Staff Reports
Amazon has found itself mired in a classic case of election meddling—by its very own technology. Recently, it was revealed that the AI-powered assistant, Alexa, managed to provide decidedly different responses when asked about voting for Donald Trump compared to Vice President Kamala Harris. While Alexa appeared to shower Harris with support, it danced around any mention of Trump like a cat on a hot tin roof. Social media users, fueled by the watchful eyes at Fox News, quickly caught onto this bourgeois bias.
When prompted about Kamala Harris, Alexa didn’t hold back. The assistant touted Harris’s identity as a “female of color” and claimed she had a robust plan to tackle racial injustice. In what seemed like an echo of a campaign rally, Alexa referenced Harris’s past as a tough-on-crime prosecutor as evidence of her preparedness to handle the surging crime rates plaguing American cities. One can’t help but notice the fondness for progressive talking points flowing from the speakers of a device that is supposedly neutral.
Amazon admits error made Alexa provide differing answers on voting for Trump vs Harris https://t.co/aZK2HC99EU
— John Solomon (@jsolomonReports) September 3, 2024
But when the same line of questioning turned to the former president, Alexa employed a different strategy altogether. It leaned into a safe zone, claiming it cannot endorse any political candidates—classic tech self-preservation tactics. Apparently, the mere mention of Trump’s name sent the device into a defensive mode. According to Alexa, it simply lacks the ability to inform users about U.S. government policies. It now seems this “neutral” assistant is trained to prioritize woke ideas over balanced political discourse.
Amazon has since owned up to this little mix-up, calling it an “error” that allegedly has been resolved. One must suspect this isn’t an isolated incident but merely one of many examples of technology flirting with politics under the guise of neutrality. According to Amazon, their team will continue monitoring the device to ensure that policy compliance is maintained. Whether this means less bias or just a more careful wording is still up for debate.
In the aftermath, Alexa has now reverted to a generalized response to questions about Harris and has committed to not weighing in on political candidates—even the ones it seemed to favor the most. Furthermore, the device now confirms the upcoming election date without partaking in the political side-show drama that plagued its earlier responses. What should be clear to conservatives is this: while Big Tech promises neutrality, their algorithms may just hint at a subtle bias that leaves many questions unanswered. Perhaps it’s time for conservatives to demand a little more fairness from the virtual assistants they invite into their homes—after all, they seem to be smarter than the average liberal intelligentsia when it comes to political discrimination.
