FOR editors of mainstream news portals, the bane of their existence is undoubtedly the sheer volume of reader comments on their sites, which are becoming more vulgar and toxic.

The height of this frenzy was probably displayed during the KK Super Mart socks controversy.

The nasty remarks included shocking calls inciting racial discontent and even the elimination of a particular race.

Unfortunately, in Malaysia, most social media readers confine themselves to platforms in their preferred languages.

Many of us live in our own cocoon, oblivious to everyone’s sentiments.

Basically, the predominantly Malay audience would only read Bahasa Malaysia portals and assume that their engagements are only followed by their own community.

The same can be said about Chinese platforms, too, including chat groups. Chinese readers instinctively think that they can speak about certain issues and remain unaware that their words could hurt the feelings of other races.

Even in the comments section of English medium portals, hostile views are right there in the public domain.

The comments section is essential given the eyeballs it draws, but no responsible publisher can moderate this free-for-all forum 24/7.

Some publishers have pulled the plug on it simply because it has been routinely abused.

Freedom of speech doesn’t amount to freedom to defame, slander or worse, instigate racial disharmony.

If a reader posts a racist comment at 3am and it’s automatically uploaded, which editor would be able to catch it and have it removed immediately?

In May 2021, the Federal Court ruled that Malaysiakini was guilty of contempt of court over the comments of five readers.

The country’s highest court said the comments posted by these readers were deemed offensive to the judiciary and fined the online news organisation RM500,000 and ruled that Malaysiakini is fully accountable for its website, including reader comments.

The judges said the case was a reminder to the public not to attack the judiciary online, and that the fine reflected the gravity of the offence.

Hurtful remarks and seditious comments in any language bring no benefit to our beloved country. There’s no reason to defend or justify retaining vile content in the name of freedom of expression. Of course, the authorities must be mindful that their actions shouldn’t be imposed on fair criticisms either.

Political operatives: Malaysian authorities have found that the dark side of social media has birthed individuals paid to post desired narratives in the comments sections. — 123rf

Speaking of which, criticising politicians is par for the course and most of them accept it. They are expected to be resilient, so if they can’t stand the heat, then they should avoid the flame of this game.

I concur with the populist view that it’s unnecessary for our regulators to be ruffled by some of the criticism, especially from unknown figures with near non-existent followers.

Then there are certain personalities recognised for their denunciation. This is simply part and parcel of a democracy.

The nature of social media is that it should be taken with a pinch of salt. If these people are ignored, their messages are quickly forgotten. If it must be countered, then they should do it persuasively.

But there are many critics who cowardly hide behind anonymity despite their bravado on accountability and transparency. Yet, they fear revealing themselves, and are highly creative with their fictitious content.

Malaysian authorities have found that the dark side of social media has birthed individuals, believed to be paid political operatives using multiple accounts, who post desired narratives in the comments sections.

These comments can run into thousands of entries to push a certain agenda to influence the minds of readers.

Social media posts have influenced many people, even if we’re clueless to who these so-called Netizens are, or if they’re even real.

Despite having a population of only 33 million, Malaysia ranked 10th in the world for online engagement in 2023 with an Internet penetration rate of 96.8%.

It was reported that there were about 30.25 million social media users in 2022, which was 91.7% of Malaysia’s total population.

The Commission Report said that “if we consider just the adult population, we can see social media usage approaching full saturation levels at 99.8 per cent” and as early as 2011, Malaysian Facebook users had the most active friend networks in the world with an average of 233 friends.

Statista.com said Malaysia has the third highest social media penetration rate in South-East Asia and ranked third among the highest average daily time spent on social media with around two and half hours invested on various platforms.

Insider Monkey rated Malaysia among 25 countries with the most TikTok users in 2023.

It placed Malaysia at the No 18 spot with 19.3 million users with the demographic comprising Gen Z (ages 19-25) at 35.61%, closely followed by Millennials (ages 26-32) constituting around 29% of the user base.

Last week, it was reported that in 2023, Tik Tok removed content mentioned in half of the government’s requests based on violations of Malaysian laws. There were 2,200 government requests to remove about 6,000 pieces of content.

The next highest came from Australia with 651 submissions, but none of the commentators tied it with press freedom in their reports or asked what this content comprised to annoy Aussies. Do Australians have racial, religious or royalty issues or scam concerns to contend with like Malaysia?

These news reports put Malaysia in a bad light as it gave the impression that the Malaysian regulator or government is intolerant of criticism or grappling with the inability to handle freedom of expression,

The numbers were based on Tik Tok’s bi-annual “Government Removal Requests Report” for 2023.

Unfortunately, perception is everything. It will be good if the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) provides details and explanations for its decisions.

I was told that this year, almost 54% of the online content requested for removal across all platforms were related to online gambling with 19% linked to online scams, 15% fake news, 6% on the 3Rs (race, religion, royalty) and 5% on harassment.

For 2023, the figures were almost identical with 47% online gambling, online scams 18%, fake news 18%, 3R issues 6%, and harassment 6%.

So, from the overall data, online gambling and scams account for almost 70% of the content removed.

Without this background info, it would seem like the MCMC only removed political content. In Malaysia, though, everything seems to be about politics.

But it has reached a nadir where many of these inflammatory postings have crossed the red line. Nothing is sacred anymore and despite the repeated warnings against content relating to the 3Rs, it’s difficult to ignore the perceived reluctance to act against certain personalities.

Malaysians can certainly identify the people who continuously exploit race and religion in their social media posts.

If the authorities don’t punish these recalcitrants, then we’re sending the wrong message to the country.

Open condemnation of other religions or deceitfully trying to convert minors of other faiths are clearly a violation of existing laws.

Malaysia is a uniquely multi-racial and multi-religious nation with a robust political and social media set up with a no-holds barred political obsession driven by many Malaysians, former Malaysians who have migrated as well as foreigners who really have no business telling us how to run our country.

THE case has attracted attention like bees to honey because it involves an alleged assault of a hearing-impaired ehailing driver and an escort for Johor Regent Tunku Ismail Sultan Ibrahim.

Of course, the incident needs to be thoroughly investigated by the police since a report has been lodged.

The Inspector-General of Police is personally handling the case, which exhibits its top priority.

It’s a simple case, but Tan Sri Razarudin Husain’s attention to it reveals the police’s preparedness to do what’s right and end the high-profile controversy.

Investigations have been completed and the papers sent to the Attorney General’s Chambers.

It doesn’t get more straightforward than this because it basically involves only two persons – the driver and escort. That’s all.

In the May 28 incident, ehailing driver Ong Ing Keong lodged a police report on the day alleging he was assaulted by one of Tunku Ismail’s drivers while waiting for a customer at the St Regis Hotel lobby in KL Sentral.

Unfortunately, many outrageous innuendoes and downright defamatory remarks on the palace have inundated social media by writers who cowardly hide behind anonymity.

No employer would condone heavy handedness by their staff.

Those of us who’ve interacted with bodyguards know that some of these minders can occasionally get carried away.

Unfortunately, the over-protection, even if justified, taints the people they are supposed to protect.

Looking at the facts in this case, the alleged assault was committed by an escort assigned to the Regent.

Tunku Ismail certainly didn’t order the rogue officer to purportedly rough up the driver because he wouldn’t condone such behaviour.

Making allegation about the police and palace conspiring to halt the investigation is clearly below the belt because the palace can’t defend itself.

The Regent may not be popular among some quarters, but to be fair to His Highness, he simply didn’t know about the incident until it exploded in the press and social media.

He then immediately issued a statement urging the police to launch a thorough investigation, saying no illegal actions or threats should ever be allowed.

Now that the papers have been sent to the AG’s Chambers, the escort concerned should be swiftly charged in court if the case holds water.

It’s completely unacceptable and the book must be thrown at the said person and his colleagues if attempts are found to cover up the case or coerce the driver into withdrawing his report.

The police have already called up 12 individuals in the investigation and Malaysians should have proper access to the trial if the case goes to court, which it duly should.

The witnesses include the alleged victim, the escort, some hotel staff, members of the Police Special Operations Unit, the Johor regent’s team of drivers, the complainant’s friend, a doctor, and a Grab operations director.

The IGP has rightly advised the public against speculating or linking the case to the royal institution.

Making critical comments on the case certainly differs from infusing unrelated past matters and worse, accusing the police and palace of colluding to subvert the investigation.

One or two policemen or even a representative from the palace, if any, isn’t a representation of the institutions.

But let this be a lesson to all VVIPs, too – your entourage needs to be humble because it ultimately reflects on you, unfair as it may be. There’s a price for fame and public office.

The Lawyers For Liberty are doing their jobs as a civil rights non-governmental organisation and they would surely ensure all procedures are followed.

The bottom line is let the IGP and the AG’s Chambers take over from here. Attempts to desecrate the sanctity of the royal institution is neither acceptable nor will it be tolerated.

Bustling metropolis: China has transformed tremendously since it began to open and reform its economy in 1978. Now more than 800 million people have been lifted out of poverty in the country. — Reuters

TWO months following Malaysia Airlines’ maiden voyage to Beijing on March 31, 1991, I had my first trip to China.

I was invited by our national carrier as part of the media and government official team to experience its new route.

By then, Beijing had already become a big city with tall buildings and highways, but the streets were still filled with bicycles.

Over the last three decades, I have repeatedly returned to Beijing and other cities. Like many regular visitors, I can’t help but marvel at the pace of the economic transformation.

It’s mind-boggling how quickly the Chinese government has successfully turned the country into an economic powerhouse with huge leaps into technological and digital realms including artificial intelligence.

Their infrastructure, especially their super rail connections, are certainly the best in the world now. None of the European and American links can hold a candle to the Chinese rails.

As of 2024, it’s reported that China has more than 159,000km of railways, the second longest network in the world, and 45,000km of high-speed rail, the longest HSR in the world.

Of course, Western rail networks began much earlier while China played catch up, but with new facilities, they are more sophisticated since they can avoid the mistakes and poor maintenance practices of those in the West.

They’re certainly the envy of the world as they whizz between cities at speeds of about 320km per hour.

Those who’ve never been to China can’t ever fathom how far the republic has overtaken the Western world.

On my travels, I’ve had the misfortune of meeting many Americans and Europeans who still have flawed, if not archaic, views of China and many other parts of Asia.

The Americans are the worst because many have never travelled beyond the United States. I have given up explaining to them where Malaysia is.

On a trip to Antarctica in January, as my fellow Malaysian traveller Yusof Hashim and I held our Jalur Gemilang proudly, a passing American expedition member asked my wife if we were holding the Taiwan flag!

But of course, the Brits are familiar with most of us from the Commonwealth countries, obviously because they colonised us, and don’t parade such ignorance.

In any case, the Western narrative against China has been such a resounding success that many Western tourists have kept away from “communist” and “dictatorial” China.

Accusations of unfair dealings, falsified data and purported persecution of Uighurs in Xinjiang, and Tibetans, are also entrenched in their minds although most can’t pinpoint these places on a world map.

From my anecdotal engagements with my Western friends, it’s obvious they swallow what their politicians tell them and steadfastly refuse to have anything to do with China, which is a shame.

I’ve always told them that they need to see for themselves how China has advanced.

But what is conspicuously downplayed is Western politicians viewing China as the biggest challenge of any nation-state in the world against the US and its allies.

The US wants a big share of China’s consumer market, which has embraced Western products, but the image of the republic seeking leadership roles in many multilateral platforms remains unpalatable.

An article by Dr Zuliu Hu and Mohsin Khan from the International Monetary Fund titled “Why Is China Growing So Fast” attributes the progress to capital investment, which has made the country more productive.

Basically, new machinery, better technology, and more investment in infrastructure have helped to raise output, they wrote.

Its economy may have once been in the doldrums, but since opening to foreign trade and investment in 1979, China has been among the world’s fastest growing economies and among the highest in terms of purchasing power parity.

After all, it had a growth rate averaging 10% for over 30 years.

Since it began to open and reform its economy in 1978, more than 800 million people have been lifted out of poverty. Across China, and especially its cities, you don’t see slums like in India, or colonies of vagrants, like in the US.

Basically, there have been significant improvements in access to health, education and other services.

Emphasis is given to schools, and even in the most remote areas where I’ve seen and been thoroughly impressed by the kinds of facilities available to school children.

In Guangzhou, I saw robotics, 3D printing and coding already being taught in a secondary school during a trip in 2017.

No doubt, as the economy grows, there will be disparity, especially in a country of 1.4 billion people.

There are the upper middle class as well as those struggling to earn a living in the big cities, where at least 40% of their income goes to rental fees.

Fast forward to 2024, and as I continue my journeys in China, I have begun to feel that as Malaysians, we are poorer.

The depreciating ringgit hasn’t helped in our declining purchasing power.

As most countries direct factory outlets away from the cities, which makes travelling unnecessary, I still visited one which was right smack in three building blocks in Beijing.

Looking at the wide range of products from the West and China, I wondered how the Chinese can afford such expensive items, and where their money comes from!

In Shanghai, where many of the city folks are often well-dressed, I felt even smaller.

This doesn’t bode well for me as a third-generation Chinese.

My grandfather left Guangdong in China because they were almost trapped in famine and needed to come to Malaya to escape poverty.

And now, many of my friends who have relatives in Fujian and Guangdong, speak about how financially secure their relatives have become.

For Malaysia, as we celebrate 50 years of friendship with China, it’s imperative we leverage on the ties which bind both nations.

The special bond began in the 1400s when Admiral Zheng He visited Melaka several times, marking the state’s significance.

I tip my hat to Malaysia and China!

Lingua franca: Most Penangites, including those of other racial groups, can easily speak or at least understand Hokkien. — KT GOH/The Star

EVERY month, I routinely return to Penang. Although I’ve spent the last three decades in the Klang Valley, Penang remains my home since my 93-year-old mother and my siblings still live there.

Penangites are very parochial people and one thing that binds us is our unique brand of Hokkien.

When I started my journalism career at The Star in Penang, it was common for the daily editorial meetings to break into Hokkien with even my Malay and Indian colleagues using the dialect proficiently.

When many of us were transferred to Kuala Lumpur, the same pattern continued as the bulk of the newspaper staff was from Penang.

But all that has changed drastically as the dialect’s use has declined sharply over the years, with Mandarin taking its place. It’s not something that happened overnight, but it has almost been a decade or more since the shift began.

Whether one is at a shopping mall or even a coffee shop, it’s likely that Mandarin will be spoken by the staff with the assumption it’s universally understood.

But this uncle is a banana, which basically means an English-educated Chinese who can’t speak Mandarin and only thinks in and speaks English. Like the banana, I am yellow on the outside but white inside.

For older Penangites, and even northerners from Kedah and Perlis, as well as our friends from Taiping, Perak, our Hokkien is a heritage. It separates us from the rest of the ethnic Chinese in Malaysia because of our distinct northern-accented Hokkien.

As I have written in my past articles, it doesn’t matter whether we’re in Kuala Lumpur, Johor Baru, London or Timbuktu because we can always detect a Penangite in our midst whenever we hear this northern style dialect with its rich sprinkling of Malay words that denotes its nonya-baba linguistic roots.

Penangites are fiercely proud of their Hokkien as it’s completely different from the one spoken in Klang, Melaka, Johor, Singapore, Taiwan or Xiamen in China.

As older Penangites, perhaps we can be a little snooty, as we sometimes dismiss the Hokkien spoken elsewhere as somewhat crass and unrefined.

Only the Hokkien spoken by the Chinese community in Medan, Indonesia, and Phuket, Thailand, closely mirrors that of Penang Hokkien, presumably because of the proximity between Penang and the Indonesian city.

Rightly or wrongly, or plainly out of ignorance, Penangites feel the sing-song delivery sounds better.

Words such as balai (police station), balu (just now), bangku (stool), batu (stone), cilaka/celaka (damn it), campur (mix), jamban (toilet), gatai/gatal (itchy) gili/geli (creepy), sabun (soap) and kesian (pity), are an integral part of the Penang Hokkien dialect.

Even Penangites of other races can easily speak, or at least understand it. My fellow moderation advocate, Anas Zubedy, speaks excellent Hokkien. So do my fellow journalists like The Star’s Dorairaj Nadason and Bernama’s R. Manogaran, a former sports editor at The Star.

Then, there’s Tan Sri Syed Danial Syed Ahmad, the Keeper of the Rulers’ Seal, the person announcing the date of fasting and Hari Raya, who also speaks Hokkien, being a Penangite.

Last year, Penang Chief Minister Chow Kon Yeow said many Penang-born youth no longer speak Hokkien and the state government was now moving to address this to prevent the dialect from fading away.

The state has also approved an allocation to support an initiative by Han Chiang University College to produce a video on Penang Hokkien.

But it looks like a losing proposition.

In an interview with Penang Monthly, Penang Hokkien Language Association secretary Ooi Kee How was quoted as saying that “people think there’s no benefit in learning or speaking Hokkien, which is not true. Yes, you can survive if you do not speak Hokkien; you can get by with speaking only one language your entire life.”

“But the thing is, something will diminish. Our creativity, our cultural identity, will decline. A lot of innovations will disappear because different languages shape the way we think differently.”

The decline of Penang Hokkien is a result of a combination of factors. For one, a whole generation of Penangites have been educated in Chinese schools, at least at primary level.

This is unlike the older generation of Penangites like me, who are now in our 60s, who attended schools which used English as a medium of instruction. In the absence of Mandarin, we spoke mainly Hokkien and English, but Chinese in their 30s and 40s now find it more comfortable conversing in Mandarin – and for sure, not in English.

There’s also the impact of China as the new economic powerhouse of Asia, if not the world.

Mandarin has taken over the dominant spot as a language with economic value, and certainly prestige. That’s the reality, but it may well be at the expense of a rich heritage.

As a Penangite will say “aun juanh” (so, how?). Like many other languages around the world that have vanished, Hokkien is in danger of becoming a lost dialect, too.

In an era of digital disruptions and reduced attention span, everyone should learn this old journalistic adage: ‘Keep it short and simple’.

THERE is a lesson for speakers in general – don’t bother to give a lecture, talk or sermon that is more than 30 minutes unless you are confident of holding your audience or you have a captive audience that is forced to listen to your monologue.

Unfortunately, many speakers are not aware of the shrinking attention span of their listener, especially the younger set.

Like most politicians, many speakers seem to love holding on to their microphones even as their listeners’ minds drift away.

They are probably too engrossed to see their audience fidgeting in their seats, trying not to fall asleep, looking bored or worse, have started looking at their phones.

It’s not just speakers that should remind themselves but journalists, too. The days of lengthy text or reports are over.

No one has the patience to read tedious length articles when the average Tik Tok video is less than a minute while X, formerly Twitter, allows only 140 characters. Videos uploaded on Instagram are also usually a minute or less.

This is the Age of Instant Noodles, Instant Coffee, and Instant Information, after all.

A decade ago, research had already shown that between 2000 and 2015, our attention span had shrunk by a whopping 25%.

A year ago, a 2023 report stated that the average human attention span has decreased from 12 seconds to 8.25 seconds in the last two decades.

In the case of Gen Z, it was reported that these youngsters, who have been characterised as having “hearing problems”, have an attention span of around 2.5 minutes, which is significantly shorter than the attention of previous generations.

Well, our lives have become more preoccupied now. Our texts keep flashing on our mobiles even if the ringtone is switched off.

Giving online talks is probably the worst as many listeners, especially the younger ones, prefer to switch off their cameras. So, we have no idea if they are following – or even if they are there at all. At least, one can change the approach if it’s a physical audience and humour can be injected to spice up the discussions.

Most of us prefer texting over talking on the mobile phone because we can perform other tasks if we don’t have to speak. We don’t mind voice messages as we then decide when to reply.

Older people prefer to call you on the phone not realising that they are interrupting your work. We could be at a meeting, in a train or having meals but old people, including my 93-year- old mum, have no clue of that.

She gets very upset when I do not pick up the phone immediately. So, I get yelled at practically most times because she has a hearing problem, which is expected at her age, and we are expected to take such calls immediately.

Our lives have become much busier and many of us do not have the luxury of being entrapped in a long lecture because all the good intentions with the research and prepared decks goes to waste if the listeners lose interest.

As a journalist, I have also allowed breaking news alerts to appear on my phone, and this has become a non-stop exercise!

As I struggled to write this article – the result of having to endure a traumatic monologue of one hour and 20 minutes recently – I have been interrupted numerous times. The shows how much digital media affects our lives, and the result is the decline of our ability to focus, and to listen for too long.

A 2023 CNN report, quoting Dr Gloria Mark, a professor of informatics at the University of California, Irvine, who studies how digital media affects our lives, said in 2004, “we measured the average attention on a screen to be 2 ½ minutes’’ but ‘’some years later, we found attention spans to be about 75 seconds. Now we find people can only pay attention to one screen for an average of 47 seconds.’’

Oftentimes, especially those in the media and finance, have two screens in our workplace. The reality is that we cannot stay focused on one screen for too long.

Writer Alf Rehn wrote that there should be a 20-minute rule for public speaking, reminding us of an old quote, attributed to American businessman Phil Crosby, that goes – “no one can remember more than three points.’’

Rehn argued that “the fact is that we often can’t remember even that many. Life is just too busy and too confusing to really focus more, so regardless of how many brilliant notions are thrown in our way, we subconsciously try to pick out just a few, sometimes, just one, to make sense of it all.’’

The optimal attention span for an audience, i.e. the attention span that can be comfortably held by an interested human engaged to listening to a speaker is not five to 10 minutes. Instead, it is about 20 minutes.

Well, these experts are going to argue and dispute over our attention span but the long and short of it is it is shrinking.

And that brings me to my final point – this article must end too, like now, before the reader gets bored. The point has been made already. This is the Age of Instant Noodles, Instant Coffee, and Instant Information, after all.

IF I’m suffering from a life-threatening disease and laying helplessly on a hospital bed, it wouldn’t matter to me if the doctors and nurses trying to save my life were Type C, Type M or Type I – if that’s a new classification for races.

I would just want the type of medical personnel who are competent and dedicated to their work. Basically, their race or religion bears no significance to me.

Even the most racist politicians and netizens freewheelingly posting nasty comments online would be realistic enough to know they should be colour blind when fighting for their lives.

How many of us, including these racist sorts, have enquired about the source of the blood administered in our hospitals?

Many of us seem to have ignorantly and arrogantly forgotten that skin colour matters little.

Visits to the hospitals should be organised for these types to open their eyes, and hearts, to let them see that patients in hospital wards respect each other.

They embrace prayers of a different religion conducted for them because they understand and appreciate that these prayers are done in good faith – praying for their well-being.

We must remember that come Judgment Day, our Creator will be unconcerned about our “types” but evaluate our conduct through life. If you can’t forgive, then don’t expect forgiveness for yourself.

So, why would anyone running a business – including one selling fried chicken – care about the race of their clients?

The only type of customers you’d want are repeat customers who place big orders. You want loyal customers.

So, what is the “Type C’’ issue all about? Well, it started to trend after local fast-food restaurant DarSA Fried Chicken (DFC) used the term to refer to Malaysian Chinese.

According to media reports, the restaurant in Rawang, Selangor, opened its doors last month. DFC is said to cater to locals with its “Made in Malaysia” appeal against the backdrop of local boycotts of US-linked brands.

According to a Says.com report, amid this “support local” branding drive, DFC left a controversial comment that brought the issue of race into a conversation with a netizen who complained about their pricing.

“I hope the prices can be more reasonable because after looking at the price list, I think they are more expensive than KFC,” wrote the netizen.

In response, DFC said, “Sir, did you skim through the price list or see it in full? You need to see the full price list before considering if it’s reasonably priced or expensive.

“Type C is trying to play up various harmful sentiments towards DFC. We shouldn’t be easily swayed, especially when you haven’t tried it yourself,” replied the restaurant.

DFC has since explained that the mistake may have occurred due to the high volume of comments they received, causing the social media admin to lose focus while responding to netizen complaints.

It has apologised over the issue, adding, “We have decided not to answer the issue from hereon to avoid repeating the mistake. We will only answer issues regarding operations and other matters that do not involve other parties.

“We welcome all our customers from various walks of life regardless of race or religion,” they said.

To err is human, to forgive is divine. Mistakes happen and it’s right that many Malaysians are saying DFC doesn’t deserve to be boycotted over a silly response from an errant administrator.

DFC, however. should have added another line to its statement – “the person responsible for that hateful remark has been reprimanded.”

An employee with that kind of attitude is certainly not the type that the restaurant wants on its payroll.

In a strange twist, DFC had to acknowledge customers’ complaints about their price points but refrained from specifying future steps to lower prices.

At the end of the day, price matters, but customers don’t mind paying more if its fried chicken tastes better than the established competitors.

It can’t depend on an unending well of goodwill and the present sentiment against US franchises for support. It must encourage the patronage of all types of customers.

Thankfully, Malaysians have a great sense of humour. TGV Cinemas wittily rode on the controversy by posting the message – “Type A, Type B, Type C, itu semua tak penting. Yang penting you are my type!”

Numerous cartoons have also appeared on social media, taking a dig at those of us who callously blame the Chinese community for certain things.

DFC has apologised a few times following the incident, revealing that the staff responsible has been transferred. The fried chicken retailer seems genuine, and one staff shouldn’t ruin everything, So, let’s just move on and give them a chance.

I have faith in most Malaysians. Of course, we should support Malaysian products.

I like all types of chicken whether fried, steamed or roasted. So it doesn’t matter if it is KFC, DFC, mamak or Hainanese!

But those who spew racist remarks, especially politicians, should be “deep fried” by us in the next general election. That’s the type we want booted out.

The basic rules of journalism should apply, says the writer: Be able to back what you’ve reported, especially when it involves sensitive matters. — This visual is human-created, AI-aided.

WHEN the Bloomberg editors approved the story about on-going talks to open a casino in Forest City in Johor, they must have been absolutely convinced by their information’s accuracy.

The three reporters, too, must have completely believed in their sources’ whispers to them.

They claimed their information came from “people familiar with the matter”. It must then have solid and credible evidence.

In fact, they even said that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim had met with Berjaya Corp founder Tan Sri Vincent Tan and Genting Group’s Tan Sri Lim Kok Thay recently to discuss reviving the troubled RM478bil property project.

The New York-based financial news agency has since reported a denial from Genting, quoting the New Straits Times, alleging its involvement in starting a casino.

The supposedly credible news agency has, however, not retracted its story, which conspicuously indicates its stand.

Unfortunately, the report has detrimentally affected those named in the article. The impact is bad because Malaysiakini and The Edge apart, it was also picked up by a few news outlets in Singapore.

A police investigation is imminent, and the three reporters will likely be called up for questioning, too. Berjaya Corp legal representatives filed police reports on April 26, and it wants the cops to determine the source of the reporters’ information. The editor of a financial portal is expected to be called to Bukit Aman tomorrow, with more journalists asked to do the same in coming days.

Bersatu information committee member Badrul Hisham Shahrin has already been charged for publishing seditious material on the purported casino project.

There are grave consequences from the story. It’s not just a simple speculative news piece which can be dismissed and denied later.

Its faraway ignorant American editors may be forgiven for not realising the implications of the article, but surely their Malaysian bosses should know better.

It may seem like a story that’s too juicy to spike, as veteran journalists would recall the term, but this would simply be put on hold or just deleted.

Still, the basic rules of journalism apply. Be able to back what you’ve reported, especially when it involves sensitive matters.

Bloomberg hasn’t officially denied its story, which means it’s sticking by its report. For impressive stats, their reporters are 100% accurate.

Naturally, they won’t reveal their sources, like any self respecting journalist. The agency ran the story trusting the accuracy of the information and credibility of its sources.

It’s optimistic to expect the sources to vouch for them at the expense of needing to defend themselves instead. Perhaps the media house believes the government is powerless since retribution infringes on press freedom.

However, the aggrieved parties in this article include Sultan Ibrahim, the Sultan of Johor, and the King of Malaysia.

He’s also a stakeholder of the massive Forest City project, and His Majesty has been unfairly dragged into the controversy of the news report because of the article.

Surely Bloomberg is aware that the King is the head of Islam, so there won’t be any approval for a new casino in his state.

The timing of the report certainly raises an eyebrow, and could it also be injurious to the King, PM and even China?

In a nutshell, the purported casino can’t be approved in Johor without his consent.

There are many businessmen and leaders, who may have access to the King, but that doesn’t entitle them to speak with authority or expect credibility.

It may be wishful thinking on their part because over the past few years, many have explored all kinds of ideas, including possibly starting a casino to revive Forest City, but they remain propositions at best.

For the media, which gets fed with all kinds of information daily, good and seasoned journalists would still know how to exercise discretion, maturity, wisdom and remain aware of the impact of what they write.

They would crosscheck with other sources to verify the accuracy of their information.

In this scenario, Bloomberg said “people familiar with the matter.” So, we presume that’s plural?

But in this contentious report, Muslims, who comprise most of this country, will surely be anxious and unhappy with what’s been reported.

It also involves two Chinese tycoons, whose motives will be questioned and likely interpreted as insensitive by Muslims, while for China, it will, again, be seen as the villain and greedy country, like how the Western media merrily spins the narrative.

Fake news? No. It’s a story that has a lot of red flags and a new casino in present day Malaysia is a non-starter.

Big potential: Adapting faster to AI technology in as many areas as possible will help Malaysia with proactive planning, which includes looking at talent, norms, standards, and research and development, says the writer. — 123rf

ABOUT a week ago, I decided to make a video ahead of my meeting in Beijing, on the use of artificial intelligence in the media.

The video was no ordinary recording since, finally, AI technology can professionally produce a work of me speaking in Mandarin, even though I’m not fluent in it at all.

With the help of Bernama and Huawei Malaysia, an AI avatar of me was generated speaking in the language, with convincing lip and voice gestures and movements.

With readily available tools, AI allows me to “speak” in any language I choose with near likeness to my voice.

The days of amateur voice dubbing of Malay-speaking Doraemon and Ultraman, which we grew up watching on television, has long expired.

AI will even allow the generators to create an artificial version of myself in great detail.

That AI alter ego of me, if that’s the right term, can be programmed to have conversations with those unaware that it’s not really me.

To rephrase a classic quote, it looks like me and sounds like me, but it isn’t really me. And the technology to do this isn’t even rocket science.

Now, that’s a new avatar I’d like to work on.

As a newcomer to this exciting technology, I have found how useful AI will be in helping generate content as well as fact check our work.

I arrived in Beijing on Thursday to attend a four-day conference organised by China Media Corp (CMG), one of the world’s largest broadcasting networks.

It’s a short training programme for media practitioners to learn about AI and the responsibilities that come with it.

AI will help focus our energies on productivity and creativity as it can handle the mundane daily work, although it can’t negate human decision making.

There’s a responsibility that must be shouldered by humans.

But more than that, as China and the United States compete in this technology, it concerns me that Malaysia has yet to fully embrace it.

At stake is international economic competitiveness and efficiency for Malaysia. Adapting faster to this technology in as many areas as possible will help Malaysia with proactive planning, which includes looking at talent, norms, standards, and research and development.

Will we be able to produce enough Malaysians who are skilled in this area of technology?

By being competent in AI technology, nations aspire to have a strategic advantage over their rivals, and outpace them.

AI is rapidly transforming the way things are done in many industries, including the media.

Media practitioners are at the forefront of harnessing AI’s potential as a tool for good while ensuring ethical usage.

Journalists can now make use of this new technology for advanced research, data analysis, and coming up with better story angles. They can even leverage AI’s writing assistance for initial drafts while retaining editorial control.

Unfortunately for Malaysia, it seems like we haven’t discovered the relevance of this cutting-edge technology yet.

Almost all sectors have not embraced it as much as they should. It’s probably due to the lack of knowledge and prohibitive costs, but the sad truth is our leaders haven’t focused on this area at all.

Are our regulators ready to ponder existing legal frameworks on the use of algorithm data which affects our lives and generates artificial content, even fake works?

Are our laws and regulators, and even enforcement bodies, equipped to take on those who violate the use of AI?

Yes, Malaysia has started drawing up the code of governance and ethics on AI, but it can’t take too long because technology won’t wait for us to catch up.

How can our police force be upskilled to use AI to conduct investigations and forensic work to help cut down manpower needs? The police have been identified as one area where the use of AI will help lighten the load.

Our politicians are unfortunately wasting too much time on inconsequential issues that won’t help Malaysia be on the forefront of the race to be an international player.

We need an effective action plan for AI to create public awareness. While we have a Roadmap for Artificial Intelligence 2021-2025, we also need a stronger push for a growing digital economy.

One notable venture is the collaboration between YTL Power International Bhd and US-based Nvidia Corp to develop AI infrastructures and build super computers.

For that, we need to attract as well as produce enough of these world forces.