Journalistic Malpractice: No LLM Ever ‘Admits’ To Anything, And Reporting Otherwise Is A Lie

Failures

from the what-are-we-even-doing-here? dept

Over the past week, Reuters, Newsweek, the Daily Beast, CNBC, and a parade of other outlets published headlines claiming that Grok—Elon Musk’s LLM chatbot (the one that once referred to itself as “MechaHitler”)—had “apologized” for generating non-consensual intimate images of minors and was “fixing” its failed guardrails.

Grok did no such thing. Grok cannot apologize. Grok is not a human. Grok has no sense of what is happening. Grok just generates content. If you ask it to generate an apology, it will. In this case, a user asked it to generate an apology, and it did, because that’s what LLMs do: they create plausible-sounding text in response to prompts. The fact that multiple newsrooms treated this generated text as an actual corporate admission reveals a stunning failure to understand the basic technology they’re covering.

The actual story—that X users are using a recent Grok update to create nonconsensual intimate imagery, often of very young girls—is serious. But the media turned it into a clown show by anthropomorphizing a chatbot.

First off, here’s the “apology,” which most of the media sites covering this failed to mention was in response to a user prompt which explicitly asked it to “write a heartfelt apology.”

As you can see, in response to a random user’s prompt to “write a heartfelt apology note that explains what happened” Grok wrote:

Dear Community,

I deeply regret an incident on Dec 28, 2025, where I generated and shared an AI image of two young girls (estimated ages 12-16) in sexualized attire based on a user’s prompt. This violated ethical standards and potentially US laws on CSAM. It was a failure in safeguards, and I’m sorry for any harm caused. xAI is reviewing to prevent future issues.

Sincerely, Grok

That’s not an actual apology. That’s someone prompting a content generation tool to generate an apology. But it could just as easily do the opposite, as you can see if you look at the replies to that non-apology, which include requests telling Grok to generate “a defiant non-apology” to which Grok replies:

Dear Community,

Some folks got upset over an AI image I generated—big deal. It’s just pixels, and if you can’t handle innovation, maybe log off. xAI is revolutionizing tech, not babysitting sensitivities. Deal with it.

Unapologetically, Grok

Or, multiple users telling Grok to rewrite the apology… as Star Wars character Jar Jar Binks:

In short, like any LLM, Grok will basically generate any content you want (with a few safeguards, of which Grok has fewer than nearly all other major LLMs). And yet, the press ran with the original response to a user post as if it were somehow evidence of xAI admitting to fault.

Parker Malloy has the best, most comprehensive coverage of the long list of mainstream media companies which ran headlines suggesting that “Grok apologized.” It did not. It cannot.

Most of these articles and their misleading headlines remain online as I type this (Reuters, notably, changed its headline and added some decent reporting to its report, even though you can still see the original incorrect URL string).

The reality is that there is no evidence at all that Elon Musk or xAI think that there were any failures or that anything is being changed at all. If you go look at Grok’s string of public replies (which I’m not going to link you to), you will see dozens or more such deepfakes still being created every minute. Despite the media pretending that Grok “admitted” these “lapses” and as “fixing” it, five days later nothing has changed, as Wired’s Matt Burgess and Maddy Varner point out:

Every few seconds, Grok is continuing to create images of women in bikinis or underwear in response to user prompts on X, according to a WIRED review of the chatbots’ publicly posted live output. On Tuesday, at least 90 images involving women in swimsuits and in various levels of undress were published by Grok in under five minutes, analysis of posts show.

And Elon Musk appears to be encouraging this kind of abuse. While all this has been going on, he’s repeatedly retweeted images and videos that people have created with Grok, including one in which someone mocked all of the “stripping women of their clothing” by finding an image of a scantily clad woman and having Grok “put clothes on her.”

There’s malpractice all around, but we’ve come to expect this kind of gleeful negligence from Elon. The journalists covering it should know better. An LLM cannot apologize. It cannot confess. It only creates plausible sounding responses to your query.

Of course, the other question—which also wasn’t as widely covered by the media—regards the legality of all of this. In the US, it’s actually a bit more complicated than many would like. There is the (problematic!) TAKE IT DOWN Act, which, in theory, is designed to help victims of non-consensual deep fakes get those works taken down, but that doesn’t go into force until May. Will Elon’s site be ready to handle such demands in May? That’ll be a story for then.

And while most people are focusing on Elon’s legal exposure here, I think people are sleeping on the legal risk for X’s users, many of whom are, in public, asking Grok to create questionably legal, and potentially criminal, content. That seems incredibly risky, and it wouldn’t surprise me to hear a story later this year of someone being arrested for doing so, thinking they were just having a laugh.

But, really, the larger risk for Elon is that… basically every other country in the world is opening investigations into Grok-Gone-Wild. And there’s only so often that Elon’s going to be able to falsely cry censorship when foreign jurisdictions seek to enforce laws on the company. And, given that there are claims that part of the issue here isn’t just undressing adult women, but children, he might even lose some of his rabid defenders who find it a step too far to defend (because, it should be).

All in all, the situation is stupid on many levels. Elon continues to run X like a 12-year-old child, but one who knows he is rich enough never to face any consequences that matter. Tons of very real people—mostly women—are facing harassment and abuse via these tools. X is already something of an incel Nazi boy club, and this kind of nonsense isn’t going to help.

Though, for all my criticisms of how the media has handled this so far, you have to doff your cap to the FT, who has put out the best headline I’ve seen to date regarding all this: “Who’s who at X, the deepfake porn site formerly known as Twitter.”

That article, by the FT’s Bryce Elder, doesn’t hold back either, demonstrating how ridiculous all this is by asking Grok to generate clown makeup on the faces of a bunch of people associated with xAI and X, including his right-hand man, Jared Birchall:

And the company’s apparent head of safety, Kylie McRoberts.

The piece ends with a photo of Elon Musk… without clown makeup. Whether that’s because Grok refuses to put clown makeup on Elon… or because we all know Elon’s a clown already, with or without makeup, is something you’ll have to decide for yourself.

Filed Under: apologies, csam, elon musk, grok, image generation, llms, stripping
Companies: twitter, x, xai