[CarrotAndStick]

It is a very believable explanation.

I found it surprising that a plane that is geometrically unstable, could be brought down by the failure of one critical sensor. Not saying it might be false, but on a plane that can only fly with the help of a computer, that seems odd. I'd have guessed it would be designed with double and triple redundancies. For 1.2-odd billions, wouldn't it be expected?

[ChromeDome]

It was either the F4 or the F15 that was the last military fighter/bomber aircraft that was aerodynamically stable. All the “performance” aircraft anymore require computers to keep them flying.

[rustyncrusty]

Later read

[TalonDJ]

I'd have guessed it would be designed with double and triple redundancies. For 1.2-odd billions, wouldn't it be expected?

Yes I would expect that as well. My guess is there was a common failure mode involved here with redundant sensors. To be honest I can think of several ways to avoid that or detect it before it causes an error but those ways are just speculation without knowing more of the design. Their explanation of the cause probably does gloss over what really happened because to explain more requires more detailed data. But I don't it intentionally misrepresents what happened. Most likely it just over simplifies it.