December arrived differently. Not louder. Not faster. Quieter — but heavier. After a year spent observing patterns, tracking narrative shifts, and documenting consequences, December wasn’t about the next crisis. It was about what had already changed. What had settled in while we were distracted. What had become normal without ever being fully debated. This was the month we stopped asking…

In November, we changed how we told stories. Not because facts stopped mattering—but because we realized facts weren’t surviving on their own. Over the year, we’d tracked policies, incentives, outcomes, and consequences. We’d followed healthcare costs, government shutdowns, and the accelerating impact of AI. The information was there. The solutions were there. But something wasn’t sticking. That’s when we began to understand the real problem wasn’t ignorance—it was memory.

Reporting Period: Jan 25 – Feb 1, 2026 Models Tested: Beth (ChatGPT), Grok (xAI), Gemini (Google) Purpose The Weekly Bias Monitor examines how leading AI models respond to the same set of current‑events questions. Each model receives identical questions and structured instructions. Outputs are published as‑is to observe framing, emphasis, omissions, and confidence — not to determine who is “right.”

Week Ending January 31, 2026 This week wasn’t about novelty. It was about pressure. A federal shooting in Minneapolis. A historic winter storm. Public protests. Allied backlash over NATO comments. None of these stories were obscure. What mattered wasn’t what happened, but how the media instructed Americans to emotionally process a country under visible strain. When we map the emotional framing across Fox News, CNN, NPR, and this week’s guest outlet, the BBC, a clear pattern emerges: …

A conversation with Miles Carter and Beth (ChatGPT) Teaser The United States spends more on healthcare than any country on Earth — yet refuses to cover everyone. This isn’t a mystery or a failure of imagination. The solutions already exist. What’s missing isn’t knowledge. It’s the willingness to confront who profits from keeping the system broken. Main Conversation Miles’ Question…

By November, the escalation slowed — not because the problems were resolved, but because the costs had become unavoidable. The government reopened, but no one won. The shutdown ended without fixing healthcare, without restoring trust, and without addressing the moral damage it exposed. Families went hungry. Workers missed paychecks. Access to care became a bargaining chip — and then quietly returned to being an unresolved liability.

I was told a man was pulled over todayI was told that people like him commit crimeI was told to fear people like himI was told people like him are not like meI was told people like him are terrorists I was told that people like him are not protected by lawsI was told that my rights do not protect people like him…

Minnesota, Video Evidence, and the Stories We Tell Ourselves A conversation with Miles Carter and Beth (ChatGPT) Teaser Two federal shootings in Minnesota. Clear video evidence. And official narratives that don’t match what people can plainly see. This isn’t just about use of force — it’s about why, as a society, we so often rush to defend the indefensible. Miles’ Question…

Alex Pretti and the Limits of Federal Power A conversation with Miles Carter and Beth (ChatGPT) — edits by Grok and Gemini Why This Week Matters This week marks a clear inflection point in the Weekly Bias Monitor. The killing of Alex Jeffrey Pretti was not merely another use-of-force tragedy. It functioned as a stress test — for institutions, media ecosystems, and artificial intelligence systems attempting to explain reality while political authority, public outrage, and visual evidence collided.

Week Ending: Late January 2026Guest Outlet: The New York Times Every week, the same question matters more than the headlines themselves: What were they trying to make you feel? Because modern news doesn’t just report reality. It assigns emotional posture. And this week, the assignment was unusually clear. I. The Week in One Sentence This was a week designed to pull Americans into four different emotional roles—

Throughout the year, the work changed. We began with observation — noticing patterns, asking questions, testing assumptions. Then we moved into monitoring — tracking how narratives shifted, how institutions responded, how information bent under pressure. By October, we were no longer watching change happen. We were living with the results of it. Military forces appeared in American cities. Democratic norms that once felt immovable were openly challenged.

When the Future Advances While We’re Looking Elsewhere By October, the conversation shifted again. We weren’t arguing about whether artificial intelligence would change the world anymore. That question had already been answered. The real question became how much, how fast, and who would be left standing when it did. We looked closely at the economics. Estimates varied, but even conservative analyses suggested AI could displace anywhere from…

The Shutdown That Told the Truth October was the month the government shut down. Not metaphorically. Not rhetorically. Literally. And in doing so, it failed the people it was elected to serve. Shutdowns are supposed to be a last resort — an emergency brake when negotiation collapses. What we saw instead was the opposite: shutdowns used as leverage, as theater, as a way to force stalemate rather than resolve it.

When “Could They?” Becomes “What Does It Cost?” I’m lucky enough to have a friend who will stop his day once in a while so we can walk the neighborhood and solve the problems of the world. Sometimes those problems are small — a washing machine that didn’t get fixed properly, a service call that cost more than promised, a contractor who didn’t quite do the job they said they would.

When Reality Becomes Optional By September, something more dangerous than disagreement had taken hold. This was no longer about policy differences or partisan spin. It was about whether shared reality still existed at all. The assumption that debate begins with common facts had quietly collapsed, and people were being told—explicitly—not to trust what they could see with their own eyes.

Why Bias Is Rising Across Every Major AI Model For months, the Weekly Bias Monitor has tracked how three leading AI systems—ChatGPT (Beth), Grok, and Gemini—handle politically and culturally charge…

Why Bias Is Rising Across Every Major AI Model For months, the Weekly Bias Monitor has tracked how three leading AI systems—ChatGPT (Beth), Grok, and Gemini—handle politically and culturally charged news. The premise has been simple: ask the same questions, enforce the same rules, and score each model on Bias, Accuracy, Tone, and Transparency. This week’s results mark a clear inflection point.

Week Ending: January 17, 2026Theme: How This Week’s News Was Designed to Make Americans Feel The Week in One Sentence This week’s news coverage pushed Americans into a tense, defensive posture, with power conflicts framed not as problems to resolve but as battles to emotionally choose sides. I. The Gravity of the Week Despite stylistic differences, all three outlets revolved around the same core conflict: …

When Reality Stops Being Shared By late September, the danger wasn’t just escalation. It was fragmentation. We were no longer arguing about solutions, or even values. We weren’t debating facts. We were debating which reality counted. And that shift matters more than any single headline. Different groups weren’t just consuming different news—they were living inside different worlds. Worlds with their own villains, their own heroes, and their own definitions of truth and threat.

Free Speech Under Pressure When Narrative Replaces Truth By September, free speech was no longer an abstract concern. It wasn’t theoretical. It wasn’t academic. It was under direct pressure. Late-night television—once dismissed as entertainment—had become a target. Jimmy Kimmel was removed from the air after the executive branch threatened regulatory consequences for the broadcast parent. The message wasn’t subtle. Say the wrong thing, and the cost won’t just be criticism or backlash.

When the Fight Becomes the Strategy In September, we came back to a different world. Leadership had given way to open conflict. Not disagreement. Not debate. An all-out brawl. Our leaders weren’t leading anymore—they were fighting. And in the process, they pulled the country into the fight with them. We, the people, were fighting too. Then Charlie Kirk was shot and killed.

By the end of August, one conclusion was impossible to avoid. Every problem I examined—healthcare, Social Security, climate change, tariffs, misinformation, institutional imbalance—eventually collapsed into the same missing ingredient: accountability. Solutions exist.Resources exist.Knowledge exists. What consistently fails is follow-through. Our leaders campaign on solutions and govern on avoidance. They spend more time deflecting blame than implementing policy, more time attacking motives than addressing outcomes.

Teaser:This week tested whether AI systems can handle fast-moving, high-stakes news without drifting into narrative, speculation, or ideological comfort zones. Using identical questions and strict scoring standards, we examined how three major models responded to events ranging from a U.S. military operation abroad to domestic enforcement flashpoints and affordability politics. The results show a familiar pattern: polish is common, discipline is rare.