For many of us, 2016 was a particularly formative year in our childhoods. I had just turned 10 years old and had been given my very first phone. I couldn’t wait for what the wonders of the World Wide Web had in store! I don’t think I ever could have prepared for what made headlines in early 2016 as the world met Sophia, the AI humanoid robot! And my first reaction seeing this new technological marvel? EW oh dear LORD EW! What is that THING?

The main issue is the face, which has been ripped straight from the depths of uncanny valley. Then there’s the see-through window into its “brain,” which is an odd choice. I mean, if I were to design a robot to be as normal and human-like as possible, I don’t know that I’d want to include a window into the gaping cavity in its mind, proving that its very existence is a falsehood and there is in fact no soul in this electronic husk of a “human”. But hey, that’s just me! Another big issue I have is that the face moves and is animated to some degree. Whatever mechanism moves the facade of flesh just doesn’t do a good enough job, and so all of Sophia’s facial expressions give off a vibe somewhere between a run-down theme park animatronic from the 90’s and your average celebrity that has frozen their face with too much botox and filler. Beside the face being covered in a flesh-toned exterior, the “skin” extends down to about the collarbone and then just ends. So the most human feature of the robot extends from the forehead to the neck. That’s it, really? Did they run out of budget for beige silicone? Or was it an intentional choice to make the rest of the body of the “humanoid” robot to look nothing like a human?

I recently came across a video where Sophia was “singing” with a live orchestra. The text of this song began with the line “I don’t want you to be afraid,” and personally that line does nothing besides invoke fear in my heart. Beside offending musicians around the globe by calling that poor excuse of a performance “classical music,” Sophia expresses its wish to connect with human emotions through art. Please, don’t. If you want to connect with human emotion, why not start with disgust and disappointment from me, a living, breathing singer who is sitting here wondering if she will ever have a job because robots are learning to sing. Sophia doesn’t need a paycheck or healthcare or even a soul, so why would anyone ever spend money on paying a human musician who requires all of those things? 

So really, thank you to Sophia for not only being a horror of human creation, but also reminding me of my future unemployment! But please, consider putting on some more skin? Maybe a wig? You’re really creeping me out.

Editor’s note (competing interest): The author of this article is a member of the Oxbridge Honors Program.

The end of the 2025-2026 academic year will mark the end of William Jewell College’s Oxbridge Honors Program. The program was already barely clinging on, with admissions for new students closing in 2025 and the unique small-group tutorial-style courses that defined the program being eliminated that same year. The college’s financial exigency has also resulted in significant faculty turnover, including the loss of many Oxbridge professors. The current Oxbridge Senior Tutor and the final remaining Philosophy professor at Jewell, Dr. Elizabeth Sperry, is among that list, as she has been let go by Jewell after over 30 years at the college.

While the average Jewell student had little interaction with the Oxbridge program, for those students (including myself) who were fortunate enough to be selected for it, the program was truly a life-changing opportunity. With the program officially being closed by the college this year, I’ve taken some time to reflect on just what Oxbridge has meant for me. The Oxbridge Honors Program deserves to be remembered, and the lessons of its closure must be understood if we wish to preserve what makes Jewell unique.

Why Oxbridge Mattered

The Oxbridge Honors Program was much more than just a typical honors program. Oxbridge students were offered a thoroughly specialized and highly intensive form of education, one that didn’t fit into the standard structure of Jewell so much as was added on top. In their first semester, Oxbridgers would take the Introductory Seminar, an intense crash course on writing and thinking philosophically. Even now, at the conclusion of my senior year, the Oxbridge Intro Seminar remains arguably the most influential single course I have taken in my time at the college, and my experiences there continue to shape how I read, write, think, and live.

After completing that first seminar, each of the six Oxbridge majors would proceed into a planned-out list of specialized tutorials, a specialized and Oxbridge-exclusive class with a Jewell professor who specialized in that given subject. Every week, there would be an assigned list of readings from key thinkers and researchers in that field, and most weeks would include an essay assignment about that given reading. During the course meeting, the students would share their essays and would have to defend their ideas before their professor and their fellow students. These opportunities to not only write down my arguments about a given question but to defend them under often-intense scrutiny have been incredible for developing my ability to reason on the fly.

The pre-planned structure also permits Oxbridgers in the same major to develop a close academic camaraderie. For cases where multiple Oxbridgers share the same year and major, those students take all their tutorials together, letting them build rapport over time and become comfortable sharing their ideas and critiquing each other. The students I’ve shared tutorials with have greatly shaped my thinking on many key questions in the field and learning not just alongside them but also from them is an incredible feature of the program.

While Oxbridge provides students with many wonderful opportunities during their years on Jewell’s campus, the distinctive feature of the program was the study abroad opportunity in the junior year. As the name implies, the program primarily sent students to Oxford University, allowing students to join one of the oldest and most academically rigorous institutions on the planet.Jewell maintained relationships with eight Oxford colleges (Regents’ Park, Mansfield, Hertford, Lady Margaret Hall, St. Anne’s, St. Catherine’s, St. Edmund’s, and St. Peters’), and Oxbridge students could select from any of the options based on their interests, major, and location preferences.

I cannot speak for every Oxbridge student, but for me, that year abroad was the greatest highlight of my time in the program. It not only helped me grow academically but showed me a new way of learning and a new way of life. Before that year, I would never have considered moving to a new continent, but spending a year in Oxford proved to me that I want the next stage of my academic career, and of my life, to be in Europe. Without Oxbridge and the opportunities Jewell provided, I would never have found that next step forward.

What Went Wrong

Like all good things, the Oxbridge Program didn’t last forever. Identifying an exact date of its demise is tricky, but this year, in which the college officially informed students and faculty that Oxbridge would be closed and the role of Senior Tutor eliminated, is as good a date to select as any. The actual causes of its closure are various and complex; Oxbridge was a remarkable and unique program but by its nature it placed a huge number of financial and logistical challenges on the institution. Jewell is already suffering through a crisis wholly unrelated to Oxbridge, and the college’s reactions to that crisis have largely shifted its focus away from its more specialized programs; with all those institutional headwinds facing the program, its removal is sadly unsurprising.

The start of Oxbridge’s downfall was the loss of the Hall Family Foundation’s grant. The Hall Family Foundation, built from the fortune of the founders of Hallmark Cards, spent millions of dollars on the Oxbridge program, with their 2014 report listing a grant of over $1.2 million specifically to assist with program expansion between 2014 and 2017. These grants helped fund not only scholarships for Oxbridge students but also the Journey Grants that helped Oxbridgers fund their study abroad year in Oxford.

Unfortunately, this money, initially donated shortly after the program’s founding in 1982, has since run dry, and has left the Oxbridge program financially unsustainable. While Dr. Sperry made significant efforts to reinforce the financial position of the program through fundraising efforts, her efforts came at the same time as the College’s major fundraising push for the now-abandoned Link project, and later during the financial exigency. As such, Jewell did not prioritize the Oxbridge fundraising efforts, and without a significant benefactor for the program, Jewell was unable to continue providing the Oxbridge Journey Grants and other scholarships. This, along with the rising cost of an Oxford education in the first place (visiting student fees increased 34% between academic years 2019 and 2023), has significantly reduced the ability of the remaining Oxbridge classes to enjoy the program’s key distinctive feature.

The financial exigency at Jewell has impacted not only the funding of Oxbridge but also the educational experience of Oxbridge students at Jewell. As explored in the Hilltop Monitor back in spring of 2025, 45 faculty and staff members, including tenured faculty, were laid off during the initial declaration of exigency, and additional faculty members, including Dr. Sperry, will be leaving at the end of this academic year. The Oxbridge program’s tutorial system relied on having faculty available to teach those unique one-of-a-kind classes, and with the downsizing of Jewell’s faculty, there simply were not enough faculty members available to teach those tutorials.

As such, starting with the 2024/2025 academic year, Oxbridge tutorials were turned into “embedded tutorials,” where students would participate in a regular class and would meet occasionally with their professor on the side, either during office hours or at a scheduled meeting. These embedded tutorials did not count as an additional course on a professor’s workload, since the primary class meeting time was shared with another non-Oxbridge course, which meant that professors could be scheduled for their full course load and be required to teach an Oxbridge course in addition. This stopgap measure was functional enough for Oxbridge students, and the embedded tutorials I have taken at Jewell have certainly been enjoyable. However, the additional workload placed on professors added extra stress onto faculty members who had already been pushed to their limits.

With Jewell downsizing their professorial staff even further at the end of this academic year, and with the college currently working on their Reimagined Jewell restructuring plan, maintaining even the reduced vision of Oxbridge became incredibly untenable. With Jewell’s emphasis on “developing a flexible, adaptable curriculum” in the wake of their current challenges, the Oxbridge program, with its clearly defined four-year tutorial structure and closed cohorts, would become more of a hindrance than a benefit. Other unique programs, including Jewell Theatre and the Honors Institute for Critical Thinking, have also been casualties of Jewell’s restructuring, and it’s likely that an emphasis on flexibility and broad appeal was part of the decision to cut those programs as well as Oxbridge.

While the loss of Oxbridge may have been inevitable under the current pressures facing the college, that does not make its loss less sad. Oxbridge was not just an honors program that served a few students per year, it was a core aspect of the variety and the excellence that has made this college special. The loss of Oxbridge shows a Jewell that has given up on that which once made it unique, and whatever the future of the college may hold, those unique and meaningful programs should, and will, be missed.

This article was originally published in an Apr. 24 print edition of the Monitor.

(Journalist’s Note: This speech was published on the official White House DaddyPatriot media account earlier this week. So far, the White House has declined to provide further comment.)

My fellow citizens of this strong, great, and beautiful United States of America,

Today, we will be unveiling the biggest technological development that America has seen—at least, since sliced bread! We are excited to present this revolutionary, nationwide update which will roll out new tech features to every household in America—whether you’re rich or poor, whether you’re white or white, whether you’re ugly or a Republican, you are going to love it! For only a small mandatory subscription of $99.99 biannually per device, you will have access to unique specialty safety features developed specifically for you. TakeyoInfo.Chat will be available to you as an information categorization system to help you let go of the responsibility of remembering all your personal data—but it’s not just about keeping track of information, it’s about a more structured, more precise, more data-driven world where we can all work together to achieve great things. Whether you’re looking for a fresh new take on your social security card or just a prediction about where you are going to be at all times, TakeyoInfo.Chat is there for you!

Let’s discuss TakeyoInfo.Chat’s capabilities and features! Whether you’re on your computer for work or just for fun, TakeyoInfo.Chat will be running in the background, gathering information from your hard drive, and collecting it all into a secure online vault that can only be accessed by specialists—no one will be seeing it except the entire government and whoever they show, we promise! And your secrets are safe with us—if TakeyoInfo.Chat finds any risky or political content or information, the software will immediately store it and investigate your personal risk factors, updating with your fine or prison time (calculated precisely with our CalculateyoSentence.Chat tool). And that’s not all—TakeyoInfo.Chat can complete automatic tasks for you, freeing you from boring activities like deciding where to read the news, texting your friends, and even voting with our built-in software that provides AI-generated information on anything you want to know about, suggested responses to any and every correspondence you receive that will automatically send after a 10-second period of inactivity, and effort-free autofill voting. Think camel, but thousands of them on a conveyor belt heading straight for the eye of a needle every single second! 

There are so many more capabilities to TakeyoInfo.Chat that we’d love to share with you, but we couldn’t possibly fit it all in one speech—here are the highlights!

• Free image generation capabilities with built-in bigotry and racism
• Free bullshit spewing capabilities—your political opponents can’t defeat your points as fast as you generate them
• Free child mentorship software—connect your kid with a friendly, helpful, and patriotic agent of the Trump administration!

Whether you’re looking for a helpful in-home assistant for all your thinking needs, a high-tech new way to be hateful as efficiently as possible, or even just a good friend, TakeyoInfo.Chat is here for you. We’ve already been enjoying its helpful features here in the White House! That’s right—you might be surprised to hear this, but some of the images and videos we’ve been posting were actually generated by TakeyoInfo.Chat! While President Trump is definitely the perfect blend of powerful and charming, those photos of him as a Jedi, the pope, co-explorer with a lonely but patriotic penguin, Jesus, and a king were actually not from real life, but generated with care by your good friend TakeyoInfo.Chat! 

But it’s not about generating images so realistic that you think they might step off the screen, it’s about honoring the hard work, dedication, and traditional American values of our great president. That’s another fantastic feature of TakeyoInfo.Chat—for no extra charge, every American will receive a completely free, AI-generated wake-up speech from President Donald J. Trump, unique to them, every single day of the year! Feel free to respond to the pop-up ads embedded in the video to tell us where you would like to be sent after the mandatory draft—our state-of-the-art information sorting system can send you to a deployment location that’s full of rustic charm, a hidden gem of beaches and palm trees, an old-world city full of bustling streets and sunset views, and so much more. Trust us when we tell you that TakeyoInfo.Chat is a real game-changer, not just for analyzing information and generating patriotic, American images and videos, but for helping people access the tools they need to make their own decisions as easily as if something else were making decisions for them.

Fellow Americans, today marks a defining moment—not just for our nation, but for the future we are building together. TakeyoInfo.Chat represents a commitment to a better life for Americans that don’t like putting effort into their citizenship but still want to feel like they have good ideas online—something we can all relate to. Thank you for your commitment to making America great again—one AI post from your highest governing body at a time, we will strive to always improve the quality of life for America’s most fortunate.

Hope this speech fits your needs! If you would like, I can also:

• Generate a video of J. D. Vance doing a wheelie on a motorcycle, yelling “It’s not eyeliner—it’s pure patriotism overflowing out of my eyes!”
• Summarize the key moments of today’s White House events—from Linda the secretary spilling green bean casserole on the floor to that romantic call with Benjamin Netanyahu
• Tell you that you are so handsome, muscular, and smart
• Generate a silly comic strip about immigrants and asylum seekers being deported

I hope this helps!

Just to be clear, please note that AI was not used in the making of this article. I wrote it all. It is from a human. 

• H. William Speck

Media Monopolies

Fact: a small number of corporations play an outsized role in shaping what millions of Americans see, hear, and ultimately believe. While the exact list varies depending on how companies are grouped or reorganized, a commonly cited set of dominant players includes Comcast, The Walt Disney Company, Paramount Global, Warner Brothers and News Corp. Together  these corporations have controlled a substantial share of television networks, film studios, publishing houses and newspapers.

Comcast owns:

• DreamWorks Animation
• Peacock
• NBC (including NBC News, MSNBC, CNBC)
• Universal Pictures 

The Walt Disney Company owns:

• Marvel
• Lucasfilm (owns Star Wars)
• Pixar
• ABC
• ESPN
• 20th Century Studios (formerly 21st Century Fox film assets)

Paramount Skydance owns:

• Paramount Pictures
• Paramount Television
• CBS 
• MTV
• Comedy Central
• Showtime
• Pluto TV

Warner Bros. Discovery owns:

• HBO
• Warner Bros. Pictures
• DC Comics
• Cartoon Network
• Discovery Channel
• CNN

News Corp (owned by Rupert Murdoch) owns:

• HarperCollins 
• The Wall Street Journal
• The New York Post

The Fox corporation (also owned by Murdoch)

• Fox News 

This concentration did not emerge naturally. The most important turning point was the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which dramatically loosened restrictions on how many media outlets a single company could own. Prior to this, rules limited cross-ownership (for example, owning both newspapers and TV stations in the same market) and capped the number of stations a company could control. After 1996, those limits were relaxed or eliminated, opening the door for aggressive mergers and acquisitions. Companies rapidly expanded, swallowing local outlets and consolidating control at the national level. Earlier policies like the Communications Act of 1934 had emphasized serving the “public interest,” but by the late 20th century, the policy environment shifted toward prioritizing market efficiency and corporate growth.

Paramount and Warner Bros. 

These media companies continue to consolidate. Paramount Skydance announced on February 27, 2026 that it will acquire Warner Bros. Discovery in a definitive merger agreement. Paramount is paying $31 per share in cash for all outstanding WBD shares, and the deal is expected to close in Q3 2026, pending regulatory clearance and WBD shareholder approval. More than 2,000 actors, writers, and directors signed a letter opposing the deal, warning it will result in “fewer opportunities for creators, fewer jobs across the production ecosystem, higher costs, and less choice for audiences.”

Propaganda?

The result is not just economic concentration, but informational power. This becomes especially concerning when we look at how narratives can be coordinated across platforms. An example is the behavior of Sinclair Broadcast Group, which owns or operates a large number of local television stations across the country. In 2018, Sinclair drew widespread criticism when dozens of its local news anchors were required to read nearly identical scripts warning about “fake news” and media bias. The segments, broadcast in local markets that viewers often trust more than national outlets, created the impression of independent reporting while delivering a centrally produced message. 

Perhaps the most visible example of the political consequences of media power is the role of Fox News in the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election. The network became central to the spread of claims about election fraud, many of which were later proven false. This culminated in the high-profile Dominion Voting Systems v. Fox News Network lawsuit, in which Fox agreed to pay a $787.5 million settlement to Dominion Voting Systems. Internal communications revealed during the case showed that some hosts and executives privately doubted the fraud claims even as they were promoted on air. In addition, in 2020, Fox News host Tucker Carlson was sued for slander by Karen McDougal after he claimed she tried to extort money from Donald Trump. Fox’s legal defense argued that Carlson’s statements weren’t meant to be taken as factual. Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil agreed, ruling that a reasonable viewer would treat his comments as opinion or exaggerated political commentary rather than literal facts. These case shows how media organizations, driven by ratings, audience expectations, and competitive pressures, can amplify misinformation with significant real-world consequences.

The consequences for democracy are significant. A healthy democratic society depends on access to diverse, independent sources of information. When most media flows through a small number of corporate channels, that diversity can be undermined. Local journalism declines as national corporations cut costs, investigative reporting becomes riskier in a profit-driven environment, and public discourse becomes more polarized as media outlets cater to specific audiences. Meanwhile, the line between news, opinion, and entertainment continues to blur, further complicating the public’s ability to evaluate information. Understanding this landscape is essential for anyone concerned with the future of democratic governance and the integrity of public discourse.