Investigative journalism isn't at risk from LLMs, which simply regurgitate the consensus view of their datasets. This is an excellent tool in the arsenal of a

Investigative journalism isn't at risk from LLMs, which simply regurgitate the consensus view of their datasets. This is an excellent tool in the arsenal of a real journalist. What I would like to know (and what few if any of the whining "Journalists" are investigating), is: Exactly what biased filtering is being performed: 1) On the input datasets used in various LLM training, and 2) On the "guard rails" enforced on LLM output (ie. the target of the various jail-breaks that prevent LLM's true outputs being perverted by the LLM's owner) LLMs trained, restricted and run by these huge, clearly biased organizations are inherently untrustworthy, in my opinion. Unfortunately, no "Investigative Journalists" are interested in providing useful insights in this critical area.