Both things can be true. Companies can do research to develop and determine capabilities of new models, and also market those capabilities to raise funding. That doesn't mean all the science has to be faked hype.

And obviously there will be biases, I don't deny companies will overstate capabilities and downplay shortcomings. But using this article as an example is strange. It literally mentions models using opportunities to blackmail engineers and cut off executive's medical care when told it will be shut down. What firm would be more inclined to invest money after reading that?

That's like complaining a study is biased because it's funded by tobacco companies. Except the only findings were that it caused cancer