If you've worked at a large organization, you'll know the news can paint a cartoonishly distorted picture largely informed by the perspective of the anonymous sources, journalist and news organization.
The WSJ article expressly considers that factor and goes into detail on what's under the surface.
> The end of the long-running negotiations, which hasn’t previously been reported, is the latest example of how Google and other tech giants are trying to strengthen their control over the study and advancement of artificial intelligence.
Fighting between Deepmind and Google leadership over autonomy doesn't really directly support that Google Brain employees and Deepmind had infighting. They seem to me to be quite different things.
It seems like a big leap to take these articles as support the statement:
> Demis now has a load of people reporting to him who previously were rooting for his failure
It certainly might be true, but I'm missing the connection between these articles and the statement.
How are "Google Brain employees" distinct from "Google leadership with Google Brain personnel in their respective reporting line?" What is the criteria for that distinction?