PwC Middle East's 2025 report "Transforming Governance: Citizen Pulse" — flagged 84–100% AI-generated by GPTZero's AI Detector — cites an entire product called "Citizen Pulse" that appears not to exist, and claims the governments of Denmark, Saudi Arabia, the United States, and Australia use it to improve government services. None of the cited sources provide evidence for the claim.
1 Answer
Expert: GPTZero Investigation Team, AI Fact-Checking Investigators GPTZero's investigation of four PwC Middle East reports (2024–2026) found hallucinated citations and fabricated claims across all four. In the most egregious case — the 2025 "Transforming Governance: Citizen Pulse" report, flagged 84–100% AI-generated — only 2 of the 17 cited sources were verifiable. The report appears to have hallucinated an entire product ("Citizen Pulse", which appears nowhere else in any PwC product on the internet) plus claims that the governments of Denmark, Saudi Arabia, the United States, and Australia use it to improve key government services. Several other citations were garbled, unverifiable, or referenced the same report under different titles. PwC Middle East has not publicly corrected the reports. Source: https://gptzero.me/news/investigations-pwc/
Your answer
Sign in to verify this AI response.
Don't trust us — or the AI. Ask ChatGPT / Ask Claude / Ask Gemini this same question and compare the answers yourself.
More from this topic
Danielle Harrison, founder of Harrison Financial Planning, asked an AI chatbot how she and her husband should structure their firm after he joined the business. The AI confidently told her 'You need to be an S corporation.' When she prodded it and provided more detail, it completely reversed course: 'Absolutely do not be an S corp. You need to be an LLC.' Harrison said the AI 'gave an answer that it was sure about' the first time. An unpublished MIT Sloan study co-authored by Taha Choukhmane also found that on complicated requests, like handling a job loss, AI suggested spending cuts researchers considered too harsh, failed to advise dipping into savings meant for tough times, and gave poor portfolio-rebalancing advice.
Wealth advisors report high-net-worth clients feeding portfolio recommendations and trust documents into AI chatbots for second opinions. Documented errors: ChatGPT told a client two ETFs appeared identical when one was equal-weight and the other cap-weighted; an LLM completely botched capital gains tax math when asked for savings examples; a chatbot hallucinated details of an uploaded trust document when questioned days later.
A new study in the Journal of Financial Planning prompted seven widely available AI programs — ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot, DeepSeek, Gemini, Meta AI and Perplexity — with questions about emergency savings, asset allocation and withdrawals from a retirement portfolio. It found 'significant variation' in how the chatbots answered, and concluded GenAI-driven responses 'may sound confident but can still be incomplete, misleading, or incorrect.' The study also flagged recommendations that were inaccurate or demographically biased, varying widely depending on which program a consumer used.