> This assumes that "Chinese" "Citizens" didn't notice the air in their cities looks like AAA game textures from the mid 2000s. It also assumes that "Chinese" "Citizens" will pay attention to the US about an AQI number (or whatever the data was).
You don't have to assume anything, this is a real (past) event that has happened:
> In 2008, the US Embassy in Beijing started regularly tweeting about the air quality in the city, which was gearing up to host China’s first Olympic Games. Two times a day, the embassy automatically published current pollution levels measured by an air quality monitor installed on its roof in collaboration with the US Environmental Protection Agency. The data contradicted the figures published by the local government, angering local officials and eventually spurring China to clean up the air in its capital city.
You don't have to assume anything, this is a real (past) event that has happened:
> In 2008, the US Embassy in Beijing started regularly tweeting about the air quality in the city, which was gearing up to host China’s first Olympic Games. Two times a day, the embassy automatically published current pollution levels measured by an air quality monitor installed on its roof in collaboration with the US Environmental Protection Agency. The data contradicted the figures published by the local government, angering local officials and eventually spurring China to clean up the air in its capital city.
https://www.wired.com/story/air-monitoring-beijing-state-dep...
Clearly, having numbers that are/seemed more trustworthy had a large and good impact on the city and it's inhabitants.