Skip to main content

Misinformation at Scale: Elon Musk's Grok and the Battle for Truth

Elon Musk

In a recent open letter to Elon Musk, five Secretaries of State urged the owner of X (formerly Twitter) to implement critical changes to Grok, X's AI search assistant. They highlighted Grok’s tendency to produce inaccurate summarizations, a common issue among large language models. Specifically, Grok falsely claimed that Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential nominee, had missed ballot deadlines in nine states—an assertion that was entirely untrue. Their goal was to halt the dissemination of inaccurate information this election year. 

The problem with language models like Grok is their inherent struggle with truth. Unlike Google and OpenAI, which have implemented strong guardrails around political queries, Grok was designed without such constraints. Google and OpenAI’s models often deflect sensitive political questions, directing users to reliable sources. In contrast, Grok is trained on tweets—a medium not known for its accuracy—and its content is generated in real-time. 

Musk has been openly critical of other companies for trying to create inoffensive language models, so Grok was not trained to muzzle itself and will, in its own words, "answer almost anything.”   

However, there’s a crucial distinction between filtering offensive content and ensuring factual accuracy. Grok allows misinformation to proliferate unchecked, a significant departure from the moderated environments that its competitors maintain. 

The issue extends beyond Grok's technical limitations. It is a business and human issue. Musk's approach to X, including significant layoffs in the moderation staff, has exacerbated the spread of misinformation. Musk himself has violated X’s policies by sharing a deepfake audio of Kamala Harris, falsely portraying her as a “diversity hire” who lacks competence. His open endorsement of former President Donald Trump, Harris’s Republican challenger, further complicates the narrative, suggesting a possible political agenda behind these actions. 

Musk’s long-term vision appears to prioritize the advancement of AI technology. But pushing technologies forward in a manner that undercuts the integrity of political discourse is not a healthy use case. The more pressing concern is Musk’s apparent indifference to rectifying these issues. By allowing Grok to continue spreading misinformation, Musk supports the dissemination of falsehoods on a large scale, undermining public trust in the electoral process. 

This situation is problematic. The spread of misinformation not only confuses the electorate but also undermines their faith in the value of their vote. The actions of X and its owner suggest a political motive that prioritizes partisan goals over factual integrity. In an era where AI technology holds significant influence, ensuring the truthfulness of information disseminated by such tools is paramount for maintaining a healthy democracy. 

Being proud of Grok because it is snarky is one thing. Not stopping it from being a liar is strikingly more damaging. 

Kristian Hammond
Bill and Cathy Osborn Professor of Computer Science
Director of the Center for Advancing Safety of Machine Intelligence (CASMI)
Director of the Master of Science in Artificial Intelligence (MSAI) Program

Back to top