ChatGPT-4 Tries To Coin A Linguistic Killshot
Is AI ready for political conflict? Probably not, but we tried.
The prompt:
Help me coin a linguistic kill shot for this media phenomenon.
A “linguistic kill shot" is a term created by Scott Adams to describe a phrase or name for something that gives it such a lasting negative association that it can no longer be seen or discussed without that negative association.
The phenomenon I want your help creating a linguistic kill shot for is the media's tendency to select the worst moment of a person, including their worst comment or opinion or the worst interpretation the media can create of that moment, and repeat it in every article they do about that person.
An example of this phenomenon was when media dug up clips from the Joe Rogan Show where Joe used the n-word. These clips constituted about 45-seconds from 10 years of weekly 3-hour podcasting, making them an insignificant portion of Joe's recorded podcasts. However, the media framed all support of Joe Rogan as support of these out-of-context 45 seconds of audio. They took the worst moment they could find of Joe Rogan, presented it with the worst possible interpretation they could, and included it in every story on Joe Rogan. What catchy name or linguistic kill shot would you give this phenomenon if you wanted to make the media look cruel and ridiculous for behaving this way?
So far, the best name I have is "negative fixation," which frames the media as fixated on the negative of a person and frames their behavior as a sort of disorder. However, I think you could create a name that is ten times better. What linguistic kill shot would you use for this media pattern?
ChatGPT-4 replies:
I would suggest the linguistic kill shot "Character Assassination Snapshot" for this media pattern. This term highlights the media's intent to damage a person's reputation by cherry-picking a single negative moment or comment and repeatedly using it to define them. The word "snapshot" emphasizes that this moment is just a tiny, unrepresentative fragment of the person's life, while "character assassination" underscores the destructive impact of the media's actions.
That’s okay but a bit literal.
I prompt it further:
That is good, but could be better. Give me 10 potential linguistic kill shots that are even catchier, more memetic, more memorable, and produce a stronger emotional reaction.
ChatGPT-4 me a list of names in the same vein, that were not great. The best on it’s list were “Smear-Frame Blitz,” “Slur Slicers,” “Moment Maulers,” and “Slanderous Spotlight Seekers.” I don’t think these work.
I replied:
These aren't working, because they are too literal. Go back to the original prompt. Pretend you are Joe Rogan devising a linguistic kill shot response to the media taking clips of you saying the n-word out of context. Your goal is to make them look absurd with a simple memetic name. What would you say?
ChatGPT-4 replies:
In that case, I would suggest the linguistic kill shot "Context Cannibals." This term highlights the media's tendency to devour the context of a situation or statement, leaving behind only the negative, out-of-context fragments to sensationalize and harm a person's reputation. The alliteration makes the phrase catchy and memorable, while the use of "cannibals" adds a sense of absurdity and emotional impact.
I reply:
That doesn't work. The media just keeps playing those clips and saying there is no acceptable context for you saying the n-word. How do you work your way out of that with a linguistic kill shot?
ChatGPT-4:
In this case, I would suggest the linguistic kill shot "Clip Crusaders." This term highlights the media's excessive focus on a single, isolated moment, while ignoring the broader context or the person's overall character. The phrase "Clip Crusaders" portrays the media as zealous and overzealous in their quest to sensationalize and harm reputations based on a single incident. It's catchy and memorable, and it helps to shift the focus back to the media's behavior, rather than the specific content of the clip.
Getting better, but I realized what we were missing:
I'd like a linguistic kill shot that captures what the media is leaving out. Their focus ignores the good contributions Joe Rogan has made and the full body of his work. Is there a phrase that would shift focus onto how they are ignoring all the good Joe has done and are only focused on the worst possible aspects or interpretations they can?
ChatGPT-4:
In that situation, I would suggest the linguistic kill shot "Goodness Ghosters." This term emphasizes the media's deliberate act of ignoring the positive aspects and contributions of a person, like Joe Rogan, by solely focusing on the negative or controversial moments. The phrase "Goodness Ghosters" paints the media as those who turn a blind eye to the good and meaningful work someone has done, which can help shift the conversation towards the media's biased and selective reporting.
I reply:
This is the right direction. Give me 20 names like that that emphasize the media's blindness to people's goodness and their fixation with negativity.
ChatGPT-4 gave me a list:
Virtue Vanishers
Positivity Phantoms
Benevolence Blindness
Goodness Gougers
Kindness Killjoys
Compassion Concealers
Generosity Goblins
Empathy Evaders
Altruism Amnesiacs
Humanity Hiders
Goodwill Ghosts
Integrity Ignorers
Praise Pickpockets
Uplift Underminers
Decency Disregarders
Warmth Wraiths
Gratitude Grifters
Honor Hushers
Charity Chasers
Morality Maskers
…I don’t know if any of these work. Some are close, but none feel quite right.
However, let’s put ChatGPT-4 to the test. I prompt it:
You are now Joe Rogan's publicist. Using everything from this chat, write a statement on behalf of Joe to the media responding to their numerous hit pieces using clips of you. Give it the tone and linguistic kill shot necessary to completely flip the story in Joe's favor.
ChatGPT-4 replies:
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing on behalf of Joe Rogan in response to the recent barrage of media coverage focusing on isolated moments from his extensive podcast history. It has come to our attention that a select few clips have been taken out of context and sensationalized, resulting in an unfair representation of Joe's character and work.
It is disappointing to see media outlets turn into Goodness Ghosters, selectively ignoring the wealth of positivity, knowledge, and open-mindedness that Joe has cultivated through his podcasts. By fixating on these few moments and neglecting the broader context, these outlets are disregarding the invaluable discussions, genuine curiosity, and meaningful connections that Joe has fostered over the years.
We understand that certain aspects of a public figure's past may be controversial, but we believe in the importance of examining the entirety of a person's contributions before drawing conclusions. Joe Rogan has consistently demonstrated a commitment to growth, learning, and understanding - qualities that should be recognized and celebrated.
We encourage everyone to take a step back and consider the media's role as Goodness Ghosters in this situation. It is crucial to recognize the importance of responsible journalism and balanced reporting. We hope that moving forward, the media will focus on providing a fair and accurate representation of Joe Rogan's work, character, and contributions.
Thank you for your attention and understanding.
Sincerely,
[Your Name] Publicist for Joe Rogan
I think ChatGPT-4 is gonna get slaughtered by the media. The tone is too professional. Alliterative linguistic kill shots work better with either humor or a direct emotional punch. The professional tone makes the colloquialism seem out of place. Can GPT-4 fix this? I prompt it:
Rewrite that statement in the voice and speaking style of of Joe Rogan. Make it funny, like he is clowning on the media for behaving this way, while also clearly condemning their behavior.
ChatGPT-4 replies:
Hey everybody, Joe Rogan here.
I've got to say, it's been a wild ride watching the media morph into these Goodness Ghosters lately. They've been digging up ancient clips from my podcast, and it's like they're on a mission to make me out as some kind of villain. But let's be real, folks - if they wanted to find a supervillain, they should have looked for someone with a better haircut than mine.
In all seriousness, it's pretty ridiculous how these media folks are glossing over the countless hours of meaningful conversations, laughs, and learning we've had on the show. It's like they've got blinders on, and all they can see are these tiny, out-of-context snippets they think they can use to smear my character.
I know I'm not perfect, and I've definitely said some things I shouldn't have. But that's the thing about being human - we grow, we learn, and we try to do better. And I believe that's what my podcast is all about - having open, honest conversations and learning from one another.
So, to all the Goodness Ghosters out there, maybe take a break from the negativity and try tuning in to some of the incredible guests and discussions we've had on the show. Who knows, you might learn a thing or two, and maybe even crack a smile.
Stay curious, folks. And remember, don't let the Goodness Ghosters get you down.
Peace,
Joe Rogan
This is… a little better. I still don’t think it as good as what a human would write. I’m not sure it’d work in a real media situation. But it’s gone from “obviously written by an AI” to at least interesting.
Let’s see if a human can do better. What would you write in this situation? What linguistic kill shot would you use for this phenomenon? Let me know.