But kudos to the effort and the idea of keeping news small is a most noble cause
Also, the second to last least significant article seems to be incorrectly categorized: "Regenerative medicine has come a long way, baby"
Which is actually a serious look back at the advancements over the last quarter century, hardly deserving the second to last position.
It seems like ChatGPT is ranking them not based on actual content significance but presumed significance of the headline. (Which would also make sense technically as ~1200 headlines is about the max context length of GPT-4).
I don't think it's fair, I think ChatGPT hallucinated that it's a tabloid.
Not sure how to fix this. I don't want to adjust sources credibility manually, that will introduce too much bias. My hope is that OpenAI will update ChatGPT with newer data and I could rerun the credibility evaluation.
So it's exceedingly unlikely the actual content, beyond the headline, is processed if your using the ChatGPT version.