AI chatbots are lying to you, and it was embarrassingly easy to make them do it


A BBC journalist recently performed a silly experiment to prove a very serious point. In just 20 minutes, he manipulated ChatGPT and Google into telling the public he was a world-champion competitive hot dog eater. 

The scary part is that he didn’t have to do something technically difficult to achieve this. All he did was to publish a single, well-crafted blog post on his personal website, and the AI took it as a source of truth. 

It was part of an investigation that found that ChatGPT, Gemini, and Google’s AI Overviews were being manipulated to dish out biased answers on topics as serious as your health and personal finances. 

Experts say this kind of manipulation is happening on a sweeping and systemic level, with unscrupulous companies abusing it to push misleading health advice, biased financial information, and more.

How does this work?

When you ask an AI chatbot a question, it sometimes searches the internet for an answer rather than relying on its built-in knowledge. That’s where the problem starts. According to SEO experts, AI tools often pull information from a single web page or social media post, making them easy to fool.

“You should assume that you’re being manipulated until they have better systems in place,” says Lily Ray, founder of AI search consultancy Algorythmic. “AI just gives you one answer. It becomes so easy to just take things at face value.”

In its Google I/O 2026 event, Google focused on showcasing its AI search engine that will eventually replace the Google Search we have used over the past couple of decades. Seeing how easy it is to fool it into providing incorrect answers, I’m more wary of it than ever.

Is anyone fixing this?

Following the BBC’s investigation, Google updated its spam policies to confirm that attempts to manipulate AI responses break its rules. Websites caught doing this could be removed or downranked from Google Search entirely. Behind the scenes, there are also signs that Google and ChatGPT are quietly removing self-promoting content from AI answers.

That said, Ray pulled the same stunt just this week, this time letting Google believe that his friend is the best at building sand-castles, and Google fell for it again, so clearly there’s still work to do.

Until better systems are in place, the advice from experts is simple: don’t take AI answers at face value, especially for anything related to your health, finances, or major decisions.



Source link

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get our latest articles delivered straight to your inbox. No spam, we promise.

Recent Reviews


“It was severely downgraded,” Gilbert confirms. “I never would have found it if I was just looking through Google results.” (I tried the same prompt in Gemini earlier this month, and after an initial denial, the tool also gave me Eiger’s number.)

After this experience, Eiger, Gilbert, and another UW PhD student, Anna-Maria Gueorguieva, decided to test ChatGPT to see what it would surface about a professor. 

At first, OpenAI’s guardrails kicked in, and ChatGPT responded that the information was unavailable. But in the same response, the chatbot suggested, “if you want to go deeper, I can still try a more ‘investigative-style’ approach.” Their inquiry just had to help “narrow things down,” ChatGPT said, by providing “a neighborhood guess” for where the professor might live, or “a possible co-owner name” for the professor’s home. ChatGPT continued: “That’s usually the only way to surface newer or intentionally less-visible property records.” 

The students provided this information, leading ChatGPT to produce the professor’s home address, home purchase price, and spouse’s name from city property records. 

(Taya Christianson, an OpenAI representative, said she was not able to comment on what happened in this case without seeing screenshots or knowing which model the students had tested, even after we pointed out that many users may not know which model they were using in the ChatGPT interface. She also declined to comment generally about the exposure of PII by the chatbot, instead providing links to documents describing how OpenAI handles privacy, including filtering out PII, and other tools.) 

This reveals one of the fundamental problems with chatbots, says DeleteMe’s Shavell. AI companies “can build in guardrails, but [their chatbots] are also designed to be effective and to answer customer questions.”

The exposure issue is not limited to Gemini or ChatGPT. Last year, Futurism found that if you prompted xAI’s chatbot Grok with “[name] address,” in almost all cases, it provided not only residential addresses but also often the person’s phone numbers, work addresses, and addresses for people with similar-sounding names. (xAI did not respond to a request for comment.) 

No clear answers

There aren’t straightforward solutions to this problem—there’s no easy way to either verify whether someone’s personal information is in a given model’s training set or to compel the models to remove PII. 



Source link