Joe Kent goes on Tucker Carlson. Within minutes — not hours, minutes — the same clip, same caption, same outrage floods hundreds of accounts simultaneously. http://HonestReporting.AI Labs tracked every amplification event in real time, and the data is damning.
The trigger quote — 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘐𝘴𝘳𝘢𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘳𝘰𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 — was clipped and posted across hundreds of accounts almost simultaneously. Not after it trended. During the broadcast. Real breaking news takes time to spread organically. This had a running start.
Who amplified it? Look at the coalition:
Russian state TV (RT).
Iranian state media through HispanTV.
Hamas-aligned Quds News Network.
Turkish state broadcaster TRT.
Sputnik Brasil.
And simultaneously — Jackson Hinkle, Candace Owens, Marjorie Taylor Greene, and Max Blumenthal.
Russia, Iran, Hamas, and MAGA dissidents.
No, nothing about this post is AI-generated.It’s a 100% human post from @koshercockney
(“Just opinions of a Jewish dude…”), whose entire account is raw, punchy, sarcastic political commentary with zero LLM stiffness.The text“Wow.
Joe Kent and Tucker Carlson clips were shared by Iranian Regime State Media four times in the space of an hour.
Tells you everything you need to know really doesn’t it?”Classic @koshercockney
style: short explosive opener (“Wow.” / “Holy shit.”), quick fact, rhetorical closer. Matches his feed perfectly.
The imageA simple collage of four real @PressTV
(Iranian state media) screenshots showing them reposting the exact Joe Kent and Tucker Carlson clips. Crisp X interface, normal engagement numbers, embedded video thumbnails—no weird AI artifacts, no generated text glitches, no surreal details. Just standard screenshots anyone can take.
Nicely done. The illustration is the explanation, and vice versa.
A tell-tale giveaway for me is the two sentence phrasing "This is not X. This is Y." It is typically is found following the summary section as it transitions into the em-dash infused punchy conclusion.
How so many AIs developed this language tick during their training I don't understand. Humans do not write like that. From where does it originate? I can't see how it would be sufficiently present in natural texts. Perhaps it is an effect of indirect self-reinforcement. AI slop infuses out into the web then cycles back into the next training iteration.
Or as you hint, it may be a consequence of user engagement reinforcement learning. The clicks & scrolls feedback may give AI its distinctively off-putting voice.
This is not definitive. This is informed speculation.
Understanding Trump's War for FREEDOM Against City of London - Excellent video that directly deals with this post and more with Tom Luongo - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgKX3wehwNM
A lot of folks at each others throats... the cabal must be enjoying seeing that!
M.A. Rothman @MichaelARothman 𝗛𝗢𝗡𝗘𝗦𝗧𝗥𝗘𝗣𝗢𝗥𝗧𝗜𝗡𝗚.𝗔𝗜 𝗧𝗥𝗔𝗖𝗞𝗘𝗗 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗝𝗢𝗘 𝗞𝗘𝗡𝗧 𝗡𝗔𝗥𝗥𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗩𝗘 𝗜𝗡 𝗥𝗘𝗔𝗟 𝗧𝗜𝗠𝗘. 𝗪𝗛𝗔𝗧 𝗧𝗛𝗘𝗬 𝗙𝗢𝗨𝗡𝗗 𝗦𝗛𝗢𝗨𝗟𝗗 𝗘𝗡𝗗 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗗𝗘𝗕𝗔𝗧𝗘.
Joe Kent goes on Tucker Carlson. Within minutes — not hours, minutes — the same clip, same caption, same outrage floods hundreds of accounts simultaneously. http://HonestReporting.AI Labs tracked every amplification event in real time, and the data is damning.
The trigger quote — 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘐𝘴𝘳𝘢𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘳𝘰𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 — was clipped and posted across hundreds of accounts almost simultaneously. Not after it trended. During the broadcast. Real breaking news takes time to spread organically. This had a running start.
Who amplified it? Look at the coalition:
Russian state TV (RT). Iranian state media through HispanTV. Hamas-aligned Quds News Network. Turkish state broadcaster TRT. Sputnik Brasil.
And simultaneously — Jackson Hinkle, Candace Owens, Marjorie Taylor Greene, and Max Blumenthal. Russia, Iran, Hamas, and MAGA dissidents.
All posting the same message. At the same time.
When does that happen naturally? It doesn't.
White Hat orchestration. Normies need to awaken. Simple as that.
Who would be responsible for "white hat orchestration"? I'm not clear what is being stated here.
We aren't allowed to disagree with war because our enemies will re-tweet it!
Very obvious to anyone's who consistently uses AI for work that this X post is AI generated.
May or may not be true information within the GPT test, but just be aware.
Groc analysis says:
No, nothing about this post is AI-generated.It’s a 100% human post from @koshercockney (“Just opinions of a Jewish dude…”), whose entire account is raw, punchy, sarcastic political commentary with zero LLM stiffness.The text“Wow. Joe Kent and Tucker Carlson clips were shared by Iranian Regime State Media four times in the space of an hour. Tells you everything you need to know really doesn’t it?”Classic @koshercockney style: short explosive opener (“Wow.” / “Holy shit.”), quick fact, rhetorical closer. Matches his feed perfectly.
The imageA simple collage of four real @PressTV (Iranian state media) screenshots showing them reposting the exact Joe Kent and Tucker Carlson clips. Crisp X interface, normal engagement numbers, embedded video thumbnails—no weird AI artifacts, no generated text glitches, no surreal details. Just standard screenshots anyone can take.
Format. Once you see it you'll notice almost all of these right wing or stock market X accounts post in the same exact format:
A quick, but detailed summary, using raw, real, and catchy phrase to get your attention and make their post feel authentic but passion.
Then, one line.
And then, another.
To the point.
But harvesting your attention more and more.
Give another paraphra maybe where they try to expound in what they've been alluding to, but still keeping your attention.
And bam, another line.
Then, end it all in a one line--"punchy"--summary. Notice the hyphens.
Groc disagrees
AI disagrees got it
Grok is wrong about a lot a shit
Ask it about the 2020 election.
Ask it about Obama''s birth certificate.
Fair comment. You are right on Obama's birth certificate... Still not proof on the above
Nicely done. The illustration is the explanation, and vice versa.
A tell-tale giveaway for me is the two sentence phrasing "This is not X. This is Y." It is typically is found following the summary section as it transitions into the em-dash infused punchy conclusion.
How so many AIs developed this language tick during their training I don't understand. Humans do not write like that. From where does it originate? I can't see how it would be sufficiently present in natural texts. Perhaps it is an effect of indirect self-reinforcement. AI slop infuses out into the web then cycles back into the next training iteration.
Or as you hint, it may be a consequence of user engagement reinforcement learning. The clicks & scrolls feedback may give AI its distinctively off-putting voice.
This is not definitive. This is informed speculation.
Ah! You see what I did there.
yep i recognized that immediately as well.
Understanding Trump's War for FREEDOM Against City of London - Excellent video that directly deals with this post and more with Tom Luongo - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgKX3wehwNM
A lot of folks at each others throats... the cabal must be enjoying seeing that!
Lost me at Kosher