Wednesday, October 25, 2017

Mrs. Trump and Dr. Seuss-- Prejudice of Another Color

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

First Lady Melania Trump sent a set of 9 Dr. Seuss books to the librarian at a Cambridge, Mass. elementary school in celebration of "National Read a Book Day."

The librarian refused to accept the books from Mrs. Trump because they are "steeped in racism, racist propaganda and harmful stereotypes."

Green eggs and ham is racist?

A new study reveals how Facebook, Google, and Twitter are using algorithms to re-educate the public, reshape the political and cultural landscape and conform a generation to their secular progressive worldview.

The First Lady says she read Dr. Seuss' "Oh, the Places You'll Go!" to her son Barron "over and over" when he was younger.

However, when she sent a gift of Dr. Seuss books to the librarian at Cambridgeport Elementary, librarian Liz Phipps Soeiro was offended...and refused Dr. Seuss.

The Washington Post makes much of this story--you can read it for yourself.

My point is not to defend Dr. Seuss and his "Green Eggs and Ham" or "One Fish, Two Fish, Red Fish, Blue Fish", but to point out the glaring and growing hypocrisy of the far Left progressives among us.

Prejudice of another color.

I find it curious that Ms. Soeiro is so offended by Dr. Seuss when her fellow progressives have shown no disgust toward the Doctor in the past.

The librarian says Seuss is "a bit of a cliche" and a "tired and worn ambassador for children's literature."

However, President Obama, a fellow progressive, said while visiting a school in 2015 he is "still a big Dr. Seuss fan."

Obama has also said, "Theodor Seuss Geisel---or Dr. Seuss---used "his incredible talent to instill in his most impressionable readers universal values we all hold."

Even the NEA likes Dr. Seuss.

Steven Grant, a spokesman for the far Left National Education Association, has said, "One of the reasons we partnered with Seuss 20 years ago was to kick-start this program"---referring to their reading program.

This is not about Dr. Seuss. It's about prejudice toward Donald Trump.

Campus Reform reporter Cabot Phillips asked students this week at George Washington University what they thought about President Trump's tax reform proposal being rolled out this week.

In elitist fashion, most all responded with criticism on each point introduced to them

Then Cabot asked the same questions telling students they were proposals being presented by Bernie Sanders. To a one, the students thought they were very good.

When told they were actually part of Trump's plan, not Bernie Sander's, one kid responded, "You got me," and another said, " I am shocked that I do agree with Trump on certain things."

This is a peek at how indoctrination and misinformation has conformed a generation to an anti-Christian, anti-conservative, anti-traditional values worldview.

Carrying the banner of tolerance, they have become among the most intolerant.

Demanding people be open-minded, inclusive and accepting, they have become closed minded and exclusive, rejecting those who are not one of them.

A kind of cultural or intellectual prejudice.

This kind of prejudice is advanced every day.

The Washington Times has published a revealing article which details how, at least in part, this is happening through the Internet giants of our day. I am summarizing it. I would encourage you to read the entire article.

Facebook. Google. Twitter. Yahoo.

The Times says "Algorithms have become the modern-day Cronkite deciding what news reaches the eyes and ears of many Americans."

Dr. Robert Epstein, of the American Institute for Behavioral Research, and Robert E. Robertson, a professor at Northeastern University, tried a simple experiment in the run-up to the presidential election: running searches on Google and Yahoo for political topics.

You should know Dr. Epstein is a vocal supporter of Hilly Clinton.

The Times says, "The results were stunning. Google searches returned twice as many pro-Hillary Clinton news articles as Yahoo."

More stunning, they report, was that men and blue-state residents saw more than double the number of pro-Clinton articles than women and people living in red states.

Mr. Epstein is still studying the results but has expressed concern that Google's search algorithms---a form of artificial intelligence that chooses what results a searcher is looking for---ranked pro-Clinton articles ahead of positive articles about Trump.

These then become the decision makers that decide what information is available and what is not.

And what people come to believe to be the truth.

Frank Foer, a writer for the far Left publication "The Atlantic" says, "Whatever choices these companies make to elevate or bury information is very powerful and will have a big impact on what people read."

The Internet companies, as you can imagine, deny these claims. They say a computer program cannot distinguish between liberal and conservative.

But emerging studies show otherwise.

In extensive studies conducted by Epstein and Robertson, they found "the algorithms are not programmed with an equal time rule."

And they found that "they are programmed to put one thing ahead of another in a way that is highly secret and ever-changing."

A separate study by Nickolas Niakopoulos with Northwestern University analyzed the Google search results on December 1, 2016.

He searched for the names of all 16 presidential candidates and discovered Democrats, on average, had 7 favorable search results among Google's top 10.

Senator Bernie Sanders had 9 positive results without a single negative, while Senator Ted Cruz had no positive results.

Niakopoulos ran a second study just before last year's election and found that the vast majority of sources selected by Google in every search were Left-leaning news outlets. In fact, 50% of Google news sources were from 3 Left-leaning sources---The New York Times, CNN and The Washington Post.

When Google was called out on this matter, they announced they had eliminated the news box and were now picking up news from "all across all sources."

Their spokesperson said, "The algorithm does not focus on political party or ideology."

They said their "algorithms focus on freshness, location, relevance, and diversity."

In May 2016, a group of several former Facebook employees told the tech blog "Gizmodo" that they routinely suppressed news about prominent conservatives. Working as "news curators" for Facebook, they said, "stories reported by conservative outlets such as Breitbart and Newsmax were dismissed unless The New York Times, BBC or CNN covered the same article."

Epstein says when confronted regarding their far Left bias, each of these companies say, "It's not us; it's the algorithm."

He says, "That's so hilarious because they programmed the algorithm."

On the surface, it may be hilarious, but at the core, it is corrupt and destructive.

From the deception in the Garden of Eden to the countless reoccurrences throughout the course of human events, one thing remains the same; Those who advance the secular, humanistic worldview do so in relentless and obsessive ways.

Whether the message is spoken by a snake, written on a wall in a cave, on parchment, carried on broadcast airwaves, or on today's internet---the message is regressive, not progressive---destructive, not constructive.

And it's always an attempt to deceive.

This is why Paul wrote to the Christians in Rome (Romans 12:2), and to all of us today: "And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God."

Be Informed. Be Discerning. Be Aware. Be Prayerful. Be Bold.