Stephen Follows analyzed more than 10,000 movies since 2000 to see if review embargo dates correlate with movie quality. He found that, yes, movies that are reviewed favorably tend to have earlier review embargoes. Conversely, the worst movies tend to have embargoes that are basically the same as their release dates.

Follows notes that opening weekends are particularly critical for a movie’s overall financial success:

A 2006 study found that the quality of the movie had much less of an effect on opening-weekend box office than on overall box office gross. You could read this to say: the more time people have to learn about how good the movie is, the more it matters if it’s any good.

Another study in the Journal of Marketing found that reviews have their strongest impact early in a film’s run. Negative reviews, in particular, hurt box office performance more than positive reviews help it, but that asymmetry is concentrated almost entirely in the first week. As the run continues and audience word of mouth takes over, the effect of criticism weakens.

Essentially, if negative reviews are barred from publishing right until a film’s opening, they have less of a chance to tank the film’s performance.

My question after reading this: why do outlets agree to embargoes designed to bury their effect? Reviews are essentially service journalism; they help the public decide how to spend their money. If review embargoes for bad movies are specifically designed to limit the effect of that advice, it seems like film reviewers should consider policies to counteract that. I could imagine larger outlets, at least, saying “we won’t agree to any embargoes fewer than three days before opening.”

I’m sure there are reasons why this is impractical, but geez, why even provide advance access to the films at all if their reviews will be so constrained and ineffective anyway?

Mike Swanson, on “backseat software” that aims to control you, rather than the opposite:

As the marketing adage goes:

People don’t want a drill. They want a hole in the wall.

The drill is just the tool. The outcome is the job. Nobody wakes up and says, “I’d like to buy a new drill today!” Well, except drill enthusiasts, I suppose. Likewise, nobody wakes up and says, “I’d like to buy a new app today!” In fact, your app is in the way of their objective.

I could argue that nobody wants the hole either.

What they really want is what comes after the hole. They want to hang photos of family and friends, souvenirs from trips, and artwork that makes a room feel like home. The drill and the hole are both just steps along the way.

That distance matters. The further a tool is from the real human outcome, the more invisible it should be. The drill doesn’t ask how you’re enjoying your experience drilling. It doesn’t upsell you on premium hole-making. It exists to disappear the moment it’s done its job.

I don’t have much to add here, but it sure does feel like for a lot of major software makers, that end result isn’t even considered. I think even if you asked most people why they want a drill, they’d actually answer “to make a hole.” It takes just the tiniest bit of extra rigor to find the “real human outcome,” and I just don’t see that from larger software makers.

Taffy Brodesser-Akner, in a lovely piece about the Broadway show “Operation Mincemeat” for the New York Times, “Why on Earth Have I Seen the Same Broadway Show 13 Times? An Investigation.”:

The tension I hold isn’t between my professionalism and the joys of fandom; it’s between the deadness of the culture and the surprise and joy of genuine originality. There is still a vestige of my brain that is fighting to save me, to defeat the doldrums of passive consumption by dragging me to fight for active passion. I can defeat those doldrums: Any day but Monday, I can stand right up from my desk and walk right over a few blocks and sit right down in a single seat and stare at the theater’s cadmium yellow curtain, trying not to face down the ridiculous crisis I have found myself in — which is that when I’m in this theater, I am happy and engaged, and when I’m not, I feel that I am useless and living in a world that seems intent on smothering the light that keeps out the dark.

That last line is a lyric from “Operation Mincemeat.”

I never found a show I was quite as enthusiastic about, but in my early 20s, when I lived in New York, I worked for a Broadway-adjacent company and got to see a lot of theater for free or cheap. There are a handful of shows I liked so much I saw them repeatedly: “In the Heights” (five times), “The Bridges of Madison County” (four times, somehow), “The Book of Mormon” (three times), “Altar Boyz” (three times, maybe?).

Brodesser-Akner doesn’t dwell on this aspect in her piece, but it can be overwhelming to see a particularly good (or complicated) musical for the first time. But getting to see a piece of live theater multiple times, in a familiar physical space, with real people performing, is an absolute joy, and you get just a little bit closer to how the people making the work are thinking about it.

But another thing Brodesser-Akner doesn’t mention is how expensive this has become. I got to see these things over and over sometimes through my job, and other times through same-day rush ticketing (I remember seeing Pippin from the first row center balcony for $25 during a snowstorm). NYC ticket prices are so out of control now, and rush/lottery tickets so hard to come by, that you need to be pretty choosy about seeing a show even once.

This video by Veritasium, about an hour long, is one of the best pieces of science communication I’ve ever seen. It’s absolutely amazing what goes into making cutting edge chips. If you have even a passing interest in science or technology, give this a watch.

I know it’s obnoxious to whine about grammar and style, but I also care a lot about clarity and voice in my own writing. So I’ve been keeping a running note to myself of phrases that bug me personally, as a reminder to find better ways to say these things.

• Somewhat of a — You either mean “something of a” or “somewhat.”
• Utilize — Just say “use.”
• Take into consideration — Just say “consider.”
• Use case — Just say “use.”
• Of late — Just say “lately.”
• Price point — In the words of Casey Newton, “we already have a term for price points. It’s called prices.”
• A tad bit — “A tad” or “a bit” works better.
• More so — You probably mean “more.” The “so” in “more so” is for referencing a comparison. (“Lions are loud, more so than mice.”)
• The ___ of it all — I’ve been seeing an uptick of this one in 2025. It’s just a cliché.