Source A
5 custom ChatGPT instructions I use to get better AI results - faster
zdnet.com
https://www.zdnet.com/article/custom-chatgpt-instructions-better-ai-results-faster/
Comparison
Winner: Tie
Both sources show similar manipulation risk. Compare factual evidence directly.
Source B
Get more out of ChatGPT: 5 smart tricks to get better results| Technology News
hindustantimes.com
https://www.hindustantimes.com/technology/get-more-out-of-chatgpt-5-smart-tricks-to-get-better-results-101751875493367.html
Topics
Instant verdict
Less biased source: Source B
More emotional framing: Source A
More one-sided framing: Tie
Weaker evidence quality: Tie
More manipulative overall: Tie
Narrative conflict
Source A main narrative
Screenshot by David Gewirtz/ZDNETSo, I can tell the AI something like, "Back in ID 031 you said blah-blah.
Source B main narrative
ELI5 - Explain Like I'm 5This is something that you can actually write before a query, and the chatbot will give you a simple answer that is going to be really easy to understand.
Conflict summary
Stance contrast: Screenshot by David Gewirtz/ZDNETSo, I can tell the AI something like, "Back in ID 031 you said blah-blah. Alternative framing: ELI5 - Explain Like I'm 5This is something that you can actually write before a query, and the chatbot will give you a simple answer that is going to be really easy to understand.
Source A stance
Screenshot by David Gewirtz/ZDNETSo, I can tell the AI something like, "Back in ID 031 you said blah-blah.
Stance confidence: 69%
Source B stance
ELI5 - Explain Like I'm 5This is something that you can actually write before a query, and the chatbot will give you a simple answer that is going to be really easy to understand.
Stance confidence: 53%
Central stance contrast
Stance contrast: Screenshot by David Gewirtz/ZDNETSo, I can tell the AI something like, "Back in ID 031 you said blah-blah. Alternative framing: ELI5 - Explain Like I'm 5This is something that you can actually write before a query, and the chatbot will give you a simple answer that is going to be really easy to understand.
Why this pair fits comparison
- Candidate type: Closest similar
- Comparison quality: 45%
- Event overlap score: 20%
- Contrast score: 65%
- Contrast strength: Moderate comparison
- Stance contrast strength: High
- Event overlap: Event overlap is weak. Overlap is inferred from broader contextual signals.
- Contrast signal: Interpretive contrast is visible, but event linkage is moderate: verify against primary sources.
- Stronger comparison suggestion: You can likely strengthen this comparison: open conflict-mode similar search and review alternative angles.
- Use stronger suggestion
Key claims and evidence
Key claims in source A
- Screenshot by David Gewirtz/ZDNETSo, I can tell the AI something like, "Back in ID 031 you said blah-blah.
- Now, when I paste in a longer prompt, it will just respond with a simple statement saying it's waiting for further instructions.
- Avoid tables that will be too wide for the page to be read.
- Try this surprising trick, researchers sayYour custom instructions will need to be fairly short, which gives ChatGPT more wiggle room.
Key claims in source B
- ELI5 - Explain Like I'm 5This is something that you can actually write before a query, and the chatbot will give you a simple answer that is going to be really easy to understand.
- So, if you want an image that should look a certain way, you can describe it in rough language to the chatbot and tell it to come up with a prompt.
- Jargonise - Makes Your Writing SophisticatedJust as ELI5 simplifies things for you, "jargonise" can actually make your text sound more sophisticated and professional.
- AI tools such as ChatGPT and Google Gemini have become an integral part of many people's lives.
Text evidence
Evidence from source A
-
key claim
Screenshot by David Gewirtz/ZDNETSo, I can tell the AI something like, "Back in ID 031 you said blah-blah.
A key claim that anchors the narrative framing.
-
key claim
Now, when I paste in a longer prompt, it will just respond with a simple statement saying it's waiting for further instructions.
A key claim that anchors the narrative framing.
-
causal claim
Giving each response an ID In all seriousness, because you can instruct the AI to add text to every response, you can use the single most useful custom instruction I've found.
Cause-effect claim shaping how events are explained.
Evidence from source B
-
key claim
ELI5 - Explain Like I'm 5This is something that you can actually write before a query, and the chatbot will give you a simple answer that is going to be really easy to understand.
A key claim that anchors the narrative framing.
-
key claim
So, if you want an image that should look a certain way, you can describe it in rough language to the chatbot and tell it to come up with a prompt.
A key claim that anchors the narrative framing.
Bias/manipulation evidence
No concise text evidence snippets were extracted for this section yet.
How score signals are formed
Bias score signal
Bias signal combines framing pressure, emotional wording, selective emphasis, and one-sided narrative markers.
Emotionality signal
Emotionality rises when evidence contains emotionally loaded wording and evaluative labels.
One-sidedness signal
One-sidedness rises when one frame dominates and alternative interpretations are weakly represented.
Evidence strength signal
Evidence strength rises with concrete claims, attributed statements, and verifiable contextual support.
Source A
28%
emotionality: 31 · one-sidedness: 30
Detected in Source A
framing effect
Source B
26%
emotionality: 25 · one-sidedness: 30
Detected in Source B
framing effect
Metrics
Framing differences
- Source A emotionality: 31/100 vs Source B: 25/100
- Source A one-sidedness: 30/100 vs Source B: 30/100
- Stance contrast: Screenshot by David Gewirtz/ZDNETSo, I can tell the AI something like, "Back in ID 031 you said blah-blah. Alternative framing: ELI5 - Explain Like I'm 5This is something that you can actually write before a query, and the chatbot will give you a simple answer that is going to be really easy to understand.
Possible omitted/downplayed context
- Review which economic and policy factors each source keeps outside focus.
- Check whether alternative explanations are acknowledged.