Once again, shame on the editor for distorting what the author wrote, using a clickbait headline when the article can stand on its own. No, there is no "inconvenient truth" in the article, but rather a sober discussion of the fluid colloquial definitions of "moped" and "scooter", as a result of technological change being much faster than the written language can adapt, all while legal language remains as tight (and impenetrable) as it's ever been.
On that latter point, I will rehash what I wrote earlier:
In California, the largest motorcycle market in the USA, this would be regulated as a moped (CVC Section 406), since it is electric, has a motor less than 3 kW (4 HP in old money), and a top speed of less than 30 MPH (48 kph).
Riders wouldn't need an M1 motorcycle license, but instead an M2 moped license would suffice. An M1 license allows riding anything that needs an M2 license, such as this moped. The process for an M2 is classroom instruction, and then a brief practical exam. There is no annual registration for mopeds, but there is a one-time plate fee, to obtain a plate from the DMV. There is no insurance requirement for mopeds.
A moped can be ridden in either traffic lanes and bike lanes (but not shoulders, which only bicycles are permitted to use). Whereas bicycles are obligated to use a bike lane when present (with a few obvious exceptions), a moped is not forced to use a bike lane. When riding in a traffic lane, a moped must keep to the right-most lane if slower than all other traffic.
This is all to say, California explicitly allows certain non-pedal, electric two-wheelers to be mopeds. But also the original, pedal, combustion two-wheelers are also mopeds. Rather than quibbling on definitions, this state would rather people go out riding.