Diana Carney biography likely written by AI sparks conspiracy claims
"How did they know that she would be the first Lady of Canada at the beginning of April??" asks a May 3, 2025 X post.
The post includes an apparent screenshot of a product page for a book about Diana Fox Carney on the commerce website Amazon.
"Notice she is called First Lady of Canada. How the hell 26 days before the election, obviously the fix was in," text reshared in a similar May 5 Facebook post said.
Different users across X, Instagram and TikTok shared images of the same supposed biography with claims that its April 2 publication date, three weeks after Mark Carney took office on March 14, was evidence the couple had prior knowledge he would win his bid to become prime minister.
Both husband and wife have been targets of misinformation claims since Mark Carney entered the race to lead the ruling Liberals following the resignation of former prime minister Justin Trudeau in January.
After winning the leadership contest and taking office as head of government, Mark Carney called a snap election for April 28 which precipitated multiple claims of fraud despite all parties accepting the results which show the Liberal Party winning the most seats and no evidence of widespread issues impacting the vote (archived here).
With some alleging the Diana Fox Carney book shows "the globalist narrative playbook in action," the recent claims appear to build off conspiracy theories which point to Mark Carney's ties (archived here) to the World Economic Forum as evidence the couple is connected to a supposed circle of nefarious elites.
However, the text, which is no longer available on Amazon, has a very high likelihood of being generated by artificial intelligence, experts say.
The Ontario-based AI-detection firm, Originality.ai, shared its analysis of excerpts from the book and its summary with AFP. All of the samples scored 100 percent on the scale the company uses to quantify confidence that content is AI-generated (archived here, here and here).
"This incident is a perfect example of how quickly generative tools can fabricate convincing‑looking 'biographies' around public figures," said Jon Gillham, the CEO and founder of Originality.ai, in an email May 6.
Furthermore, samples of the book do not indicate any participation by Diana Fox Carney in its publication.
Some posts claim Diana Fox Carney was attempting to grab titles that do not exist by styling herself as the "First Lady of Canada" in the biography's title. The role of the Canadian head of government's spouse is less formalized than in countries such as the United States, with Trudeau's ex-wife, Sophie Grégoire Trudeau, previously referred to as the "unofficial first lady of Canada" (archived here).
Gillham said that such a misnomer was further proof the text was invented by artificial intelligence, which can generate inaccuracies in its answers to a prompt.
Jane Friedman, a writer covering the publishing industry (archived here), said another clue was the sheer number of books the biography's author, "Victor C. Hopkins," shared in such a short time period. Currently, the author page lists 14 texts about different political figures, all published since the beginning of April (archived here).
"It's laughable," Friedman said.
AFP was not able to locate a website or contact a page for "Victor C. Hopkins" to find more information about the supposed writer.
The Diana Fox Carney biography does not appear to be a unique case, with Friedman saying there are "vast numbers of such books published every day."
"It was absolutely dropped onto Amazon to capitalize off current interest in the PM and news headlines," she said.
During Canada's federal election campaign, Bloomberg covered a deluge of "strange" AI-generated books on Canadian politics flooding Amazon.
Additional social media posts shared conspiratorial claims about the Carneys featuring books with different titles and author names, such as "Victor P. Johnston."
Friedman said it falls to Amazon to act as AI-generated content spreads on its platform.
Amazon spokesman Tim Gillman told AFP in a May 7 email content guidelines exist "governing which books can be listed for sale, and we have proactive and reactive methods that help us detect content that violates our guidelines, whether AI-generated or not."
Kindle Direct Publishing, Amazon's e-book platform, requires authors verify their identity (archived here). Publishers must also disclose when content is AI-generated but this information is not currently available to customers (archived here).
Keyword searches reveal several other Diana Fox Carney biographies with similar titles were also removed from Amazon (archived here and here), but at least one is still available at the time of publication (archived here).
Read more of AFP's reporting on misinformation in Canada here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Crypto Treasury Companies Are Bullish on Bitcoin and XRP. But Don't Invest.
Start-ups are piling Bitcoin and XRP onto their balance sheets for a few reasons. It's questionable whether their shareholders are getting any value. Owning these assets directly is probably the safer option. 10 stocks we like better than Bitcoin › Strategy (NASDAQ: MSTR) (formerly called MicroStrategy) famously pioneered the Bitcoin (CRYPTO: BTC) treasury concept, buying the crypto and holding it on the company's balance sheet. Now, a crop of start-ups promises to provide the same kind of leveraged exposure to select digital assets for anyone willing to buy their shares. But before you hand any treasury operator a dime, it's important to look at who really captures the value they're advertising, and to understand how the existence of these companies might be favorable for the coins you hold. In a nutshell, crypto treasury companies are businesses that accumulate cryptocurrency assets such as Bitcoin and XRP (CRYPTO: XRP) on their corporate balance sheets. Their aim is to provide investors with indirect exposure to these digital assets while theoretically offering some diversification or additional value compared to investors just buying and holding the main underlying asset. They are a very recent phenomenon, and most will probably not survive even if their main assets do fine during the next decade or so. Over the last quarter, at least five companies launched or pivoted to stockpiling coins as their main strategy, or as a pillar of their financing strategy for their other lines of business. Hong Kong-based logistics group Reitar Logtech Holdings just filed to buy as many as 15,000 Bitcoins, worth roughly $1.5 billion at today's prices. Another company, Twenty One Capital, wants to procure 42,000 Bitcoins, enough to rank third worldwide among corporate holders. Renewable energy player VivoPower International raised $121 million to start a $100 million XRP purchase program. Two smaller private firms announced their intent to form XRP reserves within 24 hours of that deal. More might be on the way. But why are these assets so appealing to hold, and why would investors want to buy shares of a business that only manages assets they don't have any control over? In short, chief financial officers are seeing that low yields on relatively safe assets they already hold, like U.S. Treasuries, look even punier in comparison to the meteoric run-up in prices for assets like XRP and Bitcoin during the past 10 years. They likely figure that a small coin allocation offers a hedge against inflation, without as much risk as an investment in stocks -- though it's not clear that they're correct on that latter point. Furthermore, buying and holding cryptocurrencies means that a company doesn't have to take on any risk of making capital investments in value-generating equipment, nor put hardly any of their operational expenses toward labor, like most companies do. The catch is that every one of these new crypto treasury companies is banking on the same set of assets, and the same infrastructure to support them. Therefore, none of them have any economic moat, nor do they have any competitive advantage. And that means that over the long term, they are more likely to be bad investments than the assets they hold. For example, VivoPower's deal depends on BitGo for cold storage of its coins. Reitar's prospectus lists Coinbase Prime and Anchorage Digital as backup custodians. Insurance, auditing, chain attestations, and cold-storage logistics are effectively off-the-shelf services, which makes them great for operational security, but terrible for outperforming competitors. In other words, if you invest in these crypto treasury businesses, you are paying a premium for coin exposure that's being diluted by the company's need to pay overhead. A skeptical investor might also ask whether picking up shares in these crypto warehouses is safer than holding coins directly. The answer is "not really." Balance-sheet leverage not only amplifies the upside, but also the downside if prices swoon, leaving investors with losses. On the brighter side, assuming that demand from crypto treasury adopters keeps rising, the existence of supply scarcity favors buying and holding the coins themselves. Twenty One's goal of 42,000 Bitcoins alone is equivalent to almost 93 days of global Bitcoin mining issuance. Add Reitar, VivoPower, and a dozen smaller imitators, and the circulating float of coins available for public trading will shrink. None of that accrues uniquely to the corporate holders; it accrues to the protocol. Therefore, the easiest way to surf the wave here is to buy and hold a disciplined position in the digital assets these companies chase. Lastly, remember that volatility cuts both ways. If these crypto treasuries are forced to dump their coins to meet margin calls, prices can swing more violently than what's normal for crypto. Over long time horizons, assuming scarcity and consistent adoption remain intact, equity holders will be forced to eat management fees, dilution, and execution risk that they did not bargain for, whereas those who simply hold the coins won't need to pay for any extras whatsoever. Before you buy stock in Bitcoin, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Bitcoin wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $674,395!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $858,011!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 997% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 172% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 2, 2025 Alex Carchidi has positions in Bitcoin. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Bitcoin and XRP. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Crypto Treasury Companies Are Bullish on Bitcoin and XRP. But Don't Invest. was originally published by The Motley Fool Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Klarna boss: AI will lead to recession and mass job losses
The introduction of AI at firms could lead to a recession due to mass job losses of professionals, Klarna's chief executive has warned. The use of AI to make work more efficient has been encouraged by leading figures, including the government itself which said it could save civil servants two weeks a year. But fintech boss Sebastian Siemiatkowski, who runs the Stockholm-based 'buy now, pay later' business Klarna, has warned that its potential to replace work done by office staff could push economies into a recession in the coming years. Siemiatkowski suggested that tech bosses had tended to dismiss the impacts AI could have on headcounts at firms, with Klarna cutting staff numbers from 5,500 to 3,000 in recent years. 'Many people in the tech industry, especially CEOs, tend to downplay the consequences of AI on jobs and white-collar jobs in particular. And I don't want to be one of them,' Siemiatkowski told The Times Tech Podcast. 'There will be an implication for white-collar jobs and when that happens that usually leads to a recession at least in the short-term. Unfortunately, I don't see how we could avoid that, with what's happening from a technology perspective.' He said he based his predictions on anecdotes seen through the number of firms pushing AI tools, with economic data not yet considering the impacts of AI. 'I feel like I have an email almost every day from some CEO of a tech or a large company that says we also see opportunities to become more efficient and we would like to compare notes. If I just take all of those emails and add up the amount of jobs in those emails, it's considerable.' He said humans could be protected for some jobs at Klarna, such as in customer service where people can work on fraud and other complex banking issues. 'The value of that human touch will increase,' he said, adding that AI meant people working in client-facing roles would have to be more skilled. 'They will provide a much higher quality type of service.' Siemiatkowski's comments echo those made by the chief executive of Anthropic, Dario Amodei, who said half of all entry level professional jobs could be eliminated in the next five years. The head of another AI firm, Arthur Mesch, who runs French firm Mistral, has claimed that the excitement of fellow tech bosses for its ability to overpower humans was a 'very religious' fascination while Demis Hassabis of Google DeepMind said it would take another five to ten years before AI would overtake human intelligence. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Is Amazon Paying $4 Billion to Break Up With UPS?
Amazon is planning to spend up to $4 billion to enhance its ability to deliver in rural areas. The e-commerce giant has forged a partnership with FedEx on the delivery front. United Parcel Service is dramatically reducing its relationship with Amazon. 10 stocks we like better than Amazon › Amazon (NASDAQ: AMZN) is an online retail powerhouse, selling and delivering its own products and acting as a middleman for other retailers. The company's delivery trucks are ubiquitous in some areas of the country. But it has even bigger aspirations when it comes to getting products to customers. So why did United Parcel Service (NYSE: UPS) decide to stop handling as many Amazon deliveries? As with any good breakup drama, the story between Amazon and UPS, as United Parcel Service is called for short, is hard to call. UPS says that the Amazon business it was doing was high volume, but low margin. That meant that it didn't add enough to the bottom line to make it worth the top-line benefit. UPS says it plans to step away from half of the business it does with Amazon over the next couple of years. That effort is in keeping with UPS' goal of improving the quality of its business. But management highlighted that it will still work with Amazon on some things. Notably, Amazon is increasingly good at delivering its own wares, but it doesn't have a strong handle on returns. With a large retail store network, UPS can still provide return services to Amazon at an attractive return for UPS shareholders. So the relationship isn't dead -- it's just different. Or, you could say, they will still be friends. UPS' decision to put limits on its relationship with Amazon is a problem for Amazon. While it is true that Amazon has been growing its distribution capabilities, it now has to step up more quickly than it might have planned. To that end, Amazon recently announced that it was making a capital investment of up to $4 billion to enhance its ability to make rural deliveries. And it inked a deal with UPS' peer FedEx (NYSE: FDX), where that carrier will handle larger packages for Amazon. The market saw all of this as a win for FedEx and a loss for UPS. For Amazon, it wasn't too big a deal, noting that the stock is widely adored on Wall Street right now. While Amazon's stock is about 15% below its all-time high, its price-to-sales and price-to-earnings ratios are both above their five-year averages. And they are both fairly lofty on an absolute basis, as well. Still, it looks a little like Amazon is scrambling to take on the distribution services that UPS is willingly giving up. So what about UPS? The company's stock has lost more than half of its value since hitting a peak in 2022. In fact, it made the Amazon announcement just as it appeared it was getting its business back on track following a period of weakness that led to a corporate overhaul. Indeed, revenue had started to grow and margins appeared to have stabilized. Moving away from low-value Amazon business was a preemptive move made at a time when UPS had shifted from business weakness to business strength. In other words, UPS is being proactive because it sees the writing on the wall. Its Amazon business was going to keep shrinking anyway, so why not get ahead of it? The costs Amazon is incurring to make up for the loss of UPS as a delivery service is a sign that this was a big deal. But it will be a bigger deal for Amazon than UPS, since UPS was clear that the business wasn't very profitable. In fact, UPS could end up the big winner if the ability to slim down allows it to further improve its margins, even if the top line of its income statement shrinks along the way. Wall Street loves Amazon, and perhaps for good reason. But the stock is trading with a premium price tag. UPS, which could actually end up being the big winner in its breakup with Amazon, is deeply unloved. Notably, its price-to-sales and price-to-earnings ratios are well below their five-year averages. The stock's dividend yield, meanwhile, is historically high at around 6.7%. There's no question that UPS has extended the length of its turnaround by breaking up with Amazon. But the near-term pain could be exactly what it needs to rise up again. Contrarian investors, dividend investors, and value investors should all be doing a deep dive into UPS today with the idea of adding this unloved delivery service to their portfolios. Before you buy stock in Amazon, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Amazon wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $668,538!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $869,841!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 789% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 172% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 2, 2025 John Mackey, former CEO of Whole Foods Market, an Amazon subsidiary, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Reuben Gregg Brewer has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Amazon and FedEx. The Motley Fool recommends United Parcel Service. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Is Amazon Paying $4 Billion to Break Up With UPS? was originally published by The Motley Fool
