So I went and checked, and it really is a ~90-minute thing, but I wonder if the excessive-exposition could partly be explained by habits (or cancelled plans) involving multi-part TV shows, where it's less-weird to remind viewers of details that might be--in their own timeline--a week in the past.
> According to actor Matt Damon, filmmakers are told: “It wouldn’t be terrible if you reiterated the plot three or four times in the dialogue, because people are on their phones while they’re watching.”
OK, well, that's just depressing... or at least, the idea that someone is being distracted playing on their phone while watching the movie on a larger screen is depressing.
In contrast, if it means people are watching on their phones while riding the bus or whatever, and distracted by external events... That's not so bad, because it's a story of where people watch rather than their (in)ability to focus.
Shakespeare reiterated key plot points, because he also knew the audience wasn't always paying attention. They were buying snacks, chatting with friends, even hiring prostitutes. One of the first things I do in editing a script for modern audiences is to remove a lot of redundancies, so that the plays take two hours rather than four.
We adapt to the audience expectations. I don't think Shakespeare audiences were dumb for not paying close attention. That's just what they thought the theater was for. They were neither smarter nor dumber than us, just people.
I have some random Apple TV Show on the bg TV (i havent payed attention to any of it for 3 episodes)
multi-device life is a reality, something playing doesnt meant something is being watched in a world where a human can have several screens around
I do not think TV/Movies should be adapted for this reality, its up to me as a user to decide what to pay attention to, and its up to the creator to decide how to try and capture it
That seems a little unfair, given that we're seeing an essay to sell a much lengthier book. Some brevity is probably the author being strategic rather than un-self-aware.
Also, several of the claims do contain links for more information, such as simplification in music lyrics [0], melodies [1], and sentence-length in books [2].
> Take the Netflix film “Irish Wish,”
So I went and checked, and it really is a ~90-minute thing, but I wonder if the excessive-exposition could partly be explained by habits (or cancelled plans) involving multi-part TV shows, where it's less-weird to remind viewers of details that might be--in their own timeline--a week in the past.
> According to actor Matt Damon, filmmakers are told: “It wouldn’t be terrible if you reiterated the plot three or four times in the dialogue, because people are on their phones while they’re watching.”
OK, well, that's just depressing... or at least, the idea that someone is being distracted playing on their phone while watching the movie on a larger screen is depressing.
In contrast, if it means people are watching on their phones while riding the bus or whatever, and distracted by external events... That's not so bad, because it's a story of where people watch rather than their (in)ability to focus.
Shakespeare reiterated key plot points, because he also knew the audience wasn't always paying attention. They were buying snacks, chatting with friends, even hiring prostitutes. One of the first things I do in editing a script for modern audiences is to remove a lot of redundancies, so that the plays take two hours rather than four.
We adapt to the audience expectations. I don't think Shakespeare audiences were dumb for not paying close attention. That's just what they thought the theater was for. They were neither smarter nor dumber than us, just people.
I have some random Apple TV Show on the bg TV (i havent payed attention to any of it for 3 episodes)
multi-device life is a reality, something playing doesnt meant something is being watched in a world where a human can have several screens around
I do not think TV/Movies should be adapted for this reality, its up to me as a user to decide what to pay attention to, and its up to the creator to decide how to try and capture it
Not a week goes by without thinking about Queen’s Radio Ga Ga and how it is even more applicable now than it was then.
1791464413 | Is society growing stupider? The clues are simple and repeated | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2026/10/07/culture-i... | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50005319 | 0 comments
The "simple/simplified" theme here is repeated numerous times without much insight or exploration. Tragically beyond ironic.
> without much insight or exploration
That seems a little unfair, given that we're seeing an essay to sell a much lengthier book. Some brevity is probably the author being strategic rather than un-self-aware.
Also, several of the claims do contain links for more information, such as simplification in music lyrics [0], melodies [1], and sentence-length in books [2].
[0] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-55742-x
[1] https://www.seresearch.qmul.ac.uk/chcc/news/4763/study-finds...
[2] https://www.economist.com/culture/2025/09/04/is-the-decline-...
That’s how The Ghost operates now.
https://archive.ph/fyKbg
Neon yellow journalism and book promo! I bet this guy has a newsletter.
It's why I don't watch any mainstream TV shows. They just have no subtlety. No wonder people are distracted. There's nothing to engage them.