I want an Editor. Well okay, I don’t deserve one. The business model says no. Business model?  Now awake from this flirty dream, I move on.

The periodic spark, at times white hot, inflamed the news for several days. Meta announced that they would no longer be fact-checking Facebook and Instagram—editors be gone. Sorry, they call them fact-checkers. The idealists were angry; the realists sounded practical. I straddle the divide, but who cares?

News editors have a storied history; I suspect a survey would find a reasonably high approval level. If they are any good, they ask questions. Did you mean to say, whatever? Have you read the report on, whatever? Whatever is the subject and questions are the method. And the best editors do not want to overlay their opinions, they want to move the writer a little closer to the truth. Not the Left or Right truth—the truth.

The sad fact is that future generations will have to look up the word “editor”. Mostly the editors themselves will be gone; at least from the day-to-day press as we call it. Mainstream or Lamestream.

But back to Meta and its leader, Mark Zuckerberg. Mark has a new look; I digress. I don’t know how Facebook or Instagram can possibly keep up with the volume of speech (generally called posts). And those who use them or especially X (formerly Twitter) are bombarded with visuals and the ones who want to get attention know how to incite our emotional senses. Exciting our emotions is in Elon Musk’s business model. Explosions, playful animals, deep cleavage, outrageous whatever and on and on.

Digital manipulation, while helpful cosmetically, can be problematic if we, the public, cannot escape our innocence. Pictures do lie.

The hands-off argument: let all the stuff be displayed and then everybody will be a fact-checker. Wonder who is fact-checking the Russian propagandists or is wading deep into incendiary speech looking for the potential of terrorism? Or how many just accept the words and pictures that conform to their predispositions? Way too many.

Noting all the claims about the benefits of Artificial Intelligence (AI), I would deploy a bot trained to highlight foreign propaganda. And then I would move the propaganda into a searchable category to complete a more comprehensive analysis that would hold up, at least in the court of public opinion. Elon Musk’s Space X  can catch rockets; he can surely catch foreign propaganda if he puts his considerable mind to it. And, of course, Zuckerberg will feel that competitive push.

Having set in judgment on content complaints lodged with the Federal Communications Commission I have spent some time thinking about the free-for-all of today. And we all know that some percent of Americans will make whatever noise they believe to be necessary to get attention. Why not call the conservative a Nazi or the liberal a Communist?

And vulgarity, well you can’t have too much of it because it draws attention. It underscores while revealing that the writer has a very limited vocabulary. Next time you stream an edgy drama count the number of times the F-Word is used as a noun, verb, or adjective.

Free speech was a gift from the Founders of America when speech was lets say 15 generations different. James Madison was its author. It was intended to protect political speech. Now too much of it is intended to ultimately kill speech.

Networks are universal and connectivity is international. The Chinese and Russians cannot abide our freedoms so they target us to undermine us. The Iranians too.Their propagandists specialize in the incendiary. Is calling it speech terrorism too harsh? Wonder how much time Russia spends learning and deploying the Bahamian patios?

And, the perverse is the enemy of the rational. The Internet hosts a festival of perversion as words and images are shaped to draw us into being flaming idiots or to relax us into a stupor or worse. We are the tactical target but the US is the strategic one.

Before leaving the subject of speech, we should pay more attention to surveillance capitalism, as sellers prey on our weaknesses. The surveillance capitalists provoke us, we respond and then our response is captured in a database that is used to seduce us into buying more or drinking more or well what about drugs and gambling? And political invective? Yep, they troll our senses.

Capitalists need to pay attention to the predators less they become one. Too many already have.

Defending ourselves from deceit and worse is not easy. Maybe taking on the personal protection of skepticism is further than you want to go, but in truth, it is the only way to protect our way of life. The culture, well, that is too big a word; certainly don’t depend on it as a corrective.

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al writes on themes from his book, Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books. 

The ambitions are vaulting, and the expectations are immense. A U.S. Senator. The United States! What could be better, the ultimate club of 100? Not just any peer group—the peer group.

Well, okay, maybe they don’t measure up to my standards. So I will run.

And then the time arrives. The news media follow my every move. My wife and children glow. My supporters are on their feet. A rush of adrenaline overcomes my sleepless nights. How can I sleep with so much at stake?? And I promise a better America, one that results from my wisdom and sacrifice.

Now in Washington—bedmate absent—sleepless nights are shadowed by disappointment with office and committee assignments. I can’t shake the image. I am now 97th or maybe 100th and when everybody lines up I am in the background.

But most painfully I have lost my courage somewhere. I am not going to make America better because I am now controlled, led by others and I am a first termer. I barely get in the game and then when I do its the last minutes. Legislation looks like an Amazon Prime catalog as our team leader says everything needs to be in one big bill and certainly no more than two.

Is redemption possible? Is there any chance of independence? Can I voice my take on things—or, if I do, will I lose the next election? Or my deep pocketed givers? Will I lose my membership? Will I become barely a footnote in the local paper much less the history books?

And then the guy who was at the top of the ballot says do what I say or you are history. What about my name? If I don’t yield, will he call me a derogatory name that will chase me through life? And if he doesn’t, will I look even worse? At best an afterthought?

But then I look around. I recall that my kids got shots and skipped diseases. What about RFK Jr’s attitude toward vaccines? Should he be our health care leader?

When I look at the Department of Defense I wonder how a guy whose success is framed by being glib on TV can lead the federal government’s largest department. And in many ways the most important one. This is not defense against the local scoundrels; this is facing our most determined enemies.

So what do I do? Do I measure up?  Do I measure up to the expectations of my family? What about the imperative to tell the truth? The one I pledge each Sunday? Am I going to make a difference in Washington or has it already changed me?

The campaigns are over. The rallies a long since forgotten image passed around on Facebook. Truth be told this is now the time for me to stand-up, but damn, the truth is tough. What will the Party faithful say? Will I get invited to the White House? Already there are rumblings of a challenger.

Can I say “who cares”? There is a faint memory; maybe from high school history: the less you care about yourself the more you will care about others.

My choice—a seat with the best or are they the best? Is this the best I can do? Well maybe I can change them. Just then an invitation arrives, I’ve been asked to be a guest on a late night cable show. I text; “let my driver know.”

As afterthoughts: Maryland has a first term US Senator. As the world moves and shakes and challenges will she stick to the same old playbook? Or, will the people who really matter know her name?

Recall: At the end of the 118th Congress the final tally of Gallup was that the Congress was approved by 17%. Think about that, the most important representative body in the world approved by only 17% of its constituents. Will the 119th be any better?

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al writes on themes from his book, Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books. 

This is of course now old news (Tweets have a short life). Republicans and Democrats in the United States House of Representatives concluded negotiations on a massive appropriation bill to keep the government operational until March of next year.

But recall before going further: “to retain respect for sausages and laws avoid watching them in the making”. So please do not take this short take as respect for what is called a Congressional Resolution; shorthand: CR. But here we are. The law says to the Congress RESOLVE or shutdown. So the Committee to make Sausage resolved, Republican and Democrat alike.

Within a very short time Elon Musk, America’s richest man and buddy of the President-Elect, put his thumb down. It is said he posted his disapproval on his web site 70 times. Ten hours later so did Donald Trump. Not a good look.

But then when you assemble a bunch of titanic egos do not expect them to ask permission. Presidents since George Washington have used allies to quietly seed the news media with rumors of this or that. It is an honorable way to gain some sense of both insider and public reaction before emerging from the carefully protected trenches and announcing a decision.

Musk’s trench is his business, X, which used to be Twitter. He uses it as a bullhorn. He has impulses and he posts them. In the case of the CR he put his thumb down on the work of the Congressional committee at 4:15 am Wednesday.

Here is a take from the Wall Street Journal: “Over the course of Wednesday, Musk pressed for Congress to kill the bill. He encouraged his more than 200 million followers on X, the social-media platform that he owns, to call their representatives to vote against it, and he warned that Republicans who voted for it should lose their congressional seats in two years. He also said Congress shouldn’t pass any more legislation until President-elect Donald Trump takes office, which would ensure a partial government shutdown until Jan. 20.”

The obvious question is who is leading who? It is said that Musk gave the various Trump campaign subsidiaries over $200 million. And in the aftermath of the election, Musk became a constant presence with the President. Perhaps he should formally join the Trump family. Changing one’s name is not an expensive affair. Dutifully, I apologize for the snark.

What I don’t apologize for is my concern about the world’s richest man placing himself in a position of at least appearing to be not the President’s whisperer but the President’s voice. It is not only on the atmospherics a bad thing, it portends a clash of egos that cannot do other than undermine the Presidency. Regain control Mr. President-Elect.

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al writes on themes from his book, Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books. 

Advent began on the fourth Sunday before Christmas. Advent is, in the Christian faith, a period of preparation for the birth of Jesus Christ.

Biblical narratives are filled with heroic acts and transcendent moments. They informed and spurred the evolving church to create organizing principles and protocols in recognition. None are more important than Advent. But I expect that for most of the faithful awe is more important than obligation. The structure of denominational obligation is not unimportant but will not protect the faithful during inevitable moments of doubt as humanity pushes its own mastery.

I can recall the awe as a youth in the story of the Star of Bethlehem. The gospel writer Matthew wrote of a bright star that led the three wise men to the place where Mary gave birth. The celestial guide, The Star of Bethlehem. A miracle.

In more recent centuries the ingenuity of humankind and in particular astronomers and their equipment, have pushed and enabled us to become ever more familiar with the Celeste. Yet as hard as some try it is impossible to isolate the celestial as exclusively physical. Topically, as a symbol of otherworldliness, the Celeste is often on the finger of a superb athlete who strives to share his/her recognition with God as they point to the heavens.

Well last week it happened in a different profession—architecture. Notre Dame, the French Cathedral, was rededicated after a literal rebirth guided by the Cathedral’s architect Phillippe Villeneuve who in a video interview gave recognition to a heavenly assist. Villeneuve said, “You know I spent five years saying nothing about this because I am a civil servant in a secular republic and therefore I couldn’t say something like this, but now I have to reveal that yes I have a particular devotion to the Virgin Mary and at the risk of sounding totally crazy like Joan of Ark, I never stopped feeling support from Up There. I don’t think this project would have been possible otherwise and I think that is what gave me the strength and determination to move because I knew I was being supported from Up There.” Villeneuve was pointing skyward.

We, of course, know that over time the essence of Christianity “neighborly love” has been re-shaped beyond earlier acts of piety and biblical recognition. Humans are busy creatures. Giving today reflects an enormous commercial enterprise. It’s hard for the Star of Bethlehem to compete with advertising. Indeed as fewer and fewer attend worship services the Advent season retreats from our minds and culture. And as it retreats awe as a dimension of faith recedes.

Recognition of the rebirth of Notre Dame was the recognition of enormous accomplishment—awe-inspiring for sure. But what about the widow’s mite? The small coin that was said to represent about six minutes of work in Caesar’s time.  What about the thousands, no millions of small gifts of time and treasure each year? Many sacrificial. Where does that come from?

Or the contemporary version of a “babe in swaddling cloth”. I am reading Alexi Navalny’s book Patriot. You recall. Navalny, now deceased from Vladimir Putin’s obsession, had with his wife Yulia two children. Raised without belief in God he recounted his conversion after experiencing the awe of becoming a father for the first time.

Awe, again and again.

There are moments of transcendent glory that move many to point to the sky, to recognize that there is more to it than simply human striving.

Human striving can be reshaped and certainly has been as we pursue glory in day-to-day stuff. But then comes along those moments we can’t account for. Science doesn’t help. Earthly rewards materialize and then, poof, they are gone. So what about awe? Athletes find it in breaking records. Mothers and fathers in birth. Architects in the rebirth of a Cathedral. What about us?

The stories are there. But if you need to put your mind on today pay attention to your neighbor, his courage, her sacrifice. The reality, not just the stories are awe-inspiring and there is something behind them. What is that something? I can think of no greater inquiry.

Merry Christmas.

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al writes on themes from his book, Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books. 

Predictably much of the reporting on President-Elect Trump’s formation of a new administration is relatively negative. On a scale of 0 to 10 with 10 being the most negative I’d call the analysis part of news coverage an 8. And it appears that Trump is okay with that. His statements and actions beginning with what I will call the Matt Gaetz affair have been antagonistic toward mainstream news and analysis. And that is too bad.

Most people who gain these top jobs are not known and much of the advise and consent process, the constitutional prerogative of the United States Senate, is political. Few Senators are prepared to step outside the Party line. I supported Larry Hogan because he had time after time demonstrated his independence.

Since I often write about public affairs and the politics of it, I try to double check my own drafts for fairness. Fairness is in part subjective so to some degree my general antipathy toward the President-Elect can’t be precluded but I’ll continue to try. So here is my take.

There is a worrying element in all of this. Some years ago I ended up at lunch with a fellow who said he didn’t get his news from newspapers but only from what at the time was called Twitter. He was much younger than me and I concluded it was generational and that to some degree it reflected a disdain for left of center bias.

Left of center bias is endemic. Journalism and related journalistic tracks tend to draw from those who want to “change the world” or at least record it as they see it. Many believe that if more digging or editorial emphasis is directed to how the government can achieve their preferences, outcomes can be improved. I long ago, to one degree or another, used a discount filter. This was especially true on business reporting.

Polls of course affirm this bias. Few reporters, for example, are Republicans or identify with right of center points of view. And Donald Trump plays that bias with improvisational glee. When he saw Twitter as biased he started Truth Social.

And then his buddy Elon Musk bought Twitter. Musk declared that truth in news coverage would only be available on the newly named X because it would assure free speech. In short if you want to find out the truth in the news, X is the place to go.

Well to begin with Musk knows as much about the best practices of journalism as I know about catching rockets returning from space. Some who post on X actually have some depth of knowledge. They are almost all posters with a day job at one or another news gathering organization. I, for example, follow the Institute for the Study of War. I get informed on timely news about the Middle Eastern and Ukraine wars. I also see a steady stream of diverse opinions although fewer from left of center orientation because many have chosen to boycott X.

X is indeed a positive development in the news and information segment. But it is mainly a headline service, not a news one. If Musk wants X to become a more valuable news source, he is going to have to spend millions annually to actually provide news. Real news is the fruit of digging pushed along by principled editors whose first principle is truth. Providing accurate news is not an inexpensive pursuit and the financial incentive to do so has largely disappeared.

Opinion is rarely truth. Opinion tends to be an information layer and truth is many layered. It is, regarding many subjects, even hard to define how you find out the truth. Inquiries in search of truth recalls the blind man concluding that an elephant’s trunk was a snake. We all have our blind sides.

Back to Musk and Truth and Trump’s version of X called “Truth Social.” The latter is  propaganda—the world as Trump wants others to see it. And X is just a pass it along machine. X is not a many layered effort to find truth but a pipe, if you will, that delivers information and opinion and leaves it up to you to decide.

President-Elect Trump has heralded a momentous time in the governance of the United States of America. Indeed. And in a democracy we should all assess next steps forward while looking out for the snakes. If I had one piece of practical advice, it would be to make sure at least one of your sources of news makes you uncomfortable.

Enduring Reform

The notion that November’s election was a landslide is bunk. The most representative political institution is the House of Representatives and it is split almost down the middle—Republican’s control 220 seats and Democrats 215.

Generally in human affairs humility attaches to evenly divided opinions, in this case demonstrated through actual elections. Hubris should be avoided.

President-Elect Trump has promised to take on the “deep state” and has already begun to set up an efficiency apparatus (Department of Government Efficiency-DOGE) led by Elon Musk as part of that effort. I imagine some good ideas will result from that work. Some of the ideas might be actionable through Presidential orders while others, and especially those involving expenditures, will have to move through Congress.

While political differences today are often fought with severe language, I would suggest turning the heat down on the work of DOGE so that enduring reforms might outlast political tides. In the case of the President-Elect, he will then get credit for victory not just making political points.

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al writes on themes from his book, Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books. 

Donald J Trump knows and is moving fast.  He understands power’s cycles and the underlying conditions that gain or lose momentum. Yet, even the most insightful cannot account for what can’t be predicted and its influence on the rise and fall of political power. But, lets take a look at what we do know.

As our new President quickly assembles his senior leadership, coalitions of convenience are being shaped. And the quantity of “strange bedfellows” will exceed Washington’s supply of hotel rooms. Government employees might be staying away from their work stations but those with government privileges to be defended, they will be thick at the hotel bars.

People and their organizations, business, and not-for-profits alike, do not give up benefits without a fight. And the United States federal government is obese with allocations, set-asides, tax advantages, regulatory benefits, direct and indirect grants, and more. Most of us are affected.

Each of these government advantages have their constituencies and at the risk of overstatement Members of Congress who are politically indebted.  Members do not want their military base closed, or their local employer to lose its tax credits or for that matter any changes that cost their District money.

As I think about the President-Elect, the most interesting and potentially beneficial dimension is disruption. We read about the differences between Trump and Biden on Ukraine or NATO or North Korea and those will play out. But internationally, the US is one of many. Stronger, but its strength is inevitably diluted as some level of cooperation is not discretionary.

Domestically the White House has immense advantages. Over time the Executive Branch of government has accrued power. The power has come from weaknesses in the representative branch, the Congress. Presidents increasingly issue Executive Orders and if the President’s party controls the Congress few will be blocked and it takes Court challenges a long time to reach closure.

Enter Elon Musk on a wave of extraordinary new technology; technology that is already changing the face of much of what we do. Technology that makes the previously unthinkable thinkable. As I write it appears that the President-Elect is prepared to cede power to Musk and why not.

I chaired the Federal Communications Commission when President George H W Bush was President. He was preoccupied with generational developments in the Soviet Union and deservedly spent much of his time on foreign policy. And you might recall that President Bush assembled the coalition that kicked the Iraqis out of Kuwait.

When it came to domestic policy most agency heads did not feel shadowed by the White House. If President-Elect Trump wants to make generational changes in the bureaucracy, putting Musk in charge of a Commission to draft Presidential Executive Orders to reform the government is a deft move. There will certainly be conflicts and especially with Congressional backers of one benefit or another, but if the Trump/Musk collaboration persists it will be initially traumatic but eventually might help heal our gaping wound, the budget gap.

I left Washington for New York in 1993 and became immersed in the new economy—the digital one. In those early years our venture capital investments funded disruption (first investment—Netscape) and the disruption put extraordinary pressure on what we started calling legacy media. Newspaper, magazine, and broadcast media all declined and some precipitously. Much of government is controlled by legacy systems.

The disruption that Trump/Musk promise will necessarily be different. If it is carried out effectively, it will reduce the central government’s workforce and promote efficiency without bankruptcies. Most of the bloated organizations are statutorily authorized making dissolution of whole agencies virtually impossible. Hopefully Congress will help by repealing statutory status but don’t count on it.

Trying to stay out of the weeds, I’ll close with this observation. While the President-Elect has played fast and loose with many traditional Republican positions, tax reduction remains a central promise. If this disruptive period fails to change the trajectory on budget deficits, it will be a failure. And if government revenues do not change, then the numbers on the financial statements will have moved around but the net effect will simply be a different line-up of winners and losers. The cynics hanging around the hotel bars are betting on that outcome. History will only honor the opposite.

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al writes on themes from his book, Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books.