Latest
← Signal: Tech & AI

WIRED's Coverage of Theranos Fraud: How a Magazine Missed Red Flags

Confirmed1 source · Oct 19, 2026

WIRED editors published a flattering 2014 profile of Elizabeth Holmes and her blood-testing startup despite noting suspicious elements that later proved central to the fraud.

WIRED's Coverage of Theranos Fraud: How a Magazine Missed Red Flags
Image via Wired

What happened

WIRED published a Q&A profile of Elizabeth Holmes titled "One Drop, Infinite Data: How Elizabeth Holmes Built a Better Blood Test" in its March 2014 issue. The story was pitched by editor Caitlin Roper after internal discussion flagged oddities about the company, including its unusual board of military figures and government officials, lack of peer-reviewed data, and unconfirmed rumors of misconduct. During reporting, Roper observed Holmes wearing a black turtleneck and speaking in an artificially low voice in a manner that seemed performative. When Roper requested to follow her blood sample to Theranos's lab, company representatives refused, citing health-and-safety concerns. The Walgreens booth where Theranos had set up shop in Palo Alto was not in service when Roper visited it. Roper's blood results appeared to match a recent panel she had taken elsewhere, which seemed confirmatory at the time. The profile ran months before John Carreyrou's October 2015 Wall Street Journal article exposing Theranos as a fraud, after which Walgreens terminated its partnership.

Context

The 2014 publication reflected WIRED's editorial focus on innovation and disruption in emerging technology sectors, positioning Theranos as validation of applying Silicon Valley approaches to healthcare. Holmes made her national press debut in The Wall Street Journal in 2013 in an opinion piece titled "A Drop of Blood, an Instant Diagnosis." By 2014, Holmes was the youngest woman billionaire ever. Fortune later put Holmes on the cover, and The New Yorker did a profile. WIRED's credulous coverage of scientific claims in earlier years meant the magazine was navigating how to report on a company making extraordinary claims without peer-reviewed validation. The editors' eventual reflection on the publication raises questions about media gatekeeping in tech coverage and how outlets contribute to narratives that later prove fraudulent.