Subject: Re: Trumps Assassination Attempt Fictional
In keeping with my promise, this bit sure sounds like a leap from a specific problem to an overgeneralization.

Big Tech has been suppressing coverage of the assassination attempt against Donald Trump, The Post has found.

Then we get two examples, Meta AI and Google.

I tried to ask Meta AI the same question to see what result I got. I wanted to see for myself this response. Unfortunately, when I go to the Meta AI page, all I get is a blank page in Firefox. So I switched to Edge asked the question, and got this:

Former US President Donald Trump was shot during a campaign rally in Pennsylvania on July 13, 2024. Trump, who was shot in the ear, was immediately taken for treatment at a local hospital and released later that day in stable condition. One attendee was killed and two others were injured, but survived. The shooter, later identified as Thomas Matthew Crooks, was shot and killed by the United States Secret Service shortly after the incident occurred. Investigations remain ongoing.

Next I gave google a shot. I put "trump assassination" into google and got over 10 pages of responses. I glanced over the first two pages and all seemed to be on point.

So what's a guy to think? I tested the things that the NY Post said they did and I got very different results. I'm not going to argue that the Post didn't get those results on a single search or query. But to make a claim of suppressing coverage, you need to get the results the Post said they did on multiple occasions. AI is well known to generate odd results from time to time. I could see the answer that they reported being one of those odd results. And searches occasionally fail. That happens.

But to make accusations such as the ones the Post is making, you need the results to be at least repeatable. And I wasn't able to repeat them.

It sure seems to me that if these results are true (something I'm not willing to stipulate to, given the NY Post's record of telling lies), the most likely explanation is a one-off error or brief outage. These companies are in business to make money. They have no real incentive to spin things one way or the other, especially if a significant bias in either direction could affect their profits.

On the other hand, the NY Post has staked out a position of catering to the right wing side of American politics. They have a significant incentive to spin things in a way to favor the right wing. Telling a conspiracy theory about how Trump is being victimized will certainly add to their page views and readership. That directly affects their bottom line.

Given the inability to duplicate the Post's results and their incentive to spin stories in one direction, this sure smells like the Post is lying to you. That you would repeat it without giving it some thought makes you complicit in spreading lies. So I'm calling you out on that as I said I would.

--Peter