Alright, imagine you have a big secret to tell, but you're not supposed to. So, you find a smart friend who works with the bosses (like a whistleblower) and tell them everything. This friend then writes it all down in a special letter called a "complaint."

Now, this complaint has some important information about Facebook, the company that owns things like Instagram and WhatsApp. The complaint says that Facebook didn't protect our private messages and pictures very well, and they broke some rules.

This is serious because we want to keep our secrets safe on the internet, right? So, the government bosses are looking at this complaint to check if Facebook did something wrong. They might give Facebook a time-out or make them promise not to do it again. Read from source...

Based on the provided text, here are some possible inconsistencies, biases, and irrational arguments, along with instances of emotional behavior:

1. **Inconsistencies:**
- *Claiming to be non-partisan:* The article starts by stating that it simplifies the market for smarter investing without bias, but later touches on topics like whistleblower complaints against Meta (Facebook), which has its own set of controversies and political implications.
- *Reporting method:* While the text presents a news story, some parts read more like an opinion piece or analysis, lacking clear separations between factual reporting and interpretation.

2. **Bias:**
- *Word choices:* Certain word choices, such as "unleashed" when referring to the whistleblower complaint, may imply a certain tone or bias.
- *Coverage of certain topics:* The focus on Meta's controversies might suggest an anti-corporate bias, while the lack of focus on other tech companies' issues could indicate some level of favoritism.

3. **Rational arguments vs. emotional bias:**
- *Appeal to emotion:* Phrases like "systemically unethical," "crazy ideas," and "extreme" are emotionally charged and might distract from a more reasoned analysis.
- *Personal attacks:* Calling someone's actions "crazy" is an ad hominem attack that undermines the argument's credibility.

4. **Emotional behavior:**
- *Use of hyperbole:* Phrases like "whistleblower complaints are flooding in" and "Meta's house of cards" employ exaggeration, which can appeal to emotions rather than presenting a balanced view.
- *Dramatic language:* The use of phrases like "stunning allegations," "frightening revelations," and "shocking new claims" attempts to evoke strong emotional responses in the reader.

This article carries a somewhat bearish sentiment due to the following reasons:

1. **Whistleblower Complaint**: The article starts with a whistleblower complaint against Meta Platforms (Facebook), which suggests potential wrongdoings by the company.

2. **Data Sharing Concerns**: The complaint alleges that Facebook shared data with Chinese companies, raising concerns about data security and privacy.

3. **Potential Regulatory Scrutiny**: Such allegations could lead to increased regulatory scrutiny for the company.

4. **Impact on Stock Price**: The article mentions that Meta's stock price fell as a result of these revelations, indicating negative market sentiment towards this news.

While there isn't any explicit 'bullish' or 'positive' sentiment expressed in the article, the absence of concrete evidence and Facebook's denial of wrongdoing could potentially mitigate some of these concerns. However, until more information is available, the overall sentiment appears bearish due to the nature of the allegations.