthropic cloud partnerships combined.

Why it matters: Cloud partnerships signal enterprise credibility. Microsoft's aggressive "Copilot everywhere" strategy generates constant integration coverage. Anthropic's multi-cloud strategy (AWS + Google + now Azure) is more fragmented in coverage, even if strategically sound.


The Developer Narrative

Claude Code's Emergence

Claude Code created a distinct developer storyline in 2025:

"Claude Code emerged as the first convincing example of an LLM agent" — Karpathy, December 2025

"Data from 300K+ pull requests shows OpenAI is catching up to Anthropic" — The Information, October 2025

"60%+ of Anthropic's business customers use more than one Claude product" — Forbes, December 2025

The Developer Flip: By late 2025, coverage frames OpenAI as "catching up" to Anthropic in coding—a complete reversal of the 2023 narrative where Claude was the challenger.

This matters for enterprise adoption. Developers choose tools; enterprises follow developers. See Cursor Deep Dive for how developer preference drives enterprise adoption.


What the Data Reveals

Two Coherent Strategies

OpenAI's Strategy: Maximum Surface Area

  • Celebrity CEO as media magnet
  • Consumer product (ChatGPT) as category definer
  • Aggressive partnership announcements
  • High volume, accepts controversy as cost

Anthropic's Strategy: Minimum Attack Surface

  • Low-profile leadership
  • Enterprise focus over consumer
  • Safety positioning as differentiator
  • Lower volume, optimizes for sentiment

Both are working. OpenAI dominates mindshare. Anthropic dominates trust metrics.

The Enterprise Implication

For enterprise buyers evaluating AI vendors:

  • OpenAI: More features, faster shipping, more controversy risk
  • Anthropic: Fewer headlines, better sentiment, lower drama

The Anthropic Enterprise thesis is validated by the data: safety positioning translates to enterprise trust, even if consumer volume lags.

The Trajectory Question

The coverage ratio stabilized at 3-4x in 2025 after dropping from 19x. Two interpretations:

  1. Anthropic hit its ceiling — The enterprise market is smaller than consumer, so coverage naturally plateaus
  2. Anthropic is consolidating — The ratio will continue narrowing as Claude gains developer adoption

The Claude Code emergence suggests the latter. Developer tools create enterprise pull.


Methodology

Dataset: 90,000+ Techmeme articles (2016-2025) Company Detection: Headline keyword matching for company names, products, executives Sentiment: Keyword heuristic (positive: launches, raises, partners; negative: lawsuit, fined, struggles) Framing Analysis: Co-occurrence with category keywords (enterprise, safety, developer)

For full methodology, see The AI Infiltration Effect.


The Verdict

"Anthropic is winning the enterprise/safety narrative while OpenAI dominates consumer mindshare."

The data confirms this—with nuance:

  • OpenAI has more safety coverage in absolute terms (volume wins)
  • Anthropic has 2x higher safety concentration (positioning wins)
  • OpenAI has 7x the controversies (celebrity cost)
  • Anthropic has 2x better sentiment (quality wins)

They're not competing for the same thing. OpenAI wants to be the consumer AI platform. Anthropic wants to be the enterprise AI infrastructure. Both are succeeding at their actual goals.

The real question: as AI becomes infrastructure, which strategy ages better?


See also: Anthropic: How Safety Became the Ultimate Enterprise Feature for the strategic analysis, and The AI Infiltration Effect for the broader coverage methodology.

The Narrative War: Anthropic vs OpenAI Coverage Analysis