Response to Absolute Powerpoint by Ian Parker

Lets rewind all the way back to the Caleb Crain article at the beginning of the semester when I commented on the experiment with Power Point:

In reference to the recent experiment concerning PowerPoint, in which the silent readers retained more information and were more entertained than those who were informed both visually and audibly, I would have to say I am not surprised. Personally, I have never understood the recent PowerPoint craze.  PowerPoint just seems like another good excuse on top of Google and SparkNotes for students to slack; to cut and paste and replace solid research with entertaining photos. Ironically, many teachers seem to praise it in the name of moving forward with education. When I am viewing a PowerPoint presentation I always feel as if I am getting random, disconnected phenomenon thrown at me rather than absorbing one cohesive lesson, and in the case that the PowerPoint was compiled by a student, this is usually not far from the truth. I would much prefer reading from a textbook where I would take the personal initiative in retaining the information rather than have it chopped up and fed to me in pieces via PowerPoint. Perhaps this has something to do with some sort of psychological conditioning of my brain to shut off and recline in a La-Z-Boy boy every time a screen pops up.

Now coming back to "Absolute Powerpoint" by Ian Parker I have to say my views have not changed that much. Although I definitely see the efficiency of the PowerPoint I still have to agree with the view that Parker seems to lean toward that our thoughts and actual level of thinking may be getting cut short by the bullet point format. However, since PowerPoint is obviously not going anywhere considering that Parker mentions in some social circles not arriving to a presentation with a PowerPoint is like forgetting your shoes, I think we must find a happy medium. We must take the responsibility to be prepared presenters, and not just mindlessly read word for word what is written on the slides. We have all had that teacher who insults us by reading what is right in front of our faces for an hour as if our eyeballs and brain were not able to communicate with each other. Then again, there are those teachers that can grab your attention with their knowledge to the point that you forget that there is a PowerPoint behind them. So in some ways this is just another one of those arguments in which the effectiveness all depends on the individual.     

Picking on Wiki

Embarrassingly enough, I did not understand how Wikipedia worked until I arrived at college and none of my professors would allow me to cite it. The fact that Wikipedia is a collaborative site subject to error was a detail that my high school teachers somehow managed to skip over. I have always used the site as my first resource when I am about to tackle a foreign topic. It is nice to have all of the neat little dates and categories laid out before me on one site. Upon beginning college I was told that I may use it as a resource, but that I could not cite it which still didn't make much sense to me. I didn't understand why Wikipedia was always getting picked on and treated like a lesser specimen. Now that I more fully understand the concept I am able to see the reasons behind its being labeled as not credible.

The back and forth between Wales from Wiki and Cauz from Britannica was pretty entertaining. I loved the musical metaphors that they both came up with to describe their dominance over the other. According to Cauz Wikipedia is what American Idol would be to Juilliard, and from Wales point of view Britannica is what easy listening would be to rock. It was also interesting to learn about the site's terminology such as "wikignome" and "wikitroll". Internet communities have always been something I have never really understood, but they are interesting to observe.

Acts 3-5 Pygmalion

While reading the first half of the play I was very much reminded of the movie adaptation. However, after reading on, the play began to take its own unique form apart from my previous knowledge. In fact, I do not recall any of the scenes as having been in the movie. To me, the most intriguing part of the second half of the play was the scene in which Eliza is getting back at Higgins for his insensitivity. It is interesting to note the tactics she uses to upset him. There is something timeless and childlike about it. She takes his friend, Colonel Pickering, and contrasts him to Higgins. She describes Pickering as the one who truly educated her while Higgins simply taught her the mechanics of language. She says that Pickering is the real gentleman that makes her feel like a real lady. Higgins comeback was unexpected for me. He said that what really distinguishes a man or woman in society is whether or not they treat everyone the same, like he does. The last conversation between Higgins and Liza is truly entertaining. Bernard Shaw certainly had the personalities of his characters well thought out and must have been acquainted with similar personalities at some point in his life. The sequel, I thought, was very comical in that it delved into great detail about the future of the characters as well as some very particular reasons why Liza could never have ended up with Higgins. 

Acts I&II Pygmalion

I am a bit embarrassed to admit that I never knew that Pygmalion and My Fair Lady were essentially the same thing. I have watched the musical My Fair Lady several times and heard the play Pygmalion brought up in discussions and never connected the two. That kind of thing is pretty common though. Someone will write something based on another authors work and it becomes well known to the general population, overshadowing the original work. The dazzling Audrey Hepburn can probably take a lot of the credit for this particular situation. I remember watching the movie when I was very young and singing along with the catchy rhymes like "the rain in Spain falls mainly in the plain". The contrast of the willful and unlearned Liza to the gentlemanly manner of Higgins was always something that entertained me. One of the scenes that stood out to me was when Liza was at the horse race and starts getting all worked up and yelling obscenities at the horse they had bet on- something along the lines of "move your bloomin' arse!". Her character was endearing because even though she may have transformed into a lady, in the end she never lost her spunk. Another quote I recall is when she was trying to make lady like conversation and made a comment like "gin was mothers milk to her". I can only guess that lines like this must have come directly from Bernard Shaw's Pygmalion. So far the play is very entertaining. I find myself paying close attention to the way in which it is written since I do not read many plays. It is interesting to note the little details that playwrights add in so that the play can be directed in the manner in which the writer imagined.

Marveling at Marvell

I must say I was immediately enraptured by this poem and taken in by the sincerity of its voice. Andrew Marvell really knew how to reach the ladies. Whoever his "coy mistress" was had to have felt the depth of his emotions for her. The initial idea that I gleaned was that the kind of love affair that she deserved was too great for one lifetime. He wanted to give her a love through all the ages including past, present, and future. I don't think it gets much more romantic than that. The way he incorporated important world events was beautiful. 

The second time I read it I felt more of a sense of urgency in his voice. It was less that he wanted to be with her forever, and more that he was urging her to make a decision. He is almost being a little pushy about it when you look into the wording. He says in the first two lines that "had we but world enough, and time,/This coyness, lady, were no crime", meaning that her shyness or playing hard to get would be pardoned if they had the time for it, but they don't. So in a round-about way he is really telling her that the way she is acting is criminal-perhaps a little harsh Marvell? The somewhat passive-aggressive tone in which he begins the poem, however, can easily be forgiven because of the next forty-four lines.

I cannot help but question his choice of wording though when we approach the stanza about time being short. Perhaps I over analyzed it but it seems as though the focus of lines 21-32 is sex with lines like "... then worms shall try/That long preserv'd virginity" and then later on with "The grave's a fine and private place, But none I think do there embrace". I have no problem with this reference, I only question his choice of referring to her honor and then his lust: "And your quaint honour turn to dust/And into ashes all my lust". To me this could almost suggest that he is eager to sleep with her because of his lust and he wishes that she would not take forever to make a decision about it. This is a long shot, but worth thinking about. 

The ending is absolutely breathtaking. Who wouldn't want to look at life that way? Life is better lived when two people combine what they have ("Let us roll all our strength, and all/Our sweetness, up into one ball;) and take on struggles together ("And tear our pleasures with rough strife/Thorough the iron gates of life"). The last two lines are memorable and inspiring. We can't stop the sun, but we can make it run- I feel a hit song coming on...

Perhaps a little crazy, but periodically correct

Feminists- they do not have the best reputation today. Many view them as women starved for attention and trying to twist everything they hear in order to confirm their own self imposed victimization. I have always grouped feminists in the same category that I do people involved in New Age and the sort, and I do not always understand the point of their arguments and insight. I do however believe that women have been oppressed just as much as any other minority. Yet in today’s world it sometimes seems that they try to create imaginary discrimination or fight for rights in ridiculous and petty situations.

Reading the first essay I found it hard to hold the feminist criticism on the same level as Marxist and cultural, but that is just my personal opinion. To me it feels as though the feminist critics go out on a limb to link their concepts with those in the books that they critique. The idea that women need to “write their bodies” in order to “realize their sexuality” sounds a little bizarre. When they use terms like “female power” and the like, it just seems to glorify the female sex, or rather just pull an awkward attention to it.

As far as the second essay is concerned though, I do not feel like Pykett stretches the truth since the period in which Wuthering Heights takes place is one of blatant restrictions for women. The novel is quite obviously centered around Catherine’s choice between Heathcliff and Edgar. It is also apparent that Catherine’s strong personality and power over the men in her life only seems to cause trouble for herself and others. It is interesting that she points out that the novel explores the “dangers involved in women thinking of themselves, or their love, as gifts to be bestowed”. I did not fully understand where she was going with this point, so I would like further insight on it. 

Getting Truthful

Before I began reading the essay “Marxist Criticism and Wuthering Heights” I couldn’t help but wonder why I was reading “Marxist Criticism and Wuthering Heights”. Then, comically enough, I am greeted with: “To the question ‘What is Marxist criticism?’ it may be tempting to respond with another question: ‘What does it matter?’” Let’s face it; this isn’t an essay most students would read out of curiosity or because of the sheer tempting nature of the title. I am not one for politics, so I probably procrastinated the reading further than most. When I was finished with the first essay I felt rather disappointed. I do not feel like the question: “What does it matter?” ever really was answered after my reading. The content seemed to consist heavily of power hungry men fighting to have their own personal views of literature claimed as correct. The way that some of them tried to structuralize literature and view writers as the product of the times bothered me. Life just isn’t that simple. Perhaps it was all a little over my head and the point got lost.

However, reading on to the second essay where the topic was narrowed down to cover Wuthering Heights, my mind heaved a sigh of relief and I felt more clarity and interest. I do wish that I had read Jane Eyre since both articles contrast the two novels repeatedly by labeling Charlotte’s work to be mythical in an ideological sense and Emily’s as mythical in a timeless “worldview” sense. The thought that really engages me is when Eagleton speaks of Cathy’s trying to live two lives after she knows that she has made the wrong decision to marry Edgar.  She has indeed committed a “spiritual suicide and murder” that naturally causes her own life and those around her to spiral out of control. This is not to say that Heathcliff didn’t cause sorrow, because he most definitely did his best to make everyone miserable. But when you betray yourself and do not seek to make things right, the balance of life is upset and only tends to get worse. I never really looked at their situation in light of this important factor.

Catherine is not the only one who betrays herself. Heathcliffe becomes “contradiction incarnate” when he rises from oppressed to oppressor and a sort of dark comedy is the result when he must use his powers within the confines of the capitalist class and the culture that he hates. All of this contradiction and self betrayal is perhaps what makes the novel so difficult to get through, but it also makes it truthful. Life is full of contradictions and pain, and not only do our social and physical situations cause us sorrow, but so does our tendency to make choices that betray ourselves. More times than not, we bring about our own suffering. 

A Delightful Disappointment

This is my first time reading Wuthering Heights. Being so, I found it necessary to return to the beginning and reread the assigned pages armed with a better knowledge after having finished. There seemed to be so many characters sharing either the same last or even first names, tangled in connections that were easy to confuse, especially when presented through the language of the book. Not only that, but the story switched back and forth from Mr. Lockwood’s thoughts to Nelly’s storytelling as to further complicate my initial read.  Thankfully I sped through it the second time fully engaged and better humored by the passages.  Although I had not previously read the book, I had seen the 2009 BBC adaptation a year ago with Tom Hardy playing the lead role of Heathcliff. The curiosity which led me to watch the movie (which surprisingly enough was not the gorgeous Tom Hardy) is still the same motivation that I felt inspired me as I read through the first ten chapters: the atmosphere of the story.

This dismal atmosphere begins to take form before the first chapter has even begun. The name of the book, which is the dwelling of Heathcliff, is enshrouded with imagery, with “‘Wuthering’ being a significant provincial adjective, descriptive of the atmospheric tumult to which its station is exposed in stormy weather.”  Since the book is after all a classic, I had heard the name mentioned many times throughout my life, and gleaned from the title alone that there was something dark and looming to be discovered behind its pages. I ventured upon it with the same excitement of driving into a brooding thunderstorm on a dull afternoon. I was not disappointed. Emily Bronte pulled me into the dreary, rustic world of the Heights with descriptions of the dwelling such as “… gaunt thorns all stretching their limbs one way, as if craving the alms of the sun”, and “… grotesque carving lavished over the front [door]… among a wilderness of crumbling griffins…”, and with words like bleak, black, blustered, bitter, wailed, and wild to depict the weather.

The best example of this gothic imagery was the nightmare that Mr. Lockwood suffered during his stay at the Heights. It is creepy to picture the “little, ice cold hand” that he rubs against the glass of the broken window pane until the blood drenches the sheets in order to loosen the vise it has him in, and to hear the “doleful cry” of Catherine’s apparition that begs him to let her inside. The way it is portrayed, I can’t help but picture the Heights as a strange purgatory that both Heathcliff and Catherine are damned to for eternity. The dream that Cathy has where she is flung out of heaven by the angels onto the heath of Wuthering Heights and rejoices to be home confirms the eerie connection for me, and Heathcliff being colored as a ghoul or demon is only suitable.

As much as I enjoy a Gothic novel with a melancholic ending, when I watch the movie and now while I am reading the book, I am wishing the rugged Heathcliff to break free from his dark past and become Cathy’s reformed lover. I find myself rooting him on despite my knowledge of his ruinous end. I almost feel as if Bronte is teasing all of the female readers that try and follow along with the plot according to the archetypal structuring of the romantic hero that we have been bred to adore. However, this is the very thing that sets the novel apart in my mind as something different. I did not get to have the ending that I wished for, but instead was confronted with something unpredictable and thought provoking; a delightful disappointment.  

Cooking up some Kitsch with my Easy-Bake Writing

This blog may be the hardest one for me to write now that I am currently very keenly aware of my own tendency to meander into the language trap that George Orwell speaks of in his essay. In fact, I mindlessly began this post with a “not-un-formation” (As a student I am not unfamiliar…) but caught myself before I could complete the despicable sentence. I am shocked by how much this modern English has permeated my writing, but then again I have had years of practice regurgitating phrases that I think sound intelligent. These “ready-made” phrases have allowed me to cook up in a matter of minutes, essays that should have taken hours of preparation. I was able to justify the tasteless concoctions produced with the excuse that I was simply not interested in the subject matter so they were somehow severed from my identity as a writer. I now realize that this lazy habit of Easy-Bake Writing left its insidious mark.

I not only allowed for it to happen but took pride in the fact that I could fill up a whole page with print and not once have to engage my brain. Making it to two pages was even better; for a five page research paper on atomic bonding that would mean just three pages of actual research. I’m guilty of it all: dying metaphors, pretentious diction, meaningless words, and my personal favorite, operators. I recall literally perusing my papers for opportunities to turn verbs into operators in order to meet a word count.  This language was more prevalent in my science papers, probably because I thought I had to use “scientific words”.  Contrastingly, when I wrote a ten page research paper on “Moral Decadence in The Picture of Dorian Gray” for British Literature I spent hours trying to perfect my own personal masterpiece because I was writing for pleasure and not for the grade.

However, the problem with disassociating writing for pleasure and obligatory writing is that there is no such distinction in the mind. All words and phrases, both sincere and “slovenly”, conglomerate inside the kitchen-sink of our brain. When you actually want to be sincere there is now a barrier you must surpass.  “An accumulation of stale phrases chokes [you] like tea leaves blocking a sink”, as Orwell would put it.  At this point it is no longer you constructing words or thoughts. The phrases muddle your meaning until you are so confused that you forget what it is you were trying to convey to begin with. I can relate to this suffocating experience. I am quite fond of poetry and song lyrics, but whenever I attempt to write down sincere thoughts on paper a mob of horrendously cliché phrases lays siege to my brain. Under this influence the products of my creative effort almost never retain their integrity. I only find myself producing the same kitsch over and over again in slightly differing variations. Just like the little half baked cupcakes I would cook in minutes with my Easy-Bake oven when I was little, I produce doughy, tasteless excuses for writing when I don’t consciously force myself to think.

                                                                                                                                         

Getting Involved in a Complicated Relationship

The ideas conveyed in A History of Reading that most “stir or delight [my] soul (p. 63),” as St. Augustine would put it, are those that touch on the convoluted relationship between book and reader. As a reader and aspiring writer I could easily connect with the metaphors used to describe this intricate relationship. Some of Manguel’s personal thoughts on reading as well as the quotes of others in his account of its history turned out to be feelings I have carried inside for years, finally making their eloquent escape onto the pages of the text. This is only natural, as the history of reading is one shared by many.

The description of words as sustenance [the first example found in Ezekiel (p. 171)] is in my opinion the best metaphor to describe the relationship between book and reader. It accurately depicts the insatiable appetite as well as the urgent possessiveness that I feel when I am holding a book. When it comes to reading, enough is never enough.

 A true reader is also a scavenger. I don’t blame Alexander the Great for stopping ships at Alexandria to snatch up literature for his already overwhelmingly extensive library of nearly half a million scrolls (p. 189). Owning a book is not like owning a shiny new pair of boots. It is not even comparable to owning a pet, although I quite enjoyed Manguel’s comparison of yellowed and withering paperbacks on the patio to rescued stray cats (p.141).

As Manguel says, one does not simply read a book: “One reads a certain edition, a specific copy, recognizable by the roughness or smoothness of its paper, by its scent, by a slight tear on page 72 and a coffee ring on the right-hand corner of the back cover (bottom of p.15).” We attach sentimental value to our books as we do friends worthy of affection. Books are things that we first judge, then own, and finally assign differing levels of meaning to. Like friends, we have favorites, and like friends our books must inevitably find their unique place in our lives.

As explained in the chapter on private reading beginning on page 149, in the complex relationship between book and reader, where you read a book is just as important as the book you have chosen. To continue the comparison of books to friends, every book has more or less a certain place in which it is enhanced and able to have its full effect upon us. Not only does each book have an ordained place, but will also usually hold fast to a specific time that is proper or habitual. A book whose company you would enjoy in bed beneath the glow of a solitary lamp may not be a book whose face you would welcome flooded in the light of day upon a park bench.

This can be carried into the idea of books as social mediums. Manguel explores this idea when he speaks of a cousin of his who “was deeply aware that books could function as a badge, a sign of alliance, and always chose a book to take on her travels with the same care with which she chose her handbag (p. 214).”Therefore a book to be read while traveling or in public must be chosen wisely in order to reflect the image you wish to portray to others. Accordingly, you can immediately feel a deep connection with a stranger if you see him or her delving into the depths of a text that is close to your heart. It is in that moment you realize that you share a mutual friend, and therefore a mutual interest.

 The kindle of course renders all this fuss quite useless when your reading material becomes hidden behind a standard electronic tablet. This sort of privacy could be nice at times (after all, many readers seek escape from their surroundings) but could also lessen the social aspect of reading. The act of reading (be it kindle or book) is however in itself a social statement.

 I do not believe that books are in danger of being replaced by electronic-books. They are not as personal, nor can a person “retain a sense of the whole (p.127)” when they are holding an e-book like they can a codex. Manguel is right when he says that readers today are familiar with the “return of the ancient book-form on our computer screens”, in reference to the limiting surface of a scroll. This is not entirely the case with a kindle as it is a computer because you still hold a book in page format, but you may not finger your place at multiple sections, place post-its and scribble notes, or easily flip through pages like you can with a book.

Regardless of the format, the passionate relationship between book and reader is not limited to a mere physical item. It does not end with the completion of the final page, nor is it constricted to the confines of a publisher’s binding. The relationship between book and reader, like any other relationship, is carried on through memory. Books become a part of their readers. When explaining Walt Whitman’s opinion on the topic, Manguel states: “… invisibly, unconsciously, text and reader become intertwined, creating new levels of meaning, so that every time we cause the text to yield something by ingesting it, simultaneously something else is borne beneath it that we haven’t yet grasped (p. 173).”

Likewise, I believe that memorizing takes us to an even deeper level of intimacy within our relationship with a text. It is now our own in almost every sense, privately stowed away inside the recesses of our minds. It is the simple pleasure of a secret ownership, and a challenge to integrate that which we love unto ourselves.

Response to TWILIGHT OF THE BOOKS by Caleb Crain

For starters, I had to look up the word “arcane” as it described reading in the first paragraph of the article because it is not a word that I see very often.  (They warn that it probably won't regain the prestige of exclusivity; it may just become "an increasingly arcane hobby.") My initial reaction was to assume it meant archaic judging by the context of the sentence and the simple fact that the words sound similar. However, it is defined as: known or understood by very few; mysterious; secret; obscure; esoteric. So sociologists mean to say that reading will become somewhat of an obscure hobby in the future, like bird watching or constructing remote control planes. This is easier for me to stomach than a fearful dystopia like in Farenheit 451, but makes me said nonetheless.

I believe that the biggest thing lost in the transition from text to audiovisual media would be exercise of imagination. There is something so beautiful about creating images in your head when you read. They are your own, generated by your own personal bucket of data, making solitary reading a creative and self realizing sort of experience. Words cause us to reflect.

Furthermore, opening a book is like opening a dormant world through our imaginations. Just as the author brought a world into being through his imagination, the reader completes the cycle of revitalization with every new viewing. As readers we do not simply sit back and demand to be entertained. We must put effort into the creation of our own world of entertainment through exercising our imagination.

I found the paragraph on the progression from childhood reading to that of adult to be extremely interesting as it concerns the imagination. According to the article, as we grow up our brain signals actually change the routes in which they navigate; a short cut that allows for faster comprehension of data while also tying in more of our own personal experiences with what we are reading. I was immediately reminded of an informative writing article I had read recently called: Writing to the Imagination by Kathy Krajco. It states that as we grow older we are able to process words as “raw stimuli” rather than processing them the way a computer would process computer language. In other words, the process becomes more personalized as we accumulate a network of human data, or a “relational database”.

According to Krajco’s article, this is not developed until the mid-twenties. Therefore, once our imaginations are more fully developed we do not simply process words as language, but we experience the words as they come to us. Interestingly enough, this is why many experts think that teens show poor judgment in comparison to adults. As where adults could feel and experience the consequences of a decision before it is made, teens can only analyze the situation.

This being said, I can only see books as being the logical continuation in exercising our ever growing imaginations. Children need picture books because their brains are not fully formed. What does this say about television? I am not supposing to be an advocate for destroying modern technology, but I will not allow myself to believe that books will become obsolete either. Audiovisual media is very important, but does not replace the function of literature. As far as the shocking statistics on the nearly extinct newspaper, I don’t really see that as being a reflection on the future of books. Maybe that is just a result of my own stereotyping of a newspaper as something that old men read on Sundays. Publishing is undoubtedly dwindling with the green movement and the invention of e-book readers, but this transition could also open new doors of opportunity for aspiring writers.

In reference to the recent experiment concerning PowerPoint, in which the silent readers retained more information and were more entertained than those who were informed both visually and audibly, I would have to say I am not surprised. Personally, I have never understood the recent PowerPoint craze.  PowerPoint just seems like another good excuse on top of Google and SparkNotes for students to slack; to cut and paste and replace solid research with entertaining photos. Ironically, many teachers seem to praise it in the name of moving forward with education. When I am viewing a PowerPoint presentation I always feel as if I am getting random, disconnected phenomenon thrown at me rather than absorbing one cohesive lesson, and in the case that the PowerPoint was compiled by a student, this is usually not far from the truth. I would much prefer reading from a textbook where I would take the personal initiative in retaining the information rather than have it chopped up and fed to me in pieces via PowerPoint. Perhaps this has something to do with some sort of psychological conditioning of my brain to shut off and recline in a La-Z-Boy boy every time a screen pops up.

Back on the topic of television, I would have to agree with Marshall McLuhan in the article when he says that television “completes the cycle of the human sensorium”. It allows for an immediate grasp on the personality of a person creating quick emotional connections which can be a helpful tool for politicians and the like. But this could also be used to help out authors in a way. Many times I have felt more connected to characters in books after already having gotten to know them on the television screen. Film is often a medium in which people can become exposed to good literature through its visual counterpart. There is not as much media bombarding us on a daily basis advertising for literature as there is for movies and television series, making film the incentive some may need to be introduced to newly published books. This is not to say that I believe reading is secondary to viewing, but only to imply that the television and movie industry may be benefiting authors in some very imperative ways.

The final observation I would like to make on the article concerns the last several paragraphs. The overall message that I glean from them is that our world could be in danger of becoming populated by persons who do not think for themselves nor care to act upon their convictions. This would be the result of “a culture of secondary orality” where people would avoid interaction with any ideas they do not agree with and agree with ideas that do not have any real authority or truth behind them. This secondary orality would stem from selective television viewing. In contrast, the article suggests reading as “a prototype of independence” that inspires us to act. All of this kind of reminds me of the opiate of the masses idea from Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World.

 In relation, 19^th century American education reformist Horace Mann once said:

        A house without books is like a room without windows…. The love of knowledge comes with reading and grows upon it.  And the love of knowledge, in a young mind, is almost a warrant against the inferior excitement of passions and vices.

It would not be far-fetched to say that television has become the new universal “window” through which we view the world, but a window that may be personalized based on what each individual would like to see. Unfortunately what most people would like to see is their own beliefs and opinions confirmed back to them.