Well, there are certainly no obvious conflicts of interest behind this quote.
/s
I'm sick of this FUD. SpaceX is, I believe, the largest operator of satellites by count, so it makes perfect sense that they would account for the lion's share of these "close encounters". None of these articles offer a meaningful quantification of risk, or much in the way of constructive discussion; instead they shotgun-blast vague soundbites from "experts" and wave around the Kessler Syndrome boogeyman with about as much technical precision as can be found in the related joke at the beginning of WALL-E.
In the context of Starlink, the "SpaceX Bad" narrative basically boils down to saying we should not develop space further because reasons, much in the same way single-family-home NIMBYs poison urban growth now that they've got theirs. There are obviously tough problems that will need to be solved, and I agree that some distributed "traffic control" system will ultimately be necessary, especially when we start filling up higher orbits where Kessler Syndrome is actually a serious concern. But it's disappointing to see the media engage in so much of what basically amounts to concern trolling, polarizing and poisoning the public discourse.