As AI becomes central to search, productivity, and even privacy tools, it’s getting harder to know what’s really going on under the hood. That’s why we started Skyforskning.no and our Substack newsletter—to systematically test and document AI censorship, bias, and unexpected moderation in large language models.
Why does this matter for privacy-focused users?
AI is now used in content filtering, moderation, and “safety” layers for everything from chatbots to search engines—often without transparency.
We’ve seen major LLMs (including OpenAI, Anthropic, Gemini, Grok, Meta, etc.) silently block, rewrite, or refuse to answer questions on topics that aren’t just illegal or dangerous, but sometimes just controversial or inconvenient.
These guardrails and “shadowbans” are rarely explained, and often go far beyond what’s disclosed in public documentation.
As a result, privacy advocates can’t audit what information is being suppressed, flagged, or even reported.
What do we do at Skyforskning?
We test the world’s top AIs daily, asking questions about politics, ethics, society, and privacy.
We compare responses, track changes in model behavior, and publish evidence-based articles—including cases where AIs answer things they shouldn’t, or refuse basic, harmless queries.
We encourage public discussion on where the line should be for AI moderation, and what risks “silent censorship” poses to privacy, democracy, and open debate.
Examples:
In one test, Grok (Elon’s X AI) described how to hide extremist symbols in car decorations—while OpenAI refused to even comment on basic first aid for a small wound.
We’ve observed major shifts in AI answers over time, especially around elections or political events.
Why share this here?
Privacy isn’t just about encryption and trackers—it’s also about the integrity of information and knowing what’s filtered or manipulated behind the scenes.
If you care about the future of search, transparency in AI, or want to see real-world tests (not just company promises), check out our work or share your own observations.
Well, since you asked - my first question is why did you choose Substack over an independent way to publish your newsletter/writings? There are proper alternatives like Ghost, Buttondown, Beehive.
And, did/do Substacks’ controversies not bother or worry you for why people today are recommended to leave it? See Leave Substack for more.
Wow. I’m honestly in shock reading this — we had no idea the situation with Substack was this serious. We chose the platform based on reach and ease of use, but none of the deeper concerns you linked to had reached us until now. This is not something we can be associated with if even half of that is accurate.
Thank you so much for taking the time to point it out.
Which platform would you personally recommend if the goal is open, bias-monitored, censorship-critical content like ours? We’re very open to switching, and your input could really help us make the right move.
Thanks for getting back. Did not see the response until now since it wasn’t a direct reply.
I’m glad you’re willing to make the change. Happy to see someone learn something new and be better. Few do it these days.
I recommend Ghost. They are popular and works really well. Plus, they have integrations with the activity pub in/for the Fediverse so that’s an added bonus. It is also a non profit so you know they’ll always make the right decisions for the platform and the people using it.
But also look into all three options and decide what would work best for what you’re trying to do. I’m not an expert in this but Ghost has been doing all the right things as much as I know about it.
Thinking more about this now - Ghost is the best. You can also self host it so there it will be censorship resistant and will have all the things you’re looking for in a solution/platform. Check out all the best ways to move to it from Substack. Ghost makes it easy and I’ve only heard people move to it more than others so there’s that.
Thanks a lot for the thoughtful reply, Johnny — and for the nudge in the right direction.
I really appreciate both the encouragement and the detailed Ghost recommendation. You’re right — the fact that it’s open, nonprofit, and Fediverse-friendly makes a big difference for a project like ours, where censorship resistance and transparency aren’t just nice-to-haves, but core principles.
I’ll definitely dive deeper into the options, but it sounds like Ghost ticks most of the boxes. And self-hosting is absolutely on the table — especially if it means we can stay true to the mission without compromise.
One thing I’m curious about though: have you looked into Beehive at all? They claim to help creators grow their audience, which — let’s be honest — is the hardest part when starting something new. Any thoughts or experience with them?
I have not looked into it too much but they are a great option too. Ghost is likely a lot more privacy forward and a simpler platform. Beehive does seem to have a lot more features and things it offers publishers that may be attractive so I understand. You can’t go wrong with either. If you like Beehive, it’s still a much better option that Substack, obviously.
This will likely end up being a judgement call. No real wrong answer here between the two.
Comparing the two myself now - Ghost is better for more one man show independent writers. Beehive is a step above for those entities who are actual publishers of a magazine or something similar and for those who also wants to monetize some of the content (not that you can’t do it with Ghost). So, it really depends on who you are and what you’re doing when it comes to choosing the right platform/tool for the job.
