If there were an extremely large number of AI's making all those predictions publicly in advance, so many that one might randomly do that well, then the comment would be accurate. But that does not appear to be the case.
There was absolutely SOME luck involved, however, because I don't believe that, for instance, there is zero randomness in the World Series, which would have to be the case if one could absolutely predict it accurately.
[UPDATE: to be clear, I'm assuming that Unanimous didn't make thousands of similarly high-level predictions, and then only report the ones that did well. I think that's a reasonable assumption, because there aren't thousands of high-level predictions on the level of the Oscars and World Series.]
[UPDATE 2: I just registered at the site. It appears that many people can ask the same question, many times. The same question looks like it can be asked, in fact, many thousands of times. If they were simply cherry-picking the one answer out of thousands that was correct, then this is p-hacking. However, the press release is listing questions asked by prominent entities such as Newsweek and TechRepublic. There aren't all that many of such entities asking such questions of UNU. So the water is a little murky, but it still looks like UNU is doing something impressive.]