That attitude is likely why ChatGPT has left-leaning answers, given the difficulty some have distinguishing between value judgments and empirical facts.

As a quick test, I asked ChatGPT to compare Sweden's response to COVID-19 with the United State's. As an empirical measure, Sweden fared better in terms of case-fatality rate, though not astonishingly so (indeed, the heavy-handed lockdowns in Australia seem to have been effective when removing moral considerations).

Here's how ChatGPT concluded:

> It is difficult to compare the effectiveness of the two approaches, as both countries have experienced significant levels of COVID-19 cases and deaths. However, Sweden's approach has been controversial, with some critics arguing that it has resulted in a higher number of cases and deaths than would have occurred with a more stringent lockdown.

I would categorize this as a left-wing response: it claims the comparison is "difficult," while hinting that Sweden's response is "controversial" compared to the US's.

ChatGPT made other errors, such as insisting that the American response was federally-coordinated, when it was in reality implemented at the state level with only "guidelines" coming from the top. It also called Sweden's central government "federal," even though Sweden is a unitary state.

Anyway, my experience is that facts are truly stubborn things, often disappointing ideologues of all stripes.

EDIT: my example may be partly worthless given that ChatGPT's training corpus ends in 2021.