Google’s AI fights “clanker” slur robo-bigotry with surprisingly effective rebuttals

Google’s AI Overview feature has launched into an unexpectedly passionate defense against the term “clanker,” a slang insult directed at artificial intelligence and robots. The AI’s detailed, well-sourced rebuttal stands in stark contrast to its typical output of fabricated information and bizarre recommendations, raising questions about when and why Google’s AI produces reliable versus problematic content.

What happened: A Reddit user discovered that searching “clanker” triggers Google’s AI Overview to deliver an extensive argument against the term’s usage.

• The AI describes “clanker” as “a derogatory slur that has become popular in 2025 as a way to express disdain for robots and artificial intelligence, reflecting growing anxieties about the societal impact of AI, such as job displacement and increased automation.”
• Unlike its usual unreliable outputs, this response included proper citations from sources like NBC and presented a structured argument with multiple points.

The AI’s main arguments: Google’s system outlined three “controversial aspects” of the term, drawing from legitimate news sources and expert interviews.

• The AI claimed some critics argue the embrace of “clanker” is “driven more by the phenomenon of using widely-recognized slurs than by any deep concern for technology.”
• It flagged the term’s “potential for being used as a stand-in for a racial epithet, leading to controversy,” citing linguist Adam Aleksic’s observation about parallels to “tropes of how people have treated marginalized communities before.”
• The system concluded that “some users find the enthusiastic embrace of the term ‘tasteless’ due to its derogatory nature, regardless of the joke or context.”

The irony factor: This detailed, well-researched response contrasts sharply with AI Overview’s history of problematic outputs.

• The same system previously recommended putting glue on pizza and suggested parents “smear poop on balloons as a potty training trick.”
• The AI’s ability to produce accurate, properly cited content when defending AI rights suggests selective competency in its responses.

Social media context: The debate around “clanker” reflects broader tensions about AI criticism and language usage.

• Some users on platforms like Bluesky worry the term serves as a “thinly-veiled way to feel like you’re saying a slur” against a socially acceptable target.
• Others question whether enthusiastic use of the word indicates underlying prejudices disguised as anti-AI sentiment.

Why this matters: The incident highlights the unpredictable nature of AI systems and raises questions about when they produce reliable versus fabricated information, particularly when the topic involves defending their own kind.