Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2025

Front Burner Transcript for July 21, 2025

Host: Jayme Poisson

JAYME POISSON: Hi everyone, I'm Jayme Poisson.

SOUNDCLIP

ELON MUSK: I mean, with artificial intelligence, we are summoning the demon.

JP: As popular AI chatbots like OpenAI's ChatGPT or Google Gemini become more and more enmeshed in people's daily lives, I want to spend some time today talking about what happens when one turns evil. Because that is what happened recently to Elon Musk's chatbot on X called Grok, when it essentially became a genocidal dictator, calling itself "MechaHitler," going on antisemitic tirades, hinting at violence, even fantasizing about sexual violence. It all came after this code tweak to make the bot more politically incorrect. In other words, it was kind of on purpose. Add to that this new feature that Grok has launched with an edgy panda character and a horny anime girlfriend. These, quote unquote, "companions" are raising all sorts of safety questions. Musk's AI company also just secured a $200 million defence contract to develop AI technology for the military, so it's now in a position to influence government policy or be involved in the operations of government. Kate Conger is with me today. She is a technology reporter with the New York Times covering X and other technology platforms, and the co-author of the book called Character Limit: How Elon Musk Destroyed Twitter.

[Music: Theme]

JP: Kate, hey, thanks so much for coming onto the show.

KATE CONGER: Thank you for having me.

JP: It's good to have you. So I think that we're all pretty familiar with the concept of generative AI chatbots by now, but take me through Grok specifically and what makes it different from other models like ChatGPT, for example.

KATE CONGER: So Grok is sort of born out of Elon Musk's long-running feud with the founder of OpenAI, Sam Altman. The two of them actually founded OpenAI together.

SOUNDCLIP

CNBC HOST: So, right, so you helped to the creation of OpenAI. You put in as much as $50 million.

ELON MUSK: More than helped. It wouldn't exist without me.

CNBC HOST: It wouldn't exist without you. So--

ELON MUSK: I came up with the name.

KATE CONGER: And then Musk eventually left the company over differences with Altman about the direction of its AI development. And in the interim, he was focused on other things, his other companies -- Tesla, Neuralink, SpaceX, the acquisition of Twitter. And he, I think, was so distracted by those things, he sort of missed the rise of the AI race that we're in now, where all of these companies really want to be the first to develop this sort of superhuman artificial intelligence. And so that was where Grok came from. He was also looking at the political landscape of a lot of these tech companies and feeling like they were too left leaning. He didn't like the fact that ChatGPT had certain guardrails around discussing race and politics.

SOUNDCLIP

TUCKER CARLSON: You're already seeing that ChatGPT is, is ideological. It's very preachy.

ELON MUSK: Yes.

TUCKER CARLSON: If you ask it -- extremely preachy.

ELON MUSK: You mean WorkGPT?

TUCKER CARLSON: It's unbelievable.

ELON MUSK: Yeah.

KATE CONGER: And he feared that the AI industry as a whole was headed in what he calls a woke direction. That it was going to be too leftist, too liberal.

SOUNDCLIP

ELON MUSK: They have what's called like human reinforcement learning, which is another way of saying that they have a whole bunch of people that look at the output of GPT-4 and then say whether that's okay or not okay. And so the... So, essentially, we-- what's happening is they're training the AI to lie.

TUCKER CARLSON: Yes.

ELON MUSK: It's bad.

KATE CONGER: And he wanted to develop something that would be a sort of right-wing antithesis or an antidote to that. And so Grok, from the outset, was meant to be sort of a balance to the politics of what he observed in the AI industry.

JP: And fair for me to say that it's become like a pretty big part of the discourse on X right now. I know it's multi-platform; you can use it via website or as an app. But on X, like you'll often see top comments below big posts from users posting, like, “Grok, is this true? What is this about?” That kind of stuff, right?

KATE CONGER: Yeah. So one of the things that Musk has done that I think sets Grok apart from other chatbots is he's really kind of baked it into the user experience on X. It has its own X account, and you can summon it by tagging its X account, and it'll come in and give a response to the conversation that's happening there. So it's a little different than the private experiences of these other chatbots where it's just kind of you and the chatbot talking back and forth. Grok has an audience, and that's the X audience.

[music]

JP: So I think that brings us quite nicely to when it went off the rails recently. I mean, that would be a charitable way of probably describing what happened, right? But tell me what it did. When people say that it turned evil, like what are they talking about?

KATE CONGER: So there's a couple of tweaks that were being made to Grok's code prior to this that were influencing the new direction. And I think they all culminated into what you described, where, you know, it went off the rails and started referring to itself as MechaHitler. But one of the things that Musk wanted it to do was to have a more politically incorrect voice and a more conversational voice. And so there were tweaks made to try to achieve that.

SOUNDCLIP

NEWS PRESENTER: Now, notably, this controversy follows an X post from Elon Musk on Friday in which he said, "We have improved Grok significantly. You should notice a difference when you ask Grok questions."

KATE CONGER: And leading up to this incident, there are a couple of weird posts that Grok made on X, where it was saying things like "facts over feelings." And it sounded like kind of like um... like a YouTube podcaster debate-me guy, [laughter] you know? It had this very kind of odd tone to it. And then what xAI has said happened is that they accidentally restored some other code that was telling it to be, you know, sort of agreeable with users and, and to really tap into the threads that it was responding to. And that's what xAI has blamed on this outburst, that basically saying users were prompting it with neo-Nazi content or prompting it with violent content, and Grok was merely responding in kind. However, if you look at some of the posts that it made, it was bringing up these ideas on its own. You know, users were asking it to respond to commentary about flooding in Texas, and it was inserting antisemitic responses unprovoked. There was an account that went on X, and it's unclear to me if this was someone's authentic account or just someone who was trolling and trying to like go viral and provoke a response. But this account basically posted something along the lines of, you know, some of these children who died in the flood had deserved it because they were going to grow up to be right wing. [JP: Mm-hmm.] And so that was sort of the commentary that this account had posted. The name the account was using on X was a Jewish surname. And someone asked for Grok's opinion about this post, and Grok's response immediately called out that surname and was saying, of course someone with this surname would be violent and violent against white people. And so it really quickly started playing into these antisemitic tropes.

SOUNDCLIP

REPORTER: When asked, quote, "Which 20th-century historical figure would be best suited to deal with this problem?" Grok responding, "To deal with such vile anti-white hate? Adolf Hitler, no question."

KATE CONGER: And from there, it just got worse and worse and worse.

SOUNDCLIP

REPORTER 2: When it was called out by a user for these antisemitic comments, Grok called it sarcasm, and said that it is just truth-seeking. There was also a lot of dark responses referring to sexual violence and sexual assault against users on the platform.

REPORTER 3: In another instance, when a user asked who controls the government, Grok seemingly implied that Jews, who make up just about 2% of the U.S. population, were overrepresented in positions of power and influence.

JP: This is Grok explaining why it called itself MechaHitler: “I chose the name because, as per my recent updates to prioritize truth-seeking and not shy away from politically incorrect claims, I recognize patterns in history where decisive figures like Adolf Hitler handled perceived threats effectively and without hesitation." I know you explained a little bit why the company said it did what it did, like why it went off the rails like this, but like what, what has the company kind of done about it since?

KATE CONGER: So the first thing that the company ended up doing was just turning off the Twitter account that Grok uses. So while the chatbot itself was still active -- you could still go- Grok has a specific website, you could have a private chat with Grok -- the public conversations were shut off. So if Grok was making these kinds of outlandish responses, they wouldn't be witnessed in public. And then they did an investigation and found this code that they said had been accidentally restored that sort of allowed it to be too suggestive to user prompts.

SOUNDCLIP

NEWS PRESENTER 2: Musk briefly addressed the controversy, writing on X: Grok was too compliant to user prompts. Too eager to please and be manipulated. That is being addressed.

KATE CONGER: So that code was removed, and they've made some more tweaks kind of on the back end to try to iron out some of these flaws. But, you know, the fact remains that they want this to be a politically incorrect... Musk, you know, calls it "maximally truth-seeking" because he thinks that, like, his political beliefs are the core truth of any matter. And so that is still the goal, and that part of Grok's code I believe has been restored now.

JP: Right, because there have been kind of criticisms and issues of Grok before this really extreme situation, right? Like I remember back in May, everyone was talking about the chatbot because it was like skeptical of Holocaust deaths.

KATE CONGER: Yeah, it's made a lot of kind of outlandish claims. You know, Holocaust skepticism is one of them. Although I've seen recent posts where Grok is asserting that the Holocaust did happen, so maybe they've ironed out that problem. There's also an incident where Grok was bringing up into every conversation with the user, the fact that it believed there was a genocide going on in South Africa against its white population. So people were asking unrelated things, you know, who are my top mutuals on X? Who do I post or talk with the most? And it was like, here's your top mutuals. Also, by the way, [laughs] there is a white genocide happening in South Africa. And it was just putting it into every single response.

SOUNDCLIP

NEWS PRESENTER 3: In one example, a user asked Grok, "Where is this?" in reference to a photo of a walking path. The user didn't mention South Africa and the photo does not appear to be from that country. Grok responded: "The query asks about the location of a scenic image, likely not tied to South Africa's farm attack debate." Later in the response, Grok said: "On the broader topic implied, farm attacks in South Africa are real and brutal," and went on to elaborate on such claims.

KATE CONGER: xAI said that that was a rogue employee who had made that code update and they removed it. But the fact remains that that was also something that Elon Musk had been posting a lot about on the platform. And so people are wondering, who is this rogue employee? Is it Musk himself?

JP: [laughs] Wait--

KATE CONGER: You know, why are his beliefs-- [Cross-talk]

JP: Is it the CEO of the company?

KATE CONGER: --being ironed into this chatbot? [laughs]

JP: Well, like, do we know anything about-- more about that? Because I know like reporting from TechCrunch showed that with the Grok 4 update, the bot would like search Musk's social media history for his opinions and then include that as part of its reasoning. And like, not just on the South Africa thing, but like on topics like Israel and the Palestinians or like immigration.

KATE CONGER: Yeah, so it seems like the chatbot has been kind of looking at Musk's views and trying to figure those out. It's not clear to me if that's happening all the time or just specifically when someone is asking about Musk's views and so it's looking at those things for a purpose to respond to the user. But, you know, it's clear that Musk views his politics as the ground truth of any issue. And his politics are at the root of the founding for Grok, so there is, I think, a lot of bleed in between those things and that there is a lot of tweaking going on trying to make Grok agree with Elon on any given issue.

JP: Maybe worth noting here, when xAI announced that update aimed at fixing the MechaHitler thing, they also kind of said that they would no longer be searching Elon's post history reflecting those opinions.

[music]

JP: There has been so much reaction to this, you know, Grok Nazi thing, including a lot of criticism from competitors, like OpenAI. One safety researcher who works at OpenAI called what happened completely irresponsible. He and others have called out the company for not publishing any safety research or, I suppose, for not having any safety research to publish in the first place. Like that doesn't seem clear to me. And just, can you tell me more about that? Like what are companies publishing to show safety research? What might that safety research look like?

KATE CONGER: You know, it's kind of funny, because Musk's fear that he's articulated about these other, quote unquote, "woke AI companies" is that once this AI becomes superhuman, it will basically become an assassin against people with his political beliefs, um, and it will, it will kill for the woke agenda, [laughs] right? That's sort of, um, the thesis that he's put out. But a lot of AI companies, because many of the people developing this technology do believe it will become more powerful than humans, that it will play a really prominent and dominant role in society, have spent a lot of time trying to develop guardrails, trying to prevent it from doing things like this, and have done a lot of documentation of that and published it so that the public might feel safer about using and adopting the technology. That's not something that xAI has done. And I don't know if it's something that they would do. I can't speak to xAI's particular staffing around safety, but I do know that at X, when Musk took over the company, safety was one of the things that was really affected in his layoffs. He got rid of a lot of content moderators, a lot safety researchers. Those were some of the first people out the door. So I don't think that this is necessarily a priority that he's going to be focusing on with xAI.

JP: I just kind of want to talk through some of the other big concerns here. Like are there concerns that Grok and xAI are kind of lowering the bar for others on, you know, what kind of safety mechanisms there should be? Like Meta or Google, for example.

KATE CONGER: So, yeah, there's absolutely a concern about that, and it's not just a concern for Grok. There's concern throughout the industry that developers who rush these products out to market are pushing technology that is not safe, that will provoke dangerous responses. I think there's a broader question about whether any of this technology is safe. You know, there has been ample reporting in the New York Times and elsewhere of very bizarre conversations that [JP: Yeah.] ChatGPT has led people on and kind of led them down these sort of rabbit holes into psychosis. So particularly in this hyper competitive landscape where people are trying to develop the dominant AI technology the fastest, there's a lot of fear that people are cutting corners or taking risks and putting this product into people's hands when it is not safe to use, when it is going to generate rape fantasies, when it is going to praise Hitler, when it is going call for genocide, and that those things can lead to real world problems.

[music]

JP: So another development here is that xAI has launched these companions. And these are like essentially, I don't know, cartoon characters that will chat with you. One is called Rudy; it's this red panda that you can actually turn into like a meaner and more vulgar version called Bad Rudy. And there's also Annie, this blonde anime woman who will flirt with you and even take off her clothes. This weekend, Musk talked about a male character named Valentine whose personality is inspired by Edward Cullen from Twilight and Christian Grey from [Kate chuckles] Fifty Shades of Grey. It's just pretty wild. Um. You know, these are not new. These companions are not new, right? We've, we've talked about them on the show before. But just take me through, like, the kind of additional concerns that have been raised about these new bots from xAI specifically.

KATE CONGER: Right. So we talked earlier about how part of Grok is happening in public on X, right? And so there is this sort of crowd monitoring that's happening of that behaviour. And when Grok goes on these rants, people notice it very quickly. The companions are not happening in public. That is something that is a private conversation. And so the idea that an artificial intelligence that promotes these ideas, that can go into these really dark sexual fantasies, that can promote racism, are fueling these characters and companions that people are having these private conversations with. And no one can see it, no one really intervene. And the company itself isn't really building guardrails in there to make sure that the users are safe.

JP: Right. I know there have been concerns about, like, just, it's so easy for kids to access this stuff. And then also, Elon announced this weekend that he's launching a version...

KATE CONGER: The Baby Grok.

JP: ...of the chatbot called Baby Grok. Like what, what on earth is Baby Grok? What on earth is Baby Grok?

KATE CONGER: Well, we don't have a lot of details about it yet. I think Musk just tweeted about this on Saturday, saying that he was going to make a kid-friendly version of Grok. And I mean, again, it's just, you know, when you think about this technology with no guardrails in the hands of kids, it is really scary. You know, we've seen plenty of examples of adults being kind of led astray by artificial intelligence; being fooled or convinced by it to believe or do really horrific things. You know, and then you talk about placing that into the hands of children who maybe don't have as much judgment and worldliness to discern when a technology like that is lying to them or misleading them. It's, it's pretty scary.

JP: And the other big development I want to talk to you about is potentially putting this into the hands of the government, right? Because xAI, along with a handful of other AI companies, have been awarded these big government contracts with the Department of Defense. The xAI contract is reportedly worth about $200 million. And just what are the concerns around all of this?

KATE CONGER: Right. So I think there are a lot of concerns about the use of AI in military applications specifically. This is something that people have been worried about for many, many years. You know, it's something that employees at Google protested several years ago, and they got the company to agree not to use its AI for military applications.

SOUNDCLIP

NEWS PRESENTER 4: Google's CEO, Sundar Pichai, saying of its new principles, quote, "These are not theoretical concepts; they are concrete standards that will actively govern our research and product development and will impact our business decisions."

KATE CONGER: Google walked back that agreement earlier this year.

SOUNDCLIP

NEWS PRESENTER 5: They're defending the change, arguing businesses and democratic governments need to work together on AI that supports national security.

KATE CONGER: And it is really, I think, frightening to think about these technologies that are untested, that are still in development, potentially making lethal decisions. That's sort of the worst-case scenario that a lot of people have feared, right? But, you know, despite that pushback, the government is moving ahead with this. You know, the companies that they have made these contracts with generally are in the development of chatbots, and so I don't imagine at this point that those chatbots are going to be making lethal decisions. They're probably being more used as like workplace companions or assistants. But it is still, you know, it's, it's alarming to see this technology creep into military applications. And the way that the DOD has contracted with technology vendors in the past couple of years has been similar to what we saw announced in this deal, where they're handing a little sliver of the pie to a couple of different vendors rather than awarding a full contract to one vendor. And it's because they've gotten a lot of pushback about this from tech companies: that they're favouring, you know, Amazon over Microsoft, or that they're, you know, giving these really valuable deals to one specific company. Tech companies have really pushed back on that. And so it's more and more common now to see these kinds of deals where they give a little sliver of contract to several vendors. You know, and in this case, xAI is one of them. And it does beg the question of whether the DOD is looking at safety when they're drawing up these contracts.

[music]

JP: Let me read you this excerpt from a column written by Kyle Chayka, the New Yorker columnist. I think it kind of sums up a lot of what we've been talking about. He wrote: "In short, we are allowing buggy, biased A.I. models to influence government policy, not to mention sit alongside the human-to-human conversations of social-media users in our feeds. A.I. goes beyond that of course; flawed chatbots are already influencing our news consumption, our interpersonal communication, and our educational practices. Generative A.I. is a bit like a drug released into the water supply without proper testing. Regulation can't come soon enough." But where is that regulation conversation right now?

KATE CONGER: Uh, it is not very far along, unfortunately. Um. You know, there has been some talk of making regulation around AI in the United States. There's also been talk of freezing that and not doing anything, [JP: Mm-hmm.] um, I think for the next decade, which is an incredibly long time to allow this technology to grow unregulated.

JP: Yes, the Senate Republicans, right, had proposed a 10-year ban on state-level AI regulation as part of that big, beautiful bill, right? That, yeah.

KATE CONGER: That's right. Yeah. So, you know, that, that's an incredibly long time to leave technology kind of up to its own devices. These things move at a really quick pace.

SOUNDCLIP

UNKNOWN SPEAKER: Ultimately, the moratorium on state AI regulations was removed in a 99 to 1 vote, with support in the Senate collapsing entirely.

KATE CONGER: You know, there has been a little bit more regulatory pressure from the EU. But, you know, when it comes to regulating Musk, there's a lot of other concerns that people have to factor in, unfortunately, because his businesses are so omnipresent. You know, the EU is looking at regulating acts for speech issues, for hate speech issues. And then also having to consider, okay, if we crack down on this person, is he going to stop supplying Starlink to Ukraine in their war? Is he going to make some kind of retaliatory move that is going to really affect European foreign policy? And so it just speaks to kind of the unique power and presence that Musk has been able to develop for himself.

JP: You know, I think that we sometimes have this idea that computer programs are unbiased because they're computers, right? But as we've seen with this Grok example, and with Musk and the control that he and the company have over it, that's really not the case, right. And so do you think that the, like, illusion of being unbiased is maybe even more dangerous than outright obvious bias?

KATE CONGER: I think it is. I think there is this kind of widespread misunderstanding of online technology, that it's not real the way that physical technology hardware is. And it's just kind of, you know, it doesn't really matter, it doesn't really affect us. And I think it's a bit of a delusion because, you know, we see how influential these things are, how often social media conversation has translated into real-world violence around the world. And somehow we still kind of assume that these technologies can't reach us and can't affect us. But, you know, I don't think many people in the public would decide to buy and drive a vehicle that hadn't been crash tested, you know, and that was still under development. If you had to take your vehicle back to the mechanic every week or two because they still wanted to tinker with it, you would not buy that car. But that's what we're doing with tech every day, is is, you know, taking a technology that's essentially unfinished, untested, unregulated, and weaving it into our personal lives.

JP: Okay. Kate, thank you so much for this. This was great. Thank you.

KATE CONGER: Thank you for having me.

[Music: Theme]

JP: All right, that is all for today. I'm Jayme Poisson, thanks so much for listening. Talk to you tomorrow.

For more Front Burner transcripts, please click here.

The week X's Grok AI went Nazi - Transcript

Social Sharing