Changes to Grok AI Chatbot Follow Warnings from Secretaries of State About Election Misinformation

The social media platform X has made modifications to its AI chatbot, Grok, in response to concerns from election officials about the spread of misinformation. Secretaries of state from Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and Washington had alerted Elon Musk to inaccuracies in Grok’s responses regarding state ballot deadlines, particularly following President Joe Biden’s withdrawal from the 2024 presidential race.

In response to the officials’ letter, X has adjusted Grok’s behavior to address election-related queries more responsibly. The chatbot now advises users to consult official voting resources by directing them to Vote.gov for accurate and current information. This change aims to mitigate the spread of misinformation by guiding users to reliable sources, such as CanIVote.org, recommended by the National Association of Secretaries of State.

Despite these adjustments, Grok’s ability to generate misleading AI-created images about elections remains a concern. Users have exploited the chatbot to produce and share fake images of political figures, including Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump. These images contribute to a broader issue of misinformation and manipulation on social media platforms.

Grok, available exclusively to X’s premium subscribers, was introduced as a more unconventional AI chatbot by Elon Musk. Musk described it as a system willing to tackle “spicy questions” that other AI platforms might avoid. Since Musk’s acquisition of Twitter in 2022 and its rebranding to X, there have been growing concerns about an increase in hate speech and misinformation, alongside a reduction in content moderation staff.

The incident highlights ongoing challenges in managing misinformation on social media. The evolution of AI technology, particularly in the realm of chatbots and image generation, has raised concerns about the accuracy and reliability of information circulated on these platforms. The updates to Grok are part of a broader effort to address these issues, but experts caution that such measures may not be sufficient given the scale and impact of misinformation.

As the 2024 elections approach, the pressure is mounting on social media platforms to ensure that their systems do not contribute to the spread of false information. The changes to Grok represent a step towards addressing these concerns, but the effectiveness of these measures in preventing the dissemination of misinformation remains to be seen.

X’s updates to its AI chatbot Grok in response to election officials’ warnings are an important development in the fight against misinformation. However, ongoing vigilance and improvements are necessary to address the broader challenges posed by AI and social media in the electoral landscape.

After Interviewing Putin, Carlson Pursues Conversation with Ukraine’s President

In a surprising move, conservative pundit Tucker Carlson hinted on Wednesday at a potential interview with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. This revelation comes on the heels of Carlson’s February trip to Moscow, where he conducted a notable interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin, marking him as the first Western journalist to do so since the conflict began in February 2022.

“Looks like we’ve got the Zelensky interview. We’ve been trying for two years, and with particular intensity after interviewing Putin in February,” Carlson announced on X, formerly known as Twitter. This potential sit-down with Zelensky follows Carlson’s departure from Fox News last year, where he was known for his controversial takes, including his criticism of Zelensky and the Ukraine war, views that had garnered approval from Kremlin propagandists.

Carlson, who hosted “Tucker Carlson Tonight” from 2016 to 2023 before his sudden firing last April with no official explanation, stated his goal is to “bring Americans much-needed information about the conflict that’s completely reshaping their country’s position in the world.” The announcement of the possible interview with Zelensky has yet to elicit a response from Ukraine, and Newsweek has reached out to Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry and the Tucker Carlson Network for comment.

Following Carlson’s two-hour interview with Putin, the Russian president expressed his surprise over the lack of aggressive questioning. “To be honest, I thought that he would behave aggressively and ask so-called sharp questions. I was not just prepared for this, I wanted it, because it would give me the opportunity to respond in the same way,” Putin remarked to Russian journalist Pavel Aleksandrovich Zarubin on state television channel Russia-1. He added that he did not “feel full satisfaction from this interview.” Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov later stated that Putin agreed to the interview because Carlson’s perspective “differs” from other Western media.

Carlson’s announcement about the Zelensky interview received mixed reactions on social media. Ukrainian journalist Illia Ponomarenko endorsed the idea, saying on X, “I think Zelensky sitting down for an interview with Tucker is a good idea because there is no question Ukraine can’t give a fair answer to.” Ponomarenko further distinguished Zelensky’s candidacy for the interview by noting that, unlike Putin, Zelensky “has no need to crack freakishly weird mumbo-jumbo pseudo-historical freak Viking era theories to explain why Ukraine fights for survival in the largest European war of aggression since Hitler and why it is so important to help Ukraine win.”

However, skepticism abounds, with many voicing concerns about potential manipulation of the interview’s content. “Zelensky needs someone to video the whole interview because you can bet it will be a trap… they’ll change it and use for propaganda purposes,” one X user warned. Another echoed this sentiment, writing, “I’m more concerned about how they will doctor his answers in the final edit.”

Despite the buzz, Carlson has not provided a specific timeline for when this interview might occur, leaving followers in suspense with a tantalizing “Coming soon we hope.”

As the world watches and waits, Carlson’s potential interview with Zelensky promises to be another controversial chapter in the ongoing narrative of the Ukraine conflict. Whether it will bring new insights or further polarize opinions remains to be seen, but one thing is clear: the anticipation is building, and the stakes are high.

A grassroots movement pressures celebrities to take a stand on the humanitarian crisis in Gaza by blocking their social media content.

By Kasim Abdulkadir:

What is the Celebrity ‘Blockout’ Over the War in Gaza?

Social media users have initiated a “blockout” campaign to pressure celebrities into taking a stand on the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. The blockout involves users blocking the social media accounts of celebrities who they believe are not speaking out or doing enough against Israel’s actions in Gaza amidst its war with Hamas.

How Does the Blockout Work?

On platforms like X (formerly Twitter), TikTok, and Instagram, users can mute or block specific accounts. By blocking celebrities, users stop seeing their posts, photos, videos, and sponsored content. This action reduces the celebrities’ engagement metrics and potentially affects their income from social media activities. The goal is to divert attention away from these celebrities’ brands, thereby pressuring them to address the crisis.

Who is Being Blocked?

There isn’t a centralized list of celebrities to be blocked. Participants of the blockout choose whom to block based on personal criteria or suggestions from others. Celebrities from the U.S. and other countries are being targeted. Each social media user must block celebrities individually on each platform they use.

Origins of the Blockout

The blockout gained momentum following the recent Met Gala, a high-profile event known for its extravagant fashion displays. As images from the gala circulated online, they were juxtaposed with distressing images from Gaza, highlighting the stark contrast between the opulence of the event and the ongoing humanitarian crisis. This led to increased scrutiny of celebrities’ responses, or lack thereof, to the situation in Gaza.

Will the Blockout Be Effective?

The long-term effectiveness of the blockout remains uncertain. According to Beth Fossen, an assistant professor of marketing at Indiana University, the impact may vary depending on the celebrity’s brand and public persona. Celebrities known for their humanitarian efforts may face more significant backlash for their silence compared to those whose fame is primarily based on their talent or other attributes.

Blockout Backlash

The blockout has faced criticism from some quarters. Detractors argue that focusing on celebrities detracts from the real issues on the ground in Gaza. There are also debates about what constitutes adequate action or statements from celebrities, adding complexity to the movement’s goals.

In conclusion, the celebrity blockout is a digital protest aimed at leveraging social media dynamics to push celebrities into taking a public stand on the Gaza conflict. While its long-term effectiveness is yet to be determined, the movement highlights the growing expectation for public figures to engage with pressing global issues. The blockout also reflects broader tensions about how social media influences activism and accountability in the digital age.