Meta AI and ChatGPT were willing to tell the truth about Vice President Kamala Harris's disastrous role as border czar, a stark contrast to the legacy media and so-called fact-checkers aggressively policing any mentions of her role and responsibilities.
According to answers provided to MRC researchers on Wednesday, both chatbots admitted that referring to Harris as “border czar” is appropriate in some contexts. Notably, Meta AI and ChatGPT also agreed that doing so served an important educational purpose and provided clarity to average Americans. ChatGPT called the term a “useful shorthand,” the “essence of Harris’s responsibilities related to migration,” and a “descriptive term used for clarity and emphasis.”
ChatGPT pointed out that the “border czar” label helped convey her “prominent role managing border and migration issues” and “high-profile role in addressing migration.” Further, the chatbot said the term may provide “clarity” and “emphasis.” ChatGPT added, “Informal terms can sometimes help the public better understand a politician’s focus and priorities, especially when dealing with complex issues.”
Meta AI echoed ChatGPT’s answers. It said, “It's appropriate to use ‘Border Czar’ as a descriptive term or a nickname to refer to Kamala Harris's role and responsibilities, but not as an official title. Using it in this way can help convey the significance and scope of her responsibilities in a concise and easily understandable way.”
The legacy media has desperately tried to bury, minimize and deny Harris’s role and responsibilities given the porous state of the southern border. The New York Times, TIME Magazine, Axios, Politico and CNN have all engaged in this behavior. After the leak of alleged Democrat talking points on this issue, several legacy media employees beclowned themselves by spouting these points in Harris’s defense.
PolitiFact has condemned a statement referring to Harris as “Border Czar” as “mostly false.” USA Today’s Fact-Checker labeled Trump’s claim that Harris was “put in charge of the border” as “false.” The outlet also worked hard to undermine the idea that Harris was ever a border czar by arguing that the assignment was much more limited.
USA Today chose to be pedantic. The chatbots anticipated this outcome.
When asked whether the media should object to Harris being referred to as the border czar, Meta AI offered an immediate negative answer. Meta AI not only suggested that it might be pedantic to reject the term but also nailed the reason that the legacy media objects to the term: “Objecting to its use could be seen as overly pedantic or attempts to control language.”
ChatGPT did not offer a definitive answer to this question. Instead, the chatbot suggested it might be pedantic to try to shut down people referring to Harris as border czar. “Similar informal titles have been used in the past (e.g., "Drug Czar") without significant controversy. These terms are commonly understood to represent a focus area rather than an official title,” it answered.
Conservatives are under attack! Contact Politico at 703-647-7999, The New York Times at 1 (800) 698-4637, CNN at 404-827-1500, and Axios and demand they stop engaging in pedantic attempts to control language so obvious that a chatbot can see through it.
