"A big lie" or große Lüge is a propaganda tactic described by Adolf Hilter in his book Mein Kampf (1925) in which a distortion or lie is continually repeated until people believe it to be true.

It's clear that in the Digital Age of Information that "infotainment" is more commonplace than news that is objective and unbiased. We are currently living in an era of a media oligarchy when just a handful of companies own the majority of the market. It's also been said that 90% of the U.S. media is controlled by 6 media giants, giving us the illusion of choice. That is why as a citizen in our global world that we have to take into account sources of information that aren't part of the mainstream media, and not merely click and share curated news feed from our social networks.

In the U.S., there is also a very troubling situation in development as the U.S. Federal Communications Commission chairman recently announced plans to repeal net neutrality. 
​

The U.S. Federal Commission chairman Ajit Pai wants to repeal net neutrality, in which one of the potential effects would be to give more power to internet service providers (ISPs) to charge websites and companies like Google and Netflix for faster internet connection. Repealing net neutrality would also give power to ISPs to potentially block sites like Skype and other messaging apps that compete with their services. In addition, ISPs could also arbitrarily block sites that advocate social issues that are contrary to their financial interests. Critics say that repealing net neutrality will result in a more expensive web and mobile service that favours ISPs and will ultimately change the user experience so that the ISPs will be able to filter or block any content they don't want people to have access to.

Net Neutrality is the principle that internet service providers and governments regulating the Internet should treat all data on the internet the same, not discriminating or charging differentially by user, content, website, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or mode of communication. Without net neutrality, it is possible for internet service providers to slow down connections to certain websites or services, therefore being able to limit connections to sites based on their own preferences or blocking information to users.

So, what is a citizen to do in the Digital Era of the Information Age?

I had a conversation with Craig Newmark, Founder and Chairman of Craigslist, over email to discuss various topics in fact-checking and the role of the media and social networks in news curation.

I have known Craig since 2008, when he was one of the panelists on the new media bi-coastal San Francisco-New York panel that I had organised and co-produced for the Producers Guild of America.
​

Craig Newmark, Founder and Chairman of Craigslist, and Founder of the Craig Newmark Foundation and Craig Newmark Philanthropic Fund.

Craig has been a web pioneer, philanthropist, and one of America's most recognised "nerds." He was named "Nerd-in-Residence" by the Department of Veterans Affairs' Center for Innovation in recognition of his volunteer work with the department to enhance services to veterans and military families. Craig also launched the Craig Newmark Foundation last year to promote charitable and educational causes with a focus on consumer protection, education, govt transparency, vote protection, women in technology and fact-checking in the news amongst many other initiatives.

Recently, the Craig Newmark Foundation gave $1 million to the Poynter Institute to develop a 5-year programme that focuses on the practices of verification, fact-checking and accountability in journalism.

"I'm a news consumer, and just want news that I can trust. A trustworthy press is the immune system of democracy." - Craig Newmark
​
​As a bit of background, can you describe how you started Craigslist and the various philanthropic organisations that you have helped launch?

Craig: I guess Craigslist started in two phases, from this perspective: Early '95, I decided to give back to the early Internet community that gave me so much. So, I started a mailing list about arts and tech events that I heard about. It spread, word of mouth, that worked well, slow, steady growth. Most notably, when I had to name the list, I was going to call it "sf-events", since as an old school nerd, I'm very literal. Friends told me that I'd inadvertently created a brand, which they called "Craigslist." They were right, not hard, since I didn't know what a brand was.
​
End of '99, trying to run operations with volunteers, people told me it was failing, and I needed to get serious and make it a real company. Big decision: should I follow the advice of Silicon Valley bankers and VCs, monetize, and maybe make billions, or should I follow my own nerd values, and hope to "do well by doing good." I did the latter, not out of altruism, it just felt like the right thing.
Never launched anything philanthropic before then, though sometimes supportive at the beginning of a new org. Mostly, I find orgs that are really good at something I believe in, and support them with social media skills and efforts, and cash.

Craig Newmark at the Wikipedia headquarters in San Francisco, where he was given a memorial latrine after donating $1 million through his Craig Newmark Philanthropic Fund last year.

What do you think about those situations in which editors and journalists are pressurised to write spin stories that are favourable to their advertisers or media owners? What do you think would be an effective method to remedy those kinds of ulterior motives that are never disclosed?

Craig: There are multiple situations involved, mostly news orgs which try to act in good faith, and they generally do a good job separating editorial and business operations. On the other hand, some news orgs were created to do nothing but spin and deception, and I'm trying to the help the news industry learn how to safely call BS on them.

I'm involved mostly in funding nonprofit journalism, and following the ethical guidelines proposed by the American Press Institute. Mostly, it's about transparency and "do no harm." That's harder than it sounds.

"Some news orgs were created to do nothing but spin and deception, and I'm trying to the help the news industry learn how to safely call BS on them." - Craig Newmark

Journalists used to be the checks-and-balances of the US govt in the era of our Founding Fathers, but has evolved into a medium to control public opinion. As William Randolph Hearst said in 1897, "You furnish the pictures, and I'll furnish the war." How can citizens of our Digital Age become aware of the misinformation campaigns in the media? (e.g., NY Times front page stories in support of the Iraq War through undisclosed "sources" in the months leading up to the Iraq War)

Craig: The checks-and-balances thing has also been good, but rarely that effective. I feel that by supporting trustworthy, good-faith journalism, that'll lead to a news industry that will provide consistently effective checks-and-balances...Even news orgs which operate in good faith make mistakes, like the lead up to the Iraq war.
​
I do feel that we're seeing a renewal of trustworthy journalism, leading to much more truthful news operations, but it'll take a while.
​

​Craig Newmark on the San Francisco Muni; with a dedicated and humble attitude, Craig spends his time focused on customer service at Craigslist and philanthropic causes.

Which are your favourite or trusted fact-checking agencies and news sites? How can companies like these be able to survive without advertising revenue, govt support or endorsements in an era of corporativism?

Craig: For fact checking, it starts with the Poynter Institute International Fact Checking Network, with Politifact and Snopes leading in the US. For trustworthy news, take a look at ProPublica, Consumer Reports, and the Center for Investigative Reporting.

What do you think are positives and negatives about social networks curating news for us? Do you think all the fake news that surfaced as part of curated news content on Facebook after the November Presidential election last year skewed the votes in favour of Donald Trump? How can people who use social media be better equipped to filter fake news content?

Craig: I don't think the platforms should curate for us. What's happening is that good faith journalists and orgs are providing the means by which we curate our own news sources and that the platforms follow that. It's just a start, lots more to come, coordinated by the News Integrity Initiative via the CUNY graduate school of journalism.

"I don't think [social media] platforms should curate [the news] for us." - Craig Newmark

As a responsible citizen in the Digital and Information Age, what are some actions we can take?

Craig: Track the work of the News Integrity Initiative. At some point, it'll help new orgs signal their commitment to good faith reporting, backed up by fact checkers who'll call BS as needed. Social media platforms might help out by facilitating reader selection, maybe specifying only news sources that follow through with commitments to behave ethically and to correct mistakes.
​

​Craig Newmark outside one of his favourite cafés in San Francisco, where he is greeted by furry fans.

What is your view on agencies that pay groups to write positive reviews or inundate discussion forums with their paid views on a certain topic to sway public opinion, otherwise known as "shills"? This has been found to be paid reviews of a product or service on eCommerce sites like Amazon and Yelp and moves even further to sites like reddit and many others to manipulate public opinion.

One of the articles from the Snowden archives describes how western intelligence agencies are attempting to manipulate and control online discourse with extreme tactics of deception and reputation destruction. How can citizens be aware of these sorts of actions and protect themselves from these kinds of subversive tactics to sway public opinion?

Craig: If labelled properly, that helps, and even better, whatever platform one uses should allow the reader to mute the display of such writing...About seven years ago I became the target of a rather unpleasant fake news attack. After some years, I remembered a Sunday School lesson: better to light a candle than to curse the darkness. In a way, that's motivated my considerable involvement in helping good-faith, trustworthy journalism.

"About seven years ago I became the target of a rather unpleasant fake news attack. After some years, I remembered a Sunday School lesson: better to light a candle than to curse the darkness. " - Craig Newmark

How do you think journalism will evolve in the next decade?

Craig: I feel that the fact checking networks, in context of the News Integrity Initiative, will make it reasonably easy to find trustworthy news...It's a work in progress, but moving fast.
​

Craig Newmark with his rescued pigeons, Margaret and Snow.

As one of the early entrepreneurs who has advocated for fact-checking in the news, Craig has said before that fact-checking should be part of how news organisations earn trust, however, due to the time-consuming nature of fact-checking itself, sometimes this isn't a viable possibility when news often moves at lightning speed. I think though that the general consensus is that fact-checking should be a collective activity - and reading from sources with disclosed corporate, sponsorship and advertising interests would give more confidence to how we are able to interpret information.

"I do think the biggest problem newspapers have is loss of trust, and I feel that's a result of failure to speak truth to power and the failure to consistently practice journalistic ethics."
- Craig Newmark

Craig also serves on the board of directors of companies such as Girls Who Code, VetsInTech, Poynter Foundation and the Board of Overseers at the Columbia Journalism Review. A philanthropist at heart, he has given Wikipedia $1 million through his Philanthropic Fund, donated $1 million to ProPublica through the Craig Newmark Foundation and is a major funder of the News Integrity Initiative at the CUNY School of Journalism amongst many other organisations he has supported. He enjoys bird-watching, squirrel-watching, science fiction and can be found at cafés around San Francisco.



​By Sierra Choi

Moses lead his enslaved people towards freedom in the Exodus in both Biblical and Hebrew texts.

Strangely, all these events seem to have a kind of similar cohesion and natural correlation to each other. So who are America's significant heroes, the Jesus, Moses and Muhammeds, the great leaders who changed the lives of their people for the better?

When I think of great American leaders on this day in April, two people immediately come to mind.

"I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity." -President Dwight D. Eisenhower
​

President Dwight D. Eisenhower (1890-1969)

President Dwight D. Eisenhower was a journalist, five-star military General and the 34th President of the United States. After living through World War II, he saw the best and worst of humanity and realised that peace and negotiation were more powerful tactics than the continual funding of the military industrial complex. President Eisenhower established NASA, brokered the peace deal with Korea after President Truman had left Korea in ruins and put an end to McCarthyism - an era in which America's artists, writers, producers and many other critics of the U.S. government had been targetted and blacklisted under Senator Joseph McCarthy.
​

A typical classroom during the Eisenhower Era in the 1950s. President Eisenhower established the National Defense Education Act and provided funding for many subjects including science, math, foreign language education, African studies and graduate fellowships.

During President Eisenhower's era, there was considerable economic prosperity. American families living during that era could live comfortably under one income, and they had job security. Public education was primarily free and President Eisenhower established the National Defense Education Act, which provided funding for science and foreign language education, in addition to supporting graduate fellowships to increase the number of graduate-level professionals and university professors. However, at the end of his term, President Eisenhower warned against the continual support and building of the military industrial complex.

"We must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex." -President Dwight D. Eisenhower
​

​America's current total military spending is nearly twice its GDP.

President Eisenhower believed that out-of-control military spending will "bankrupt" the nation and instill an atmosphere of fear, where people could lose their civil liberties, something he dismantled when govt officials under President Truman began targetting American civilians, primarily artists, writers and journalists who criticised the government during the McCarthy Era. President Eisenhower believed that military spending will not only lead to economic decline, but also towards a kind of moral bankruptcy.
​

General Douglas MacArthur (1880-1964)

Another great American leader who also immediately comes to mind in this month of April was also a five-star military General: Douglas MacArthur. He too, understood the nature of war and lived through both World War I and World War II to believe that the ultimate goal of the United States was to engage in diplomacy and preserve the cultural identity of the people of other nations during an era in which President Truman and his advisers were quick to launch nuclear weapons.

"The soldier above all others prays for peace, for it is the soldier who must suffer and bear the deepest wounds and scars of war." -General Douglas MacArthur

His disagreements with President Truman, a controversial figure who many historians and academics have criticised as having launched the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki whilst Japan was actively seeking peace and already sought to surrender. President Truman would lead the United States towards a path of "might is right" of jailing innocent civilians under his "loyalty program"; testing the atomic bomb, consequently killing hundreds of thousands of civilians for the purposes to further the goals of the military industrial complex.​
​

The city of Hiroshima in ruins after President Truman detonated the first ever atomic bomb. At the time, President Dwight D. Eisenhower (who was an active military General) said: "The Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing ... I hated to see our country be the first to use such a weapon." (From Eisenhower's memoirs: The White House Years: Mandate for Change, 1953-1956). Both President Eisenhower and General MacArthur shared the same trajectory for peaceful resolutions.

General MacArthur came from a military family and became the U.S. army's youngest major general. After WWII, General MacArthur was in charge of the reforms in Japan, and he earned the nickname Gajin Shogun (foreign leader) and was the primary driver for protecting the Japanese Emperor from being indicted on war crimes, and instead lead his team and staff towards a peaceful occupation and rehabilitation of Japan, by preserving its cultural identity and history.
​
"Could I have but a line a century hence crediting a contribution to the advance of peace, I would gladly yield every honor which has been accorded me in war." -General Douglas MacArthur

General MacArthur also believed that during the Korean War, the people of Korea should be reunited - as it was their desire and their wish to do so. However, during the U.S. and Russian intervention to utilise Korea as a strategic, political access point to greater Asia, Korea had been divided in two - North and South, and left in perpetual chaos. General MacArthur's disagreement with President Truman to reunify the people of Korea lead directly to his early retirement.
​

General MacArthur (left) and President Truman (right). The two men did not get along.

What these two five-star military generals have taught us regarding American history is that the federal government's collaboration with an alliance of military contractors was most vulnerable to an abuse of power. President Eisenhower warned American citizens that only an "alert and knowledgeable citizenry" can counteract the military industrial complex with peaceful methods and goals.

"Our government has kept us in a perpetual state of fear - kept us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor - with the cry of grave national emergency." General Douglas MacArthur

When we examine our recent history - in regards to the Iraq War, Afghanistan, and currently our actions against Syria, we can see that what President Eisenhower and General MacArthur had warned of has indeed come to fruition.
​

​President Donald Trump playing golf on holiday in Florida. President Trump has never served in the military and received five deferments to avoid serving in the Vietnam War. Most members of the U.S. Congress and House of Representatives have also never served in the military and have little to no direct military experience yet have ratified multiple bills for the advent of war.

It is easy to declare war and launch missiles when one has never been in a war. It is easy for politicians who have mainly lead privileged lives to agree to more military funding and declare wars on other nations, to send drones to kill innocent citizens, to launch multi-million dollar Tomahawk cruise missiles with a trigger-happy finger from the comfort of a luxury office whilst sipping on wines after a catered lunch. However, great American leaders, and decorated military generals who did live through the atrocities of war know better, and that the way towards American economic prosperity, to make America Great Again, is through the diplomacy of peace, to invest in its people and education.

"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signified, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone; it is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children." -President Dwight D. Eisenhower

What kind of a nation ignores its youth, its elderly and the poor? What kind of a nation can't provide health care for its poorest members? What kind of a nation utilises the propaganda tactics of fear to launch wars on other nations? Those are not the actions of a great nation. America's great story has always been about finding a refuge from war, of seeking opportunity, of paving new paths from the tyranny of other governments. America's great story has always been about the belief that anyone, regardless of where they were born or what class they were born into, can attain their own version of success in a society where upward mobility is possible for everyone.

"America has evolved a model for this new free world... America has demonstrated that peoples of the East and peoples of the West may walk side by side in mutual respect and with mutual benefit." -General Douglas MacArthur

Zen Circles is an art form that is practiced amongst Zen Buddhists. It symbolizes absolute spiritual enlightenment, strength, elegance, the universe, and the void. It signifies the idea that everything comes full circle, in that what we choose to invest in will come back to us.

The way towards making America great again is to continue that story, through the building of bridges, roads, ports and transportation links, to help build new trading routes, and to actively pursue a path towards peace through diplomatic relations. The way to make America great again is through a new era of economic prosperity through open trade with other nations. The way to make America great again is through support of our innovators: the scientists, artists, writers, engineers, teachers and architects who want to build bridges and roads, not missiles.

​By Sierra Choi

Soft power is defined as a persuasive approach to international relations, typically involving the use of economic or cultural influence, especially in regards to media, education, history, art and literature.

In contrast, the United States has had a dominance in the last 50 years in its exertion of hard power, which is through the use of its military force and aggression towards nations that subvert its control of the fossil fuels industries. Much of the War on Terror and jihadist uprisings could be argued by analysts as a direct result against the U.S.'s seizing of the natural resources of other nations.

However, as the world's energy supply is diversifying and making a shift towards solar, hydroelectric nanotechnology and other forms of renewable energy, much of the foreign invasions into other nations have caused a severe rift in U.S. influence and soft power as the U.S. continues to outspend its military expenditures vs. its GDP (gross domestic product), many scholars and economists have commented on the eventual decline of the United States. Although the Obama administration had attempted to remedy the U.S. dependence on fossil fuels, much of those gains have been lost by the actions of the Trump administration, whose foreign policy is seemingly appearing more radical by the day as a warmongering nation.

Whilst the United States has been busily tearing down other nations and launching missiles, all in the name of "democracy," China has plans to do the complete opposite: to connect Europe, Asia and Africa with new trade routes named One Belt, One Road, a direct historical reference to its Silk Road from 120 BCE to the 15th century. The Silk Road was an ancient network of trade routes that were central to the cultural interaction through regions of the Asian continent to the Mediterranean Sea.
​

Silk Road 2.0: One Belt, One Road. China's plans to invest in the building of new ports, routes, high speed rail, energy lines and infrastructure to connect Asia, Europe and Africa could change global trade. To complement its physical route, China also plans to implement a digital silk road, to facilitate open trade between nations.

Through the Silk Road, and open trade between nations, it became one of the primary drivers of the rise of the first British Empire. Import and export of exotic spices, textiles, fine china, as well as the spread of religions, philosophies and various technologies were the main advances from the open network of the Silk Road.
​

Still Life Tea Set by Jean-Étienne Liotard (1702-1789). Chinese teacups and fine bone china were first introduced to the U.K. and Europe in the 17th century through international Old Maritime trade routes by the East India Company (a British company with head offices in Japan, China and India) and became a staple of upper class life until the 19th century Victorian era, when the British mass produced fine bone china to make it available for the general population during the Industrial Revolution when Britain led the way in manufacturing.

As China is gearing up to build Silk Road 2.0 in the contemporary era, this opportunity has immense potential for the rise of British soft power. Post-Brexit, the U.K. has found itself in a precarious position with no allies in Europe, followed by its diplomatic blunders in its control of Gibraltar. If trade agreements do not eventually materialise, it could very well be a hard transition for the U.K. as it attempts to re-establish its role in Europe and abroad if other nations only view the U.K. as simply, an ancillary, military sidekick of a declining economic power lead by the erratic and warmongering tactics of the Trump administration.
​

The first freight train from China to the UK made its first journey across 9 countries in Jan 2017.

Former PM David Cameron and former Chancellor George Osborne understood the future ramifications of the rise of British soft power, and embraced the East, paving the path for diplomatic relations between the U.K. and a rising China, leading to billions in investments by Chinese corporations into the U.K. and culminating with the launch of sovereign debt of their currency, renminbi (RMB) in London.

Lessons from the first British Empire have striking consequences to what the United States is currently facing - that hard power, and military might doesn't necessarily equate global dominance, and eventually leads to economic decline. As the U.S. is sending off cruise missiles to Syria, diverting funds once again, away from their own population, and ignoring their domestic problems, China is planning to invest in the infrastructure of developing nations by building ports and transportation routes via the implementation of high speed rails that will connect Eurasia and Africa.
​

​In 2015 (right) the total military expenditures for the U.S. were nearly twice its GDP, a pattern that is becoming eerily similar to the USSR in 1950 (left) before its eventual collapse in 1991.
​
Due to a lack of U.S.' soft power in East Asia, coupled with a growing resentment over its military presence, and its foreign policies, the U.S. govt has prevented its businesses from successfully penetrating the Asian markets, with the unique exception of Apple in Japan (as Steve Jobs and Softbank founder Masayoshi Son developed close ties based on a mutual appreciation and respect of cultural ties in the early 2000s). Whereas the United States' subversive foreign policies have created stronger resentment towards U.S. businesses in Asia and the Middle East, stronger cultural and economic ties between the East Asian nations and the U.K. could catapult U.K. startups and businesses to have an open network with China and beyond, leading to the rise of the British economy.

Uber's failure in China is symbolic of U.S. foreign policy towards China. Much of the resentment towards U.S. businesses in Asia is directly derivative of the foreign and economic policies of the U.S. govt post-Bush to "contain" a rising China, preventing U.S. businesses from successful penetration of the Asian markets. Whereas during the Clinton Era, President Bill Clinton opened a relationship with China and created wealth for American businesses, the Trump Administration is choosing to do the opposite and has taken his administration's anti-China policies further by alienating Asia, potentially engaging in a trade war, and risking the future of U.S. businesses' ability to enter the Asian markets.

Hong Kong and Singapore could be established models for how the British can utilise its soft power in East Asia. As two former British colonies, Hong Kong and Singapore still have many lasting influences from British soft power, namely through its educational systems. British influence in both nations lead to the education of girls during an era when women were excluded from schools, a bi-cultural education based on both Western and Eastern philosophies, a bilingual education that did not attempt to stamp out Eastern traditions, and the implementation of human rights protections. Many legacies of the British Empire in both nations lead to its economic rise as financial centres. Currently, Hong Kong and Singapore are two of the top 15 nations to have the highest GDP per capita (PPP) via purchasing power in the world, ahead of the United States.
​
As British soft power in the East could make China a more culturally viable entity to the rest of liberal Europe, who might view China as a dangerous authoritarian regime, a U.K.+ China relationship could nullify each other's weaknesses and support a ying and yang balance that complements its economic and cultural ties. One of China's previous setbacks had been in the construction of Poland's A2 highway that resulted in a debacle due to China's lack of knowledge in E.U. construction codes and certifications, whereas the U.K. has both a unique understanding of policy and heralds award winning expertise in infrastructure, architecture, design and urban planning. The U.K., and also Germany, France and other European nations have already backed the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), but Great Britain can take it one step forward to become China's primary diplomatic and economic partner in its infrastructure development of the One Belt, One Road plan in the European Union.

"It never is comfortable, when a major new power appears on the world scene, think of Bismarck's Germany, or even the United States at the turn of the Century, but we can't and should not want to stop China's rise; we shouldn't want to try to contain it, as so many armchair strategists in the United States demand. We should engage China...China is going to be a giant and it is our job, I think, to ensure as far as possible that it is a benevolent giant." -Lord Powell
​

Click here to play. Lord Powell at the University of Oxford. He states that the 21st century will belong to Asia as a continent. He says that China's remarkable economic growth over the last 30 years will continue to happen resulting in China becoming the largest economy in the world. Lord Powell was the Former Private Secretary and foreign adviser to both Margaret Thatcher and John Major and serves as the President of the China-Britain Business Council. He was also a 'mentor' to Guagua Bo, the son of controversial former Communist Party official Bo Xilai.

​The two main obstacles of China's rise that Lord Powell has argued will be its 1) authoritarian regime and 2) its inward focus, in that China has never engaged the rest of the world and has been fairly self-sufficient. However, with China's New Silk Road 2.0 plan, it appears that China has been listening.

Moreover, a U.K.+ China relationship would pave the path for Britain to regain access to Europe after Brexit and an opportunity for U.K. businesses to expand into Asia.
As many U.K. scholars and advisers have noted, the 21st century will belong to China, and it is to the advantage of Great Britain to use its soft power to influence the East, especially in regards to the issues in which the U.K. have set historical legal precedents, namely those relating to human rights, gender equality, labour laws, and education in which Great Britain has always been the first to lead; to shape China's authoritarian regime to appeal to Europe's liberal philosophies. Through its influence in education, art, media, literature, philosophy and technology, an economic and cultural marriage between the two nations could potentially lead to the rise of the second British Empire, one that has learned from its past history of military imperalism, and instead utilises its soft power to yield an open network of knowledge and technology in the era of the Silk Road 2.0.


​By Sierra Choi