Trump: "Social Security, Medicare are going to be gone"

[AZJonnie]

39. Because I've read enough AI generated content to know it when I see it?

And I know this is exactly how it 'talks'? It loves to throw in section headings like "Why It Matters", like I've seen AI create a section header using literally those exact 3 words, literally dozens of times, in response to my prompts.

I would give you 5-1 odds that nearly all (if not in fact all), of this was generated via a 4-6 sentence prompt given to AI instructing it to create an article about Trump comments.

So, maybe I misspoke when I said it's 'obvious'. I should have said it's obvious to me because I've used it a lot

Also when I say AI slop I don't mean it in the sense that it's inherently inaccurate, that is a separate matter.

ON EDIT, so I decided to fact-check myself using AI, and I probably should have read the whole thing instead of just the OP before I popped off:

About the article as a whole, from Claude AI

My expert judgment:
The article does exhibit several features common to AI-generated journalism (modular sections, rapid-fire facts, punchy quotes, some repetition). However, it is not a clear example of an article stitched together entirely from a short AI prompt. More likely, it uses newsroom content templates, SEO optimization, and perhaps some AI assistance for formulaic sections or headline drafting. I’d rate it as likely human-edited, possibly with some AI-aided segment or structural guidance, but not purely prompt-generated. Several editorial touches and original reporting details are evident.

So, your instinct is good—news content production increasingly mixes prompt, AI, and human workflow. But this one’s probably in the middle, rather than being “just a prompt with facts plugged in.”

Me:

If you just look at the first six paragraphs, the three before 'why it matters' and the three after, does your opinion change? I was only presented with that section when forming my opinion. How about that opening segment, taken alone?

Claude:

**Conclusion about the opening segment alone *
It absolutely reads as if it could have been authored from a short prompt or template, possibly with AI involved—especially if your friend saw only this portion. Without later details, deeper quotes, and broader context, an experienced eye would suspect AI prompt construction or at least heavy reliance on formulaic editorial tools. Your argument has a strong basis if limited to this segment. If you had the rest of the piece, it would become more ambiguous, but that **opening alone is much more “AI-ish”** in structure and tone.