CBS News97%

Pope Leo's encyclical warning about AI rocks tech industry 62%

5/26/2026, 2:21:59 PM

Topics: Video
Keywords: Youtube

BS Summary: This video contains 26 faulty reasoning types, including Anecdotal, Appeal to Emotion, and Availability Heuristic, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 31.5% saturation with 225 hits. Analysis detected 1,837 faulty-reasoning hits from 715 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 57.8% and a BS Rank of 62% (7,749 of 20,248 videos). This video is worse (more manipulative) than 61.70% of the video peer group.

Pope Leo the 14th has entered into the debate around the use of artificial intelligence. 
The pontiff has talked a lot about AI in the past year. 
Now it's the subject of his first encyclical which is a papal declaration and it's full of warnings. 
I want to bring in CBS News foreign correspondent Chris Livce. He is live in Rome with more on this. 
Chris, good morning. So what warnings did the pontiff raise at the Vatican yesterday? 
Hey, Michael. Good to see you again. You know, he warned about humanity itself being on the line in the age of AI. 
Now, why is his name important? I mean, you might remember just about a year ago when I saw you on this very balcony around the time Pope Francis died and Pope Leo was elected, he came out on that balcony, chose the name Leo. Why? 
Well, because the last pope to have that name, Leo, back during the industrial revolution was known for ushering the Catholic church through that pivotal time. 
Pope Leo sees the AI revolution as just as transformative. 
Although instead of transforming labor and capital like the industrial revolution, he sees it as being transformative of humanity itself. 
He talks about the possibility of the middle class being hollowed out, jobs evaporating, us turning into slaves to this system. 
In fact, he uses as an opportunity to condemn slavery and also uh apologize for the Catholic Church failing to do so for centuries in the past. 
So, he paints a pretty bleak picture, but he also talks about some of the opportunities that are available if we choose not to squander this moment. 
That's according to a cardinal that I spoke to. Here's what he had to say. 
So, this is not an all-out rebuke of artificial intelligence. 
>> Oh, no, no, no. It's a artificial artificial intelligence is a great human achievement, but we can't renounce responsibility. That's that's the main point. 
>> So, again, he speaks about it as this great moment of human achievement, but only if we know how to seize this this opportunity. 
Michael and Chris, the pope also had a warning about the use of AI in warfare. 
And I want to mention that you recently observed a US military training exercise in Africa. What role did AI play in those exercises? 
>> Well, I have to say, I mean, those exercises in the Sahara Desert were both a marvel of human achievement, as Pope Leo might say, but it was also rather chilling to see killer robots, automated systems capable of flying drones for instance, out onto the battlefield and dropping smart munitions. We also saw a dune buggy completely automated, at least in terms of how it moved in the battlefield with a machine gun mounted on top of it. 
Now, the Pentagon insists that all this technology when it comes to actually killing a person will always have a human being in the loop. 
However, I spoke to a top general of the United States military and he he he openly wondered and and really struggled with the question of exactly how long that's going to remain the case. 
Let's say there's an autonomous system that has lethal capacity. 
Do we have to have a human in the loop when it comes to pulling the trigger? 
>> Well, it depends on what the situation is. And so I think right now you say a lot of our defensive systems are already automated. 
>> Sometimes the line between defense and offense can get a little blurry >> always. 
>> So what price are you willing to pay to have a human in the loop? 
>> I don't know that we that's uh so I guess that depends on the situation doesn't it? 
So that general went on to say that when it came to winning a war and losing a war, he would not want to put the United States in the position of losing. 
He said that yes, he considers this technology ghoulish on the battlefield, but he also says it is foolish not to adopt it because our enemies will. 
Michael. 
>> All right, Chris Livay in Rome. Thank you. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 1.4%CBS Miami: 2.2%Confirmation Bias1.4%This article: 2.1%CBS Miami: 0.6%Anchoring Bias2.1%This article: 20.6%CBS Miami: 2.6%Availability Heuristic20.6%This article: 3.6%CBS Miami: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic3.6%This article: 6.4%CBS Miami: 0.5%Hindsight Bias6.4%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 1.7%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 14.1%CBS Miami: 6.0%Framing Effect14.1%This article: 6.0%CBS Miami: 0.3%Loss Aversion6.0%This article: 8.3%CBS Miami: 0.5%Status Quo Bias8.3%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 3.5%CBS Miami: 1.9%Optimism Bias3.5%This article: 7.8%CBS Miami: 1.1%Pessimism Bias7.8%This article: 31.5%CBS Miami: 6.6%Negativity Bias31.5%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 1.9%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 7.6%CBS Miami: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias7.6%This article: 7.1%CBS Miami: 1.7%Halo Effect7.1%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 8.8%CBS Miami: 1.1%Recency Bias8.8%This article: 10.6%CBS Miami: 0.3%Primacy Effect10.6%This article: 2.5%CBS Miami: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias2.5%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 10.6%CBS Miami: 4.3%Appeal to Authority10.6%This article: 11.6%CBS Miami: 1.1%False Dilemma11.6%This article: 2.9%CBS Miami: 0.5%Slippery Slope2.9%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 15.0%CBS Miami: 2.5%Hasty Generalization15.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.3%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 24.6%CBS Miami: 3.9%Appeal to Emotion24.6%This article: 4.9%CBS Miami: 0.7%Begging the Question4.9%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 2.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 12.0%CBS Miami: 0.4%Burden of Proof12.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 3.6%CBS Miami: 0.2%Composition/Division3.6%This article: 25.9%CBS Miami: 1.2%Anecdotal25.9%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 1.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 3.8%CBS Miami: 0.1%Middle Ground3.8%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 1.9%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 1.0%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 1.4%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.9%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.5%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

715 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers6.4%attributed speech669writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageCBS • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 46 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 80 words • 0.0% coveragePentagon • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageMichael • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Pentagon

100%flagged-word coverage
25 attributed words54% of attributed speech99% writer coverage

No manipulation-pattern hits were found in this speaker's attributed words or the writer's voice.

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.