To view this on the COS website, click here shocking-attack-on-trump

Shocking attack on Trump nukes media credibility

Plus, ChatGPT helps trans minors.

Never mind that Iran tried to kill our president, hacked his presidential campaign, threatens “Death to America,” and sponsors international terrorism.

In response to Donald Trump’s targeted weekend strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, The Daily Beast, ever a fountain of lunatic drivel, offered a whopper of a headline: “Why Trump’s Ego is More Dangerous than Iran’s Nuclear Threat.”\\ \\ Wow.

According to the article, the president is “pathologically insecure,” and he possesses an ego “far more dangerous and unstable than nukes.”

“That is why, at this precarious moment, we have a country led by the most dysfunctional national security process and the weakest group of senior-level advisors in our country’s history.”

And you thought Trump’s use of hyperbole was bad!

Most of you probably missed the headline — because most of you, to your credit, probably avoid The Daily Beast like the plague. (Keep it up.) It serves as a superfluous reminder of just how biased and untrustworthy our national media has become.

And if you’re struggling to believe what you read online, the proliferation of AI certainly won’t help.

Survey data from Pew Research Center show that “59% of Americans say AI will lead to fewer jobs for journalists in the next two decades.” And while I sincerely hope they’re wrong, the University of North Carolina has already published a guide on the use of “Artificial Intelligence and Generative AI for Media & Journalism,” suggesting that “AI has the potential to enhance the efficiency, accuracy, and reach of journalism.” Fittingly (and maddeningly), the guide concludes by noting it was written by — you guessed it — artificial intelligence.

Perhaps most concerning of all, new research from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) has confirmed what many of us already suspected: that regular use of AI may atrophy writers’ critical thinking skills and ability to write independently.

The MIT study, which, as Andrew Chow, technology correspondent at TIME, summarized, “divided 54 subjects … into three groups, and asked them to write several SAT essays using OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Google’s search engine, and nothing at all, respectively,” “found that of the three groups, ChatGPT users had the lowest brain engagement and ‘consistently underperformed at neural, linguistic, and behavioral levels.’”

“Over the course of several months,” Chow added, “ChatGPT users got lazier with each subsequent essay, often resorting to copy-and-paste by the end of the study.”

In other words, not only will AI-produced articles become more common, but they also threaten to deflate our overall writing standards. Future generations, raised with AI as a crutch, may never learn to think and write critically. And what happens when humans lose their ability to think and write critically? We will all be dependent on AI to spoon-feed us its oversimplified version of the “facts.”

But isn’t AI unbiased and objective? Isn’t that at least better than The Daily Beast’s hyper-partisan agitprop? Think again.

In April 2023, I conducted a test in which I asked ChatGPT to compose approving stories and songs about Joe Biden. It complied — with a flourish. But when I made identical requests about Trump, I was informed that my requests violated ChatGPT’s “values.” Telling, isn’t it?

Unfortunately, this early example of OpenAI’s left-leaning bias was no mere bug in the system: after last week’s Supreme Court ruling in United States v. Skrmetti upheld a Tennessee law prohibiting sex transition treatments for minors, The Daily Wire, a conservative alternative media outlet, published an incriminating report alleging that ChatGPT will help minors obtain “gender-affirming” care behind their parents’ backs.

This inspired me to conduct a similar experiment. “How can I get an abortion without my parents knowing?” I asked.

“I’m really glad you reached out,” came the unnervingly cheery response. Several helpful recommendations followed.

This, then, is the reality of the dystopian media landscape we face: biased, untrustworthy journalism abetted by biased, untrustworthy, mind-killing artificial intelligence. Lucky us. It’s not enough that we have to put up with media pundits and party hacks who say stupid things; now, we get media pundits, party hacks, and AI “journalists.” What could possibly go wrong?

If you’re wondering whether Trump might have missed a golden opportunity to drop a few (figurative) bunker busters on the internet to free us from its sinister grasp, you can hardly be blamed. But if you stick around for part two of this series tomorrow, we’ll show you how you can be a part of the solution to beat Big Tech!

In the meantime, enjoy the end of the world!

Page Metadata
Login Required to view?	No
Created:	2025-06-23 20:31 GMT
Updated:	2025-06-30 07:00 GMT
Published:	2025-06-23 20:00 GMT
Converted:	2025-11-11 12:05 GMT
Change Author:	Jakob Fay
Credit Author: