YouTube and now-Netflix sensation “Ms. Rachel’s” screen-fueled grip on toddler parents across the nation is certainly newsworthy. The pro-Palestine activism tongue bath about her disguised as a Washington Post profile, however, was far from news.
In just six short years, Rachel Griffin Accurso and her husband turned a simple “Songs For Littles” YouTube channel into millions of subscribers and billions of views. The influence Ms. Rachel exercises on the most technology-exposed generation of all time, however, is not as wholesome as she or the Washington Post make it seem.
WaPo’s first mistake was pretending that Ms. Rachel and the colorful and flashy content she cranks out are similar to Fred Rogers and his primary color-coded, soothing soundtrack-equipped, 31-year TV program Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood. In fact, the article goes so far as to suggest that Ms. Rachel is even more.
“Ms. Rachel is also very much her own thing — the product of a wildly different technological age,” the article states.
The WaPo headline defining the Ms. Rachel puff piece claims she is “carrying on his legacy.” The publication even tries to extend the metaphor by comparing Ms. Rachel’s radical embrace of Gaza to Rogers’ iconic advocacy for integration.
“The YouTube star wants her audiences — adults and children alike — to see the humanity of all people,” the subhead claims.
Mister Rogers asked every episode of his show, “Won’t you be my neighbor?” and told people “I like you just the way you are.” Ms. Rachel’s refusal to work with people who don’t want to join her amplification of “Hamas propaganda” and even shame them, however, didn’t seem to make the WaPo cut.
Gaza might be her current fixation, but Ms. Rachel is no stranger to amplifying leftist propaganda. The woman whom WaPo described as “the constantly accessible soundtrack of early family life” has repeatedly infused her allegedly child-friendly content with her political agenda.
Mister Rogers taught “boys are boys from the beginning. Girls are girls right from the start,” but Ms. Rachel inserted a “nonbinary” character who used “they/them” pronouns in at least one episode and then pouted on a social media break when parents expressed outrage. She also tried to twist the Bible to back her support for LGBT ideology.
Not only did the Washington Post highlight Ms. Rachel’s activism, but the publication refused to ask her any hard questions.
It’s no secret that parents use Ms. Rachel videos to justify prolonged screen exposure for their infants and very young children. Anyone who claims, as WaPo says of Ms. Rachel, to be an “early childhood educator” with a “research-based approach” would be appalled that literal babies are stuck in front of bright clip art for hours.
In fact, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) suggests infants 18 months and younger should get virtually no time in front of a screen. That’s because no matter how “educational” someone claims children’s music videos can be, a chick in a pink headband singing on a screen can’t replace the hands-on interaction and language modeling parents provide to their children face to face.
Ms. Rachel should be pressed to reconcile her business model with these facts. Instead, she was praised. WaPo even found a professor to quote who was willing to rubber-stamp Ms. Rachel’s show as “an alchemy that is irresistible to the littlest audience members.”
News flash: if Brian Stelter pretends something is good journalism, as he did with WaPo’s Ms. Rachel profile, it’s almost guaranteed that it’s not. More importantly, if WaPo claims someone is “carrying on” Mister Rogers’ legacy simply because she’s echoing some political talking points about an overseas conflict, she most likely is not.
Jordan Boyd is a staff writer at The Federalist and producer of The Federalist Radio Hour. Her work has also been featured in The Daily Wire, Fox News, and RealClearPolitics. Jordan graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow her on X @jordanboydtx.
