Education and the world have been invaded by artificial intelligence tools. Trying to keep up with all of this as a journalist and educator has become a challenge for me, and I'm sure for many others. Some of these tools get confused and seem to do more or less the same thing. ChatGPT is similar to Google's Bard (or is it now Gemini?). Is the pop-up that offers to write my email an ai tool from Grammarly or Apple?
I mention all this because DebunkBot is clearly different from any other ai tool you've come across. Created by academics from MIT, Cornell, and American University, and presented in what still appears to be its beta form, DebunkBot is designed to help “debunk” conspiracy theories.
I teach writing and journalism classes. So, like many, I lament the rise of social media-driven fake news and the subsequent habit of public figures to label as such any fact they disagree with.
I recently spent some time exploring DebunkBot. I plan to share it with students and think the tool, even with its limitations, could be an engaging classroom exercise for journalism, history and/or media literacy lessons, although its use is restricted to those 18 and older.
Here's a closer look at what I found.
DebunkBot: what works really well
It has nothing to do with the content, I love the privacy options. DiscreditBot offers to users. Before using the tool, you will be asked if you agree to the computer analyzing your session data. You can decline and continue using DebunkBot, and even if you agree, a warning appears reminding you not to reveal any personally identifiable information. This is important and often overlooked when using a tool with students.
During my sessions with DebunkBot, I asked him to debunk several conspiracy theories. He quickly provided me with evidence as to why these various theories, which ranged from the United States having prior knowledge of the attack on Pearl Harbor to alien sightings covered up by the US government, were probably not true. In that way, it works as a sort of on-demand Snopes/fact-checking tool. But it goes further by engaging in dialogue around these ideas, attempting to explain them in more detail, and addressing additional questions.
DebunkBot has a nice, non-judgmental tone and I like that it welcomes general questions and provides real documentation. For example, in response to my UFO-related questions about the 1947 Roswell incident involving the alleged crash of a UFO, he pointed out the Project Blue Book investigations conducted by the US government as evidence against UFOs and correctly noted that UAP (unidentified aerial phenomenon) is the preferred term these days; I just still prefer the old school terminology.
Crucially, the chatbot did not criticize the curiosity behind the question. “Fascination with UAPs and the possibility of extraterrestrial life forms can coexist with healthy skepticism and a reliance on scientific research to seek evidence-based explanations that we can all examine,” DebunkBot wrote. I couldn't agree more.
Limitations of DebunkBot
The tool is currently being made available to the public as part of a research survey for MIT. That makes its use a bit cumbersome. You must answer several questions before DebunkBot begins discussing a given conspiracy theory with you. This isn't a problem if you use it as a one-time exercise, but it makes daily use impractical.
DebunkBot also tries to get people to question its conspiracy theories through dialogue. I love that idea, but the pessimist in me has discovered that most conspiracy theorists find that something strange happened and then dismiss any evidence that contradicts their perception. So I'm not sure engaging in dialogue is helpful. So while I think it's a fun teaching tool, I'm not sure I would recommend it to anyone to change their beliefs about a given conspiracy.
Would I use DebunkBot in class?
Yes, despite the minimal limitations mentioned in the previous section, I enjoyed experimenting with DebunkBot. I plan to share it with students in a future class exercise.
In addition to discussing specific theories and mysteries, I think it is a good tool for media literacy and artificial intelligence literacy. What bias is the ai victim of in its responses? What parts of the conversation are being left out, etc.? These are questions that students can explore in a more interactive way thanks to this unusual ai platform.
Part of the job of teaching journalism is helping students learn how to balance healthy suspicion about reporting, actions, narratives, etc. officials, without falling into the rabbit hole of “we are all puppets without strings”. DebunkBot seems to understand this and is ideal for helping students find this balance. Unlike other ai Chatbots, it is obviously not controlled by lizard people trying to take over the world and unnecessarily remove salt from our diets. Wait, maybe I need to spend more time with DebunkBot checking what I read on the Internet.
