In reading Joe Dolson’s recent piece on the intersection of AI and accessibility, I absolutely appreciated the skepticism that he has for AI in general as well as for the ways that many have been using it. In fact, I’m very skeptical of AI myself, despite my role at Microsoft as an accessibility innovation strategist who helps run the AI for Accessibility grant program. As with any tool, AI can be used in very constructive, inclusive, and accessible ways; and it can also be used in destructive, exclusive, and harmful ones. And there are a ton of uses somewhere in the mediocre middle as well.

I’d like you to consider this a “yes… and” piece to complement Joe’s post. I’m not trying to refute any of what he’s saying but rather provide some visibility to projects and opportunities where AI can make meaningful differences for people with disabilities. To be clear, I’m not saying that there aren’t real risks or pressing issues with AI that need to be addressed—there are, and we’ve needed to address them, like, yesterday—but I want to take a little time to talk about what’s possible in hopes that we’ll get there one day.

Alternative text

Joe’s piece spends a lot of time talking about computer-vision models generating alternative text. He highlights a ton of valid issues with the current state of things. And while computer-vision models continue to improve in the quality and richness of detail in their descriptions, their results aren’t great. As he rightly points out, the current state of image analysis is pretty poor—especially for certain image types—in large part because current AI systems examine images in isolation rather than within the contexts that they’re in (which is a consequence of having separate “foundation” models for text analysis and image analysis). Today’s models aren’t trained to distinguish between images that are contextually relevant (that should probably have descriptions) and those that are purely decorative (which might not need a description) either. Still, I still think there’s potential in this space.

As Joe mentions, human-in-the-loop authoring of alt text should absolutely be a thing. And if AI can pop in to offer a starting point for alt text—even if that starting point might be a prompt saying What is this BS? That’s not right at all… Let me try to offer a starting point—I think that’s a win.

Taking things a step further, if we can specifically train a model to analyze image usage in context, it could help us more quickly identify which images are likely to be decorative and which ones likely require a description. That will help reinforce which contexts call for image descriptions and it’ll improve authors’ efficiency toward making their pages more accessible.

While complex images—like graphs and charts—are challenging to describe in any sort of succinct way (even for humans), the image example shared in the GPT4 announcement points to an interesting opportunity as well. Let’s suppose that you came across a chart whose description was simply the title of the chart and the kind of visualization it was, such as: Pie chart comparing smartphone usage to feature phone usage among US households making under $30,000 a year. (That would be a pretty awful alt text for a chart since that would tend to leave many questions about the data unanswered, but then again, let’s suppose that that was the description that was in place.) If your browser knew that that image was a pie chart (because an onboard model concluded this), imagine a world where users could ask questions like these about the graphic:

• Do more people use smartphones or feature phones?
• How many more?
• Is there a group of people that don’t fall into either of these buckets?
• How many is that?

Setting aside the realities of large language model (LLM) hallucinations—where a model just makes up plausible-sounding “facts”—for a moment, the opportunity to learn more about images and data in this way could be revolutionary for blind and low-vision folks as well as for people with various forms of color blindness, cognitive disabilities, and so on. It could also be useful in educational contexts to help people who can see these charts, as is, to understand the data in the charts.

Taking things a step further: What if you could ask your browser to simplify a complex chart? What if you could ask it to isolate a single line on a line graph? What if you could ask your browser to transpose the colors of the different lines to work better for form of color blindness you have? What if you could ask it to swap colors for patterns? Given these tools’ chat-based interfaces and our existing ability to manipulate images in today’s AI tools, that seems like a possibility.

Now imagine a purpose-built model that could extract the information from that chart and convert it to another format. For example, perhaps it could turn that pie chart (or better yet, a series of pie charts) into more accessible (and useful) formats, like spreadsheets. That would be amazing!

Matching algorithms

Safiya Umoja Noble absolutely hit the nail on the head when she titled her book Algorithms of Oppression. While her book was focused on the ways that search engines reinforce racism, I think that it’s equally true that all computer models have the potential to amplify conflict, bias, and intolerance. Whether it’s Twitter always showing you the latest tweet from a bored billionaire, YouTube sending us into a Q-hole, or Instagram warping our ideas of what natural bodies look like, we know that poorly authored and maintained algorithms are incredibly harmful. A lot of this stems from a lack of diversity among the people who shape and build them. When these platforms are built with inclusively baked in, however, there’s real potential for algorithm development to help people with disabilities.

Take Mentra, for example. They are an employment network for neurodivergent people. They use an algorithm to match job seekers with potential employers based on over 75 data points. On the job-seeker side of things, it considers each candidate’s strengths, their necessary and preferred workplace accommodations, environmental sensitivities, and so on. On the employer side, it considers each work environment, communication factors related to each job, and the like. As a company run by neurodivergent folks, Mentra made the decision to flip the script when it came to typical employment sites. They use their algorithm to propose available candidates to companies, who can then connect with job seekers that they are interested in; reducing the emotional and physical labor on the job-seeker side of things.

When more people with disabilities are involved in the creation of algorithms, that can reduce the chances that these algorithms will inflict harm on their communities. That’s why diverse teams are so important.

Imagine that a social media company’s recommendation engine was tuned to analyze who you’re following and if it was tuned to prioritize follow recommendations for people who talked about similar things but who were different in some key ways from your existing sphere of influence. For example, if you were to follow a bunch of nondisabled white male academics who talk about AI, it could suggest that you follow academics who are disabled or aren’t white or aren’t male who also talk about AI. If you took its recommendations, perhaps you’d get a more holistic and nuanced understanding of what’s happening in the AI field. These same systems should also use their understanding of biases about particular communities—including, for instance, the disability community—to make sure that they aren’t recommending any of their users follow accounts that perpetuate biases against (or, worse, spewing hate toward) those groups.

Other ways that AI can helps people with disabilities

If I weren’t trying to put this together between other tasks, I’m sure that I could go on and on, providing all kinds of examples of how AI could be used to help people with disabilities, but I’m going to make this last section into a bit of a lightning round. In no particular order:

• Voice preservation. You may have seen the VALL-E paper or Apple’s Global Accessibility Awareness Day announcement or you may be familiar with the voice-preservation offerings from Microsoft, Acapela, or others. It’s possible to train an AI model to replicate your voice, which can be a tremendous boon for people who have ALS (Lou Gehrig’s disease) or motor-neuron disease or other medical conditions that can lead to an inability to talk. This is, of course, the same tech that can also be used to create audio deepfakes, so it’s something that we need to approach responsibly, but the tech has truly transformative potential.
• Voice recognition. Researchers like those in the Speech Accessibility Project are paying people with disabilities for their help in collecting recordings of people with atypical speech. As I type, they are actively recruiting people with Parkinson’s and related conditions, and they have plans to expand this to other conditions as the project progresses. This research will result in more inclusive data sets that will let more people with disabilities use voice assistants, dictation software, and voice-response services as well as control their computers and other devices more easily, using only their voice.
• Text transformation. The current generation of LLMs is quite capable of adjusting existing text content without injecting hallucinations. This is hugely empowering for people with cognitive disabilities who may benefit from text summaries or simplified versions of text or even text that’s prepped for Bionic Reading.

The importance of diverse teams and data

We need to recognize that our differences matter. Our lived experiences are influenced by the intersections of the identities that we exist in. These lived experiences—with all their complexities (and joys and pain)—are valuable inputs to the software, services, and societies that we shape. Our differences need to be represented in the data that we use to train new models, and the folks who contribute that valuable information need to be compensated for sharing it with us. Inclusive data sets yield more robust models that foster more equitable outcomes.

Want a model that doesn’t demean or patronize or objectify people with disabilities? Make sure that you have content about disabilities that’s authored by people with a range of disabilities, and make sure that that’s well represented in the training data.

Want a model that doesn’t use ableist language? You may be able to use existing data sets to build a filter that can intercept and remediate ableist language before it reaches readers. That being said, when it comes to sensitivity reading, AI models won’t be replacing human copy editors anytime soon. 

Want a coding copilot that gives you accessible recommendations from the jump? Train it on code that you know to be accessible.

---

I have no doubt that AI can and will harm people… today, tomorrow, and well into the future. But I also believe that we can acknowledge that and, with an eye towards accessibility (and, more broadly, inclusion), make thoughtful, considerate, and intentional changes in our approaches to AI that will reduce harm over time as well. Today, tomorrow, and well into the future.

---

Many thanks to Kartik Sawhney for helping me with the development of this piece, Ashley Bischoff for her invaluable editorial assistance, and, of course, Joe Dolson for the prompt.

When you begin to believe you have everything figured out, everyone does change, in my opinion. Simply as you start to get the hang of injections, diapers, and ordinary sleep, it’s time for solid foods, potty training, and nighttime sleep. When those are determined, school and occasional sleeps are in order. The cycle goes on and on.

The same holds true for those of us who are currently employed in design and development. Having worked on the web for about three years at this point, I’ve seen the typical wax and wane of concepts, strategies, and systems. Every day we as developers and designers re-enter the familiar pattern, a brand-new technology or thought emerges to shake things up and completely alter the world.

How we got below

I built my first website in the mid-’90s. Design and development on the web back then was a free-for-all, with few established norms. For any layout aside from a single column, we used table elements, often with empty cells containing a single pixel spacer GIF to add empty space. We styled text with numerous font tags, nesting the tags every time we wanted to vary the font style. And we had only three or four typefaces to choose from: Arial, Courier, or Times New Roman. When Verdana and Georgia came out in 1996, we rejoiced because our options had nearly doubled. The only safe colors to choose from were the 216 “web safe” colors known to work across platforms. The few interactive elements (like contact forms, guest books, and counters) were mostly powered by CGI scripts (predominantly written in Perl at the time). Achieving any kind of unique look involved a pile of hacks all the way down. Interaction was often limited to specific pages in a site.

The development of internet requirements

At the turn of the century, a new cycle started. Crufty code littered with table layouts and font tags waned, and a push for web standards waxed. Newer technologies like CSS got more widespread adoption by browsers makers, developers, and designers. This shift toward standards didn’t happen accidentally or overnight. It took active engagement between the W3C and browser vendors and heavy evangelism from folks like the Web Standards Project to build standards. A List Apart and books like Designing with Web Standards by Jeffrey Zeldman played key roles in teaching developers and designers why standards are important, how to implement them, and how to sell them to their organizations. And approaches like progressive enhancement introduced the idea that content should be available for all browsers—with additional enhancements available for more advanced browsers. Meanwhile, sites like the CSS Zen Garden showcased just how powerful and versatile CSS can be when combined with a solid semantic HTML structure.

Server-side language like PHP, Java, and.NET took Perl as the primary back-end computers, and the cgi-bin was tossed in the garbage bin. With these improved server-side equipment, the first period of internet programs started with content-management methods (especially those used in blogs like Blogger, Grey Matter, Movable Type, and WordPress ) In the mid-2000s, AJAX opened doors for asynchronous interaction between the front end and back end. Pages now no longer needed to reload their pages ‘ content. A crop of JavaScript frameworks like Prototype, YUI, and jQuery arose to help developers build more reliable client-side interaction across browsers that had wildly varying levels of standards support. Techniques like image replacement enable skilled designers and developers to use fonts of their choosing. And technologies like Flash made it possible to add animations, games, and even more interactivity.

These new methods, standards, and technologies greatly boosted the sector’s growth. Web design flourished as designers and developers explored more diverse styles and layouts. However, we still relied heavily on hacks. Early CSS was a huge improvement over table-based layouts when it came to basic layout and text styling, but its limitations at the time meant that designers and developers still relied heavily on images for complex shapes ( such as rounded or angled corners ) and tiled backgrounds for the appearance of full-length columns (among other hacks ). All kinds of nested floats or absolute positioning ( or both ) were necessary for complicated layouts. Flash and image replacement for custom fonts was a great start toward varying the typefaces from the big five, but both hacks introduced accessibility and performance problems. And JavaScript libraries made it simple for anyone to add a dash of interaction to pages, even at the expense of double, even quadrupling, the download size of basic websites.

The web as software platform

The front-end and back-end symbiosis continued to improve, leading to the development of the modern web application. Between expanded server-side programming languages ( which kept growing to include Ruby, Python, Go, and others ) and newer front-end tools like React, Vue, and Angular, we could build fully capable software on the web. Along with these tools, there were additional options, such as collaborative build automation, collaborative version control, and shared package libraries. What was once primarily an environment for linked documents became a realm of infinite possibilities.

Mobile devices also increased in their capabilities, and they gave us access to internet in our pockets at the same time. Mobile apps and responsive design opened up opportunities for new interactions anywhere and any time.

The development of social media and other centralized tools for people to connect and use resulted from this combination of potent mobile devices and potent development tools. As it became easier and more common to connect with others directly on Twitter, Facebook, and even Slack, the desire for hosted personal sites waned. Social media provided connections on a global scale, with both the positive and negative effects.

Want a much more extensive history of how we got here, with some other takes on ways that we can improve? ” Of Time and the Web” was written by Jeremy Keith. Or check out the” Web Design History Timeline” at the Web Design Museum. A fun tour through” Internet Artifacts” is also provided by Neal Agarwal.

Where we are now

It seems like we’ve reached yet another significant turning point in the last couple of years. As social-media platforms fracture and wane, there’s been a growing interest in owning our own content again. There are many different ways to create websites, from the tried-and-true classic of hosting plain HTML files to static site generators to content management systems of all kinds. The fracturing of social media also comes with a cost: we lose crucial infrastructure for discovery and connection. The IndieWeb‘s Webmentions, RSS, ActivityPub, and other tools can assist with this, but they’re still largely underdeveloped and difficult to use for the less geeky. We can build amazing personal websites and add to them regularly, but without discovery and connection, it can sometimes feel like we may as well be shouting into the void.

Especially with efforts like Interop, browser support for CSS, JavaScript, and other standards like web components has increased. New technologies gain support across the board in a fraction of the time that they used to. I frequently find out about a new feature and check its browser support only to discover that its coverage is already over 80 %. Nowadays, the barrier to using newer techniques often isn’t browser support but simply the limits of how quickly designers and developers can learn what’s available and how to adopt it.

We can prototype almost any idea today with just a few commands and a few lines of code. All the tools that we now have available make it easier than ever to start something new. However, the upfront cost these frameworks may save in initial delivery eventually comes down as the maintenance and upgrading they become a part of our technical debt.

If we rely on third-party frameworks, adopting new standards can sometimes take longer since we may have to wait for those frameworks to adopt those standards. These frameworks, which previously made it easier to adopt new techniques sooner, have since evolved into obstacles. These same frameworks often come with performance costs too, forcing users to wait for scripts to load before they can read or interact with pages. And frequently, when scripts fail ( whether due to poor code, network problems, or other environmental factors ), users are left with blank or broken pages.

Where do we go from here?

Hacks of today help to shape standards for tomorrow. And there’s nothing inherently wrong with embracing hacks —for now—to move the present forward. Problems only arise when we refuse to acknowledge that they are hacks or when we refuse to take their place. So what can we do to create the future we want for the web?

Build for the long haul. Optimize for performance, for accessibility, and for the user. weigh the costs of those user-friendly tools. They may make your job a little easier today, but how do they affect everything else? What does each user pay? To future developers? to the adoption of standards? Sometimes the convenience may be worth it. Sometimes it’s just a hack that you’ve gotten used to. And sometimes it’s holding you back from even better options.

Start with standards. Standards continue to evolve over time, but browsers have done a remarkably good job of continuing to support older standards. The same isn’t always the case with third-party frameworks. Sites built with even the hackiest of HTML from the’ 90s still work just fine today. The same can’t be said about websites created with frameworks even after a few years.

Design with care. Consider the effects of each choice, whether your craft is code, pixels, or processes. The convenience of many a modern tool comes at the cost of not always understanding the underlying decisions that have led to its design and not always considering the impact that those decisions can have. Use the time saved by modern tools to think more carefully and make decisions with care rather than rushing to “move fast and break things.”

Always be learning. If you constantly learn, you also develop. Sometimes it may be hard to pinpoint what’s worth learning and what’s just today’s hack. Even if you were to concentrate solely on learning standards, you might end up focusing on something that won’t matter next year. ( Remember XHTML? ) However, ongoing learning opens up new neural connections, and the techniques you learn in one day may be useful for guiding future experiments.

Play, experiment, and be weird! The ultimate experiment is this web we created. It’s the single largest human endeavor in history, and yet each of us can create our own pocket within it. Be brave and try something new. Build a playground for ideas. Create absurd experiments in your own crazy science lab. Start your own small business. There has never been a place where we have more room to be creative, take risks, and discover our potential.

Share and amplify. As you play, experiment, and learn, share what has worked for you. Write on your own website, post on whichever social media site you prefer, or shout it from a TikTok. Write something for A List Apart! But take the time to amplify others too: find new voices, learn from them, and share what they’ve taught you.

Make a move and make it happen.

As designers and developers for the web ( and beyond ), we’re responsible for building the future every day, whether that may take the shape of personal websites, social media tools used by billions, or anything in between. Let’s incorporate our values into the products we produce, and let’s improve the world for everyone. Create that thing that only you are uniquely qualified to make. Then share it, improve it, re-use it, or create something new. Learn. Make. Share. Grow. Rinse and repeat. Everything will change whenever you believe you’ve mastered the web.

Image this. You’ve joined a club at your business that’s designing innovative product features with an focus on technology or AI. Or perhaps your business only started using a personalization website. Either way, you’re designing with statistics. What’s next? When it comes to designing for personalization, there are many warning stories, no immediately achievement, and some guidelines for the baffled.

The personalization space is real, between the dream of getting it right and the worry of it going wrong ( like when we encounter “persofails” similar to a company’s constant plea to regular people to purchase additional bathroom seats ). It’s an particularly confusing place to be a modern professional without a map, a map, or a strategy.

Because successful personalization is so dependent on each group’s skill, technology, and market position, there are no Lonely Planet and some tour guides for those of you who want to personalize.

But you can ensure that your group has packed its bags rationally.

There’s a DIY method to increase your chances for victory. You’ll at least at least disarm your boss ‘ irrational exuberance. Before the group you’ll need to properly plan.

It’s known as prepersonalization.

Behind the audio

Take into account the DJ have on Spotify, which was introduced last year.

We’re used to seeing the polished final outcome of a personalization function. A personal have had to be conceived, budgeted, and prioritized before the year-end prize, the making-of-backstory, or the behind-the-scenes success chest. Before any customisation have goes live in your product or service, it lives amid a delay of valuable ideas for expressing consumer experiences more automatically.

How do you decide where to position personalisation wagers? How do you design regular interactions that hasn’t journey up users or—worse—breed mistrust? We’ve discovered that several budgeted programs foremost needed one or more workshops to join key stakeholders and domestic customers of the technology to justify their continuing investments. Create it count.

We’ve witnessed the same evolution up near with our clients, from big tech to budding companies. In our experience with working on small and large personalization work, a program’s best monitor record—and its capacity to weather tough questions, work steadily toward shared answers, and manage its design and engineering efforts—turns on how successfully these prepersonalization activities play out.

Effective workshops consistently save time, money, and overall well-being by separating successful future endeavors from unsuccessful ones.

A personalization practice involves a multiyear effort of testing and feature development. It’s not a switch-flip in your tech stack. It’s best managed as a backlog that often evolves through three steps:

1. customer experience optimization ( CXO, also known as A/B testing or experimentation )
2. always-on automations ( whether rules-based or machine-generated )
3. mature features or standalone product development ( such as Spotify’s DJ experience )

This is why we created our progressive personalization framework and why we’re field-testing an accompanying deck of cards: we believe that there’s a base grammar, a set of “nouns and verbs” that your organization can use to design experiences that are customized, personalized, or automated. You won’t require these cards. But we strongly recommend that you create something similar, whether that might be digital or physical.

Set the timer for your kitchen.

How long does it take to cook up a prepersonalization workshop? The evaluation activities that we suggest including can ( and frequently do ) last for weeks. For the core workshop, we recommend aiming for two to three days. Details on the essential first-day activities are included in a summary of our broad approach.

The full arc of the wider workshop is threefold:

Kickstart: This specifies the terms of engagement as you concentrate on the potential, the readiness and drive of your team, and your leadership.
1. Plan your work: This is the heart of the card-based workshop activities where you specify a plan of attack and the scope of work.
2. Work your plan: This stage consists of making it possible for team members to individually pitch their own pilots that each include a proof-of-concept project, business case, and operating model.

Give yourself at least a day, split into two large time blocks, to power through a concentrated version of those first two phases.

Kickstart: Apt your appetite

We call the first lesson the “landscape of connected experience“. It looks at the possibilities for personalization in your organization. A connected experience, in our parlance, is any UX requiring the orchestration of multiple systems of record on the backend. A marketing-automation platform and a content-management system could be used together. It could be a digital-asset manager combined with a customer-data platform.

Create a conversation by mentioning consumer and business-to-business examples of connected experience interactions that you admire, find familiar, or even dislike. This should cover a representative range of personalization patterns, including automated app-based interactions ( such as onboarding sequences or wizards ), notifications, and recommenders. These cards contain a catalog, which we have. Here’s a list of 142 different interactions to jog your thinking.

It’s all about setting the tone. What are the possible paths for the practice in your organization? Here’s a long-form primer and a strategic framework for a broader view.

Assess each example that you discuss for its complexity and the level of effort that you estimate that it would take for your team to deliver that feature ( or something similar ). In our cards, we break down connected experiences into five categories: functions, features, experiences, complete products, and portfolios. Size your own build here. This will help to draw attention to the benefits of ongoing investment as well as the difference between what you deliver right now and what you want to deliver in the future.

Next, have your team plot each idea on the following 2×2 grid, which lays out the four enduring arguments for a personalized experience. This is crucial because it emphasizes how personalization can affect your own ways of working as well as your external customers. It’s also a reminder ( which is why we used the word argument earlier ) of the broader effort beyond these tactical interventions.

Each team member should decide where their focus should be placed for your product or service. Naturally, you can’t prioritize all of them. Here, the goal is to demonstrate how various departments may view their own advantages over the effort, which can be different from one department to the next. Documenting your desired outcomes lets you know how the team internally aligns across representatives from different departments or functional areas.

The third and final kickstart activity is about filling in the personalization gap. Is your customer journey well documented? Will data and privacy protection be a significant challenge? Do you have content metadata needs that you have to address? It’s just a matter of acknowledging the magnitude of that need and finding a solution ( we’re fairly certain that you do ). In our cards, we’ve noted a number of program risks, including common team dispositions. For instance, our Detractor card lists six intractable behaviors that prevent progress.

Effectively collaborating and managing expectations is critical to your success. Consider the potential obstacles to your advancement in the future. Press the participants to name specific steps to overcome or mitigate those barriers in your organization. According to research, personalization initiatives face a number of common obstacles.

At this point, you’ve hopefully discussed sample interactions, emphasized a key area of benefit, and flagged key gaps? Good, you’re ready to go on.

Hit that test kitchen

Next, let’s take a look at what you’ll need to create personalization recipes. Personalization engines, which are robust software suites for automating and expressing dynamic content, can intimidate new customers. They give you a variety of options for how your organization can conduct its activities because of their broad and potent capabilities. This presents the question: Where do you begin when you’re configuring a connected experience?

What’s crucial here is to avoid treating the installed software like a dream kitchen from some imaginary remodeling project ( as one of our client executives memorably put it ). These software engines are more like test kitchens where your team can begin devising, tasting, and refining the snacks and meals that will become a part of your personalization program’s regularly evolving menu.

Over the course of the workshop, the ultimate menu of the prioritized backlog will come together. And creating “dishes” is the way that you’ll have individual team stakeholders construct personalized interactions that serve their needs or the needs of others.

Recipes have ingredients in them, and those recipes have ingredients.

Verify your ingredients

Like a good product manager, you’ll make sure you have everything ready to cook up your desired interaction ( or figure out what needs to be added to your pantry ) and that you validate with the right stakeholders present. These ingredients include the audience that you’re targeting, content and design elements, the context for the interaction, and your measure for how it’ll come together.

This doesn’t just involve identifying requirements. Documenting your personalizations as a series of if-then statements lets the team:

1. compare findings to a common method for developing features, similar to how artists paint with the same color palette,
2. specify a consistent set of interactions that users find uniform or familiar,
3. and establish parity between all important performance indicators and performance metrics.

This helps you streamline your designs and your technical efforts while you deliver a shared palette of core motifs of your personalized or automated experience.

Create a recipe.

What ingredients are important to you? Consider the construct of a who-what-when-why

• Who are your key audience segments or groups?
• What kind of content will you offer them, what design elements, and under what circumstances?
• And for which business and user benefits?

Five years ago, we developed these cards and card categories for the first time. We regularly play-test their fit with conference audiences and clients. And there are still fresh possibilities. But they all follow an underlying who-what-when-why logic.

In the cards in the accompanying photo below, you can typically follow along with right to left in three examples of subscription-based reading apps.

1. Nurture personalization: When a guest or an unknown visitor interacts with a product title, a banner or alert bar appears that makes it easier for them to encounter a related title they may want to read, saving them time.
2. Welcome automation: An email is sent to a newly registered user to highlight the breadth of the content catalog and convert them to happy subscribers.
3. Winback automation: Before their subscription lapses or after a recent failed renewal, a user is sent an email that gives them a promotional offer to suggest that they reconsider renewing or to remind them to renew.

We’ve also found that cocreating the recipes themselves can sometimes be the most effective way to start brainstorming about what these cards might be for your organization. Start with a set of blank cards, and begin labeling and grouping them through the design process, eventually distilling them to a refined subset of highly useful candidate cards.

The workshop’s later stages could be characterized as shifting from focusing on a cookbook to a more nuanced customer-journey mapping. Individual” cooks” will pitch their recipes to the team, using a common jobs-to-be-done format so that measurability and results are baked in, and from there, the resulting collection will be prioritized for finished design and delivery to production.

Architecture must be improved to produce better kitchens.

Simplifying a customer experience is a complicated effort for those who are inside delivering it. Beware of anyone who contradicts your advice. With that being said,” Complicated problems can be hard to solve, but they are addressable with rules and recipes“.

When a team overfits: they aren’t designing with their best data, personalization turns into a laughing line. Like a sparse pantry, every organization has metadata debt to go along with its technical debt, and this creates a drag on personalization effectiveness. For instance, your AI’s output quality is in fact impacted by your IA. Spotify’s poster-child prowess today was unfathomable before they acquired a seemingly modest metadata startup that now powers its underlying information architecture.

You can withstand the heat without a doubt.

Personalization technology opens a doorway into a confounding ocean of possible designs. Only a disciplined and highly collaborative approach will produce the necessary concentration and intention for success. So banish the dream kitchen. Instead, head to the test kitchen to save time, preserve job security, and avoid imagining the creative concepts that come from the doers in your organization. There are meals to serve and mouths to feed.

This organizational framework gives you a fighting chance at long-term success as well as solid ground. Wiring up your information layer isn’t an overnight affair. However, if you use the same cookbook and the same recipes, you’ll have solid ground for success. We designed these activities to make your organization’s needs concrete and clear, long before the hazards pile up.

Your time well spent is being able to assess your unique situation and digital skills, despite the associated costs associated with investing in this kind of technology and product design. Don’t squander it. The pudding is the proof, as they say.

Ever since I was a boy, I’ve been fascinated with movies. I loved the characters and the excitement—but most of all the stories. I wanted to be an actor. And I believed that I’d get to do the things that Indiana Jones did and go on exciting adventures. I even dreamed up ideas for movies that my friends and I could make and star in. But they never went any further. I did, however, end up working in user experience (UX). Now, I realize that there’s an element of theater to UX—I hadn’t really considered it before, but user research is storytelling. And to get the most out of user research, you need to tell a good story where you bring stakeholders—the product team and decision makers—along and get them interested in learning more.

Think of your favorite movie. More than likely it follows a three-act structure that’s commonly seen in storytelling: the setup, the conflict, and the resolution. The first act shows what exists today, and it helps you get to know the characters and the challenges and problems that they face. Act two introduces the conflict, where the action is. Here, problems grow or get worse. And the third and final act is the resolution. This is where the issues are resolved and the characters learn and change. I believe that this structure is also a great way to think about user research, and I think that it can be especially helpful in explaining user research to others.

Use storytelling as a structure to do research

It’s sad to say, but many have come to see research as being expendable. If budgets or timelines are tight, research tends to be one of the first things to go. Instead of investing in research, some product managers rely on designers or—worse—their own opinion to make the “right” choices for users based on their experience or accepted best practices. That may get teams some of the way, but that approach can so easily miss out on solving users’ real problems. To remain user-centered, this is something we should avoid. User research elevates design. It keeps it on track, pointing to problems and opportunities. Being aware of the issues with your product and reacting to them can help you stay ahead of your competitors.

In the three-act structure, each act corresponds to a part of the process, and each part is critical to telling the whole story. Let’s look at the different acts and how they align with user research.

Act one: setup

The setup is all about understanding the background, and that’s where foundational research comes in. Foundational research (also called generative, discovery, or initial research) helps you understand users and identify their problems. You’re learning about what exists today, the challenges users have, and how the challenges affect them—just like in the movies. To do foundational research, you can conduct contextual inquiries or diary studies (or both!), which can help you start to identify problems as well as opportunities. It doesn’t need to be a huge investment in time or money.

Erika Hall writes about minimum viable ethnography, which can be as simple as spending 15 minutes with a user and asking them one thing: “‘Walk me through your day yesterday.’ That’s it. Present that one request. Shut up and listen to them for 15 minutes. Do your damndest to keep yourself and your interests out of it. Bam, you’re doing ethnography.” According to Hall, “[This] will probably prove quite illuminating. In the highly unlikely case that you didn’t learn anything new or useful, carry on with enhanced confidence in your direction.”  

This makes total sense to me. And I love that this makes user research so accessible. You don’t need to prepare a lot of documentation; you can just recruit participants and do it! This can yield a wealth of information about your users, and it’ll help you better understand them and what’s going on in their lives. That’s really what act one is all about: understanding where users are coming from. 

Jared Spool talks about the importance of foundational research and how it should form the bulk of your research. If you can draw from any additional user data that you can get your hands on, such as surveys or analytics, that can supplement what you’ve heard in the foundational studies or even point to areas that need further investigation. Together, all this data paints a clearer picture of the state of things and all its shortcomings. And that’s the beginning of a compelling story. It’s the point in the plot where you realize that the main characters—or the users in this case—are facing challenges that they need to overcome. Like in the movies, this is where you start to build empathy for the characters and root for them to succeed. And hopefully stakeholders are now doing the same. Their sympathy may be with their business, which could be losing money because users can’t complete certain tasks. Or maybe they do empathize with users’ struggles. Either way, act one is your initial hook to get the stakeholders interested and invested.

Once stakeholders begin to understand the value of foundational research, that can open doors to more opportunities that involve users in the decision-making process. And that can guide product teams toward being more user-centered. This benefits everyone—users, the product, and stakeholders. It’s like winning an Oscar in movie terms—it often leads to your product being well received and successful. And this can be an incentive for stakeholders to repeat this process with other products. Storytelling is the key to this process, and knowing how to tell a good story is the only way to get stakeholders to really care about doing more research. 

This brings us to act two, where you iteratively evaluate a design or concept to see whether it addresses the issues.

Act two: conflict

Act two is all about digging deeper into the problems that you identified in act one. This usually involves directional research, such as usability tests, where you assess a potential solution (such as a design) to see whether it addresses the issues that you found. The issues could include unmet needs or problems with a flow or process that’s tripping users up. Like act two in a movie, more issues will crop up along the way. It’s here that you learn more about the characters as they grow and develop through this act. 

Usability tests should typically include around five participants according to Jakob Nielsen, who found that that number of users can usually identify most of the problems: “As you add more and more users, you learn less and less because you will keep seeing the same things again and again… After the fifth user, you are wasting your time by observing the same findings repeatedly but not learning much new.” 

There are parallels with storytelling here too; if you try to tell a story with too many characters, the plot may get lost. Having fewer participants means that each user’s struggles will be more memorable and easier to relay to other stakeholders when talking about the research. This can help convey the issues that need to be addressed while also highlighting the value of doing the research in the first place.

Researchers have run usability tests in person for decades, but you can also conduct usability tests remotely using tools like Microsoft Teams, Zoom, or other teleconferencing software. This approach has become increasingly popular since the beginning of the pandemic, and it works well. You can think of in-person usability tests like going to a play and remote sessions as more like watching a movie. There are advantages and disadvantages to each. In-person usability research is a much richer experience. Stakeholders can experience the sessions with other stakeholders. You also get real-time reactions—including surprise, agreement, disagreement, and discussions about what they’re seeing. Much like going to a play, where audiences get to take in the stage, the costumes, the lighting, and the actors’ interactions, in-person research lets you see users up close, including their body language, how they interact with the moderator, and how the scene is set up.

If in-person usability testing is like watching a play—staged and controlled—then conducting usability testing in the field is like immersive theater where any two sessions might be very different from one another. You can take usability testing into the field by creating a replica of the space where users interact with the product and then conduct your research there. Or you can go out to meet users at their location to do your research. With either option, you get to see how things work in context, things come up that wouldn’t have in a lab environment—and conversion can shift in entirely different directions. As researchers, you have less control over how these sessions go, but this can sometimes help you understand users even better. Meeting users where they are can provide clues to the external forces that could be affecting how they use your product. In-person usability tests provide another level of detail that’s often missing from remote usability tests. 

That’s not to say that the “movies”—remote sessions—aren’t a good option. Remote sessions can reach a wider audience. They allow a lot more stakeholders to be involved in the research and to see what’s going on. And they open the doors to a much wider geographical pool of users. But with any remote session there is the potential of time wasted if participants can’t log in or get their microphone working. 

The benefit of usability testing, whether remote or in person, is that you get to see real users interact with the designs in real time, and you can ask them questions to understand their thought processes and grasp of the solution. This can help you not only identify problems but also glean why they’re problems in the first place. Furthermore, you can test hypotheses and gauge whether your thinking is correct. By the end of the sessions, you’ll have a much clearer picture of how usable the designs are and whether they work for their intended purposes. Act two is the heart of the story—where the excitement is—but there can be surprises too. This is equally true of usability tests. Often, participants will say unexpected things, which change the way that you look at things—and these twists in the story can move things in new directions. 

Unfortunately, user research is sometimes seen as expendable. And too often usability testing is the only research process that some stakeholders think that they ever need. In fact, if the designs that you’re evaluating in the usability test aren’t grounded in a solid understanding of your users (foundational research), there’s not much to be gained by doing usability testing in the first place. That’s because you’re narrowing the focus of what you’re getting feedback on, without understanding the users’ needs. As a result, there’s no way of knowing whether the designs might solve a problem that users have. It’s only feedback on a particular design in the context of a usability test.  

On the other hand, if you only do foundational research, while you might have set out to solve the right problem, you won’t know whether the thing that you’re building will actually solve that. This illustrates the importance of doing both foundational and directional research. 

In act two, stakeholders will—hopefully—get to watch the story unfold in the user sessions, which creates the conflict and tension in the current design by surfacing their highs and lows. And in turn, this can help motivate stakeholders to address the issues that come up.

Act three: resolution

While the first two acts are about understanding the background and the tensions that can propel stakeholders into action, the third part is about resolving the problems from the first two acts. While it’s important to have an audience for the first two acts, it’s crucial that they stick around for the final act. That means the whole product team, including developers, UX practitioners, business analysts, delivery managers, product managers, and any other stakeholders that have a say in the next steps. It allows the whole team to hear users’ feedback together, ask questions, and discuss what’s possible within the project’s constraints. And it lets the UX research and design teams clarify, suggest alternatives, or give more context behind their decisions. So you can get everyone on the same page and get agreement on the way forward.

This act is mostly told in voiceover with some audience participation. The researcher is the narrator, who paints a picture of the issues and what the future of the product could look like given the things that the team has learned. They give the stakeholders their recommendations and their guidance on creating this vision.

Nancy Duarte in the Harvard Business Review offers an approach to structuring presentations that follow a persuasive story. “The most effective presenters use the same techniques as great storytellers: By reminding people of the status quo and then revealing the path to a better way, they set up a conflict that needs to be resolved,” writes Duarte. “That tension helps them persuade the audience to adopt a new mindset or behave differently.”

This type of structure aligns well with research results, and particularly results from usability tests. It provides evidence for “what is”—the problems that you’ve identified. And “what could be”—your recommendations on how to address them. And so on and so forth.

You can reinforce your recommendations with examples of things that competitors are doing that could address these issues or with examples where competitors are gaining an edge. Or they can be visual, like quick mockups of how a new design could look that solves a problem. These can help generate conversation and momentum. And this continues until the end of the session when you’ve wrapped everything up in the conclusion by summarizing the main issues and suggesting a way forward. This is the part where you reiterate the main themes or problems and what they mean for the product—the denouement of the story. This stage gives stakeholders the next steps and hopefully the momentum to take those steps!

While we are nearly at the end of this story, let’s reflect on the idea that user research is storytelling. All the elements of a good story are there in the three-act structure of user research: 

• Act one: You meet the protagonists (the users) and the antagonists (the problems affecting users). This is the beginning of the plot. In act one, researchers might use methods including contextual inquiry, ethnography, diary studies, surveys, and analytics. The output of these methods can include personas, empathy maps, user journeys, and analytics dashboards.

• Act two: Next, there’s character development. There’s conflict and tension as the protagonists encounter problems and challenges, which they must overcome. In act two, researchers might use methods including usability testing, competitive benchmarking, and heuristics evaluation. The output of these can include usability findings reports, UX strategy documents, usability guidelines, and best practices.

• Act three: The protagonists triumph and you see what a better future looks like. In act three, researchers may use methods including presentation decks, storytelling, and digital media. The output of these can be: presentation decks, video clips, audio clips, and pictures. 

The researcher has multiple roles: they’re the storyteller, the director, and the producer. The participants have a small role, but they are significant characters (in the research). And the stakeholders are the audience. But the most important thing is to get the story right and to use storytelling to tell users’ stories through research. By the end, the stakeholders should walk away with a purpose and an eagerness to resolve the product’s ills. 

So the next time that you’re planning research with clients or you’re speaking to stakeholders about research that you’ve done, think about how you can weave in some storytelling. Ultimately, user research is a win-win for everyone, and you just need to get stakeholders interested in how the story ends.

As a product builder over too many years to mention, I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve seen promising ideas go from zero to hero in a few weeks, only to fizzle out within months.

Financial products, which is the field I work in, are no exception. With people’s real hard-earned money on the line, user expectations running high, and a crowded market, it’s tempting to throw as many features at the wall as possible and hope something sticks. But this approach is a recipe for disaster. Here’s why:

The pitfalls of feature-first development

When you start building a financial product from the ground up, or are migrating existing customer journeys from paper or telephony channels onto online banking or mobile apps, it’s easy to get caught up in the excitement of creating new features. You might think, “If I can just add one more thing that solves this particular user problem, they’ll love me!” But what happens when you inevitably hit a roadblock because the narcs (your security team!) don’t like it? When a hard-fought feature isn’t as popular as you thought, or it breaks due to unforeseen complexity?

This is where the concept of Minimum Viable Product (MVP) comes in. Jason Fried’s book Getting Real and his podcast Rework often touch on this idea, even if he doesn’t always call it that. An MVP is a product that provides just enough value to your users to keep them engaged, but not so much that it becomes overwhelming or difficult to maintain. It sounds like an easy concept but it requires a razor sharp eye, a ruthless edge and having the courage to stick by your opinion because it is easy to be seduced by “the Columbo Effect”… when there’s always “just one more thing…” that someone wants to add.

The problem with most finance apps, however, is that they often become a reflection of the internal politics of the business rather than an experience solely designed around the customer. This means that the focus is on delivering as many features and functionalities as possible to satisfy the needs and desires of competing internal departments, rather than providing a clear value proposition that is focused on what the people out there in the real world want. As a result, these products can very easily bloat to become a mixed bag of confusing, unrelated and ultimately unlovable customer experiences—a feature salad, you might say.

The importance of bedrock

So what’s a better approach? How can we build products that are stable, user-friendly, and—most importantly—stick?

That’s where the concept of “bedrock” comes in. Bedrock is the core element of your product that truly matters to users. It’s the fundamental building block that provides value and stays relevant over time.

In the world of retail banking, which is where I work, the bedrock has got to be in and around the regular servicing journeys. People open their current account once in a blue moon but they look at it every day. They sign up for a credit card every year or two, but they check their balance and pay their bill at least once a month.

Identifying the core tasks that people want to do and then relentlessly striving to make them easy to do, dependable, and trustworthy is where the gravy’s at.

But how do you get to bedrock? By focusing on the “MVP” approach, prioritizing simplicity, and iterating towards a clear value proposition. This means cutting out unnecessary features and focusing on delivering real value to your users.

It also means having some guts, because your colleagues might not always instantly share your vision to start with. And controversially, sometimes it can even mean making it clear to customers that you’re not going to come to their house and make their dinner. The occasional “opinionated user interface design” (i.e. clunky workaround for edge cases) might sometimes be what you need to use to test a concept or buy you space to work on something more important.

Practical strategies for building financial products that stick

So what are the key strategies I’ve learned from my own experience and research?

1. Start with a clear “why”: What problem are you trying to solve? For whom? Make sure your mission is crystal clear before building anything. Make sure it aligns with your company’s objectives, too.
2. Focus on a single, core feature and obsess on getting that right before moving on to something else: Resist the temptation to add too many features at once. Instead, choose one that delivers real value and iterate from there.
3. Prioritize simplicity over complexity: Less is often more when it comes to financial products. Cut out unnecessary bells and whistles and keep the focus on what matters most.
4. Embrace continuous iteration: Bedrock isn’t a fixed destination—it’s a dynamic process. Continuously gather user feedback, refine your product, and iterate towards that bedrock state.
5. Stop, look and listen: Don’t just test your product as part of your delivery process—test it repeatedly in the field. Use it yourself. Run A/B tests. Gather user feedback. Talk to people who use it, and refine accordingly.

The bedrock paradox

There’s an interesting paradox at play here: building towards bedrock means sacrificing some short-term growth potential in favour of long-term stability. But the payoff is worth it—products built with a focus on bedrock will outlast and outperform their competitors, and deliver sustained value to users over time.

So, how do you start your journey towards bedrock? Take it one step at a time. Start by identifying those core elements that truly matter to your users. Focus on building and refining a single, powerful feature that delivers real value. And above all, test obsessively—for, in the words of Abraham Lincoln, Alan Kay, or Peter Drucker (whomever you believe!!), “The best way to predict the future is to create it.”

Learn more at Duct Tape Marketing at Why Tiny Research Might Be the Major to Sustainable Success by John Jantsch.

In this episode of the Duct Tape Marketing Podcast, John Jantsch speaks with neuroscientist, writer, and entrepreneur Anne-Lauren Le Cunff about [ …] Why Tiny Experiments Are the Antidote to Goal Obsession with Anne-Laurenff Host: John Jantsch | Guest: Anne-Laurenff Book: Tiny Experiments: How to Live Freely in a Goal-Obsessed World Website: NessLabs.com

Learn more at Duct Tape Marketing at Why Tiny Research Might Be the Major to Sustainable Success by John Jantsch.

Why Are Tiny Research the Best Weapons of Obsession with Anne-Laure Le Cunff?

John Jantsch as the number and Anne-Laure Le Cunff as the host

Book: Tiny Tests: How to Survive Freely in a World of Goals.

Website: NessLabs.com

John Jantsch and Anne-Laure Le Cunff, a scientist, poet, and businessperson, discuss her new publication Tiny Research in this instance of the Duct Tape Marketing Podcast. Discover how little, curiosity-driven experiments can help you unwind from inflexible goal-setting, regain your sense of control, and foster development in your business and life.

Watch the season:

Summary of the Episode

Anne-Laure stock her personal experience of leaving a fast-track job at Google after a health issue altered her interests. Through her work at Ness Labs and her experience in neuroscience, she came up with the idea of &#8220, little experiments &#8221, low-stakes, curiosity-driven practices that help people and businesses adapt, learn, and expand without fear of failure.

In this instance, we discuss the distinction between tests and goals, how to use scientific reasoning to solve everyday problems, and why AI can help us think strategically while moving forward.

Anne-Laure Le Cunff is the host, according to the article.

Anne-Laure is a scientist, businessperson, and the leader of Ness Labs, a platform for creative and conscious performance. Her regular newsletter is read by more than 100,000 people all over the world. She oversaw international marketing efforts at Google before pursuing a PhD in science. Her new book, Tiny Tests, teaches readers how to create more versatile, reflective ways to think about learning and progress.

Important Findings

• Tiny experiments shift the focus away from learning because standard objectives can lead to a binary attitude of success or failure.
• Publically announcing aims can lead to unfavorable results.
• The” I will]action ] for]duration ]” format serves as the foundation for a meager experiment.
• Applying firm research promotes innovation and lessens the fear of failure.
• AI is concern preconceived notions and inspire creativity on a 24/7 basis.
• We can better comprehend both internal and external challenges thanks to curiosity-driven knowledge.

Timestamps for Episode Highlights andamp;

00: 01 &#8211, Anne-Laurent and the idea behind Tiny Tests
• 02: 13 &#8211, How a wellness fear triggered Anne-Laure&#8217, s career change
• 04: 03 &#8211, Why we&#8217, re obsessed with goals—and how it can be dangerous
• 06: 11 &#8211, The story of common responsibilities: Why might it be wrong to let people know your objectives?
• 07: 11 &#8211, What exactly is a little study?
• 08: 23 &#8211, Reframing weight loss or health targets as research
• Applying the PACT platform to business and marketing at 10:20 &#8211
• 12: 14 &#8211, How research is influenced by both a fear of failure and a fear of success
• 14: 21 &#8211, Practicing curiosity-driven knowledge in both business and life
• 18: 05 &#8211, Using AI as a resource for mirror and study style
• 18: 52 &#8211, Personal reports: How little tests shaped Anne-Laure’s life and work.
• 20: 27 &#8211, Where to interact with Anne-Laure and discover more

Links and Resources

• Ness Labs – Anne-Laure&#8217, a platform for cautious production
• Ness Labs Newsletter is available to subscribers.
• Buy the book, Tiny Research.

One of the most dependable genres in television is science fiction, and viewers now have no limitless options for democratic sci-fi story. Anthology line have never been more popular because they have proven to be a simple, non-committal way to draw in viewers with standalone, related stories. Death, Robots, Love, and Death have quietly [ …]]…]] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ]

The initial assessment of Love, Death + Robots Season 4 Review: Scary, Silly, and Weird appeared initially on Den of Geek.

Following the success of her 2012 comedy-drama set Girls, Lena Dunham is my Roman Empire. Everyone is aware of the plot: the published essays that examine the immediate breakdown of her long-term connection with producer Jack Antonoff, the widespread criticism of Ladies for its lack of diversity, and the unfavorable abortion comments that have been made. Dunham was hailed as one of the most contentious artists of her day by the general public. But what was she thinking as a result of that flood of criticism?

On July 10, Dunham and her father, Luis Felber, may provide a hazy account of how life was when they first met in 2021. The series will be full of humor, personal depth, and sharp introspection if it compares to her earlier work. When I met my husband, I was surprised by how much baggage two people may take with them, according to Dunham in a Variety discussion about meeting Felber.

On July 10, Netflix will release the very anticipated set Too Little, co-written by Dunham and Felber.

Too Little, a New York hardworking in her mid-thirties who is reeling from a broken connection that she thought would continue forever, is a co-created by Dunham and Luis Ferber. The only way for her to escape New York City is to work in London, where she intends to lead a life of quiet like a Bronte sister, when every block contains a tale of her own negative behavior. But when she encounters Felix ( Will Sharpe ), a walking series of red flags, she discovers that their unusual connection is unavoidable, even though it causes more issues than it solves. They now have to consider:” Would Americans and Brits basically speak the same language?”

Learn more at Deadline.

A romantic comedy about two young artists who fall in love in Paris just before they are recognized as historical icons? Yes, please, and Mick Jagger will be the producer of Miles and Juliette, a Bill Pohlad directed film. &nbsp,

Damson Idris, who is currently filming opposite Brad Pitt in Paramount’s future fantasy film Children of Blood and Bone, will play Miles Davis in Pohlad’s most recent film just in time for the new wave of buzz surrounding fresh movies during the Cannes Film Festival. Along with Anamaria Vartolomei, the duo will also be appearing in the role of Juliette Gréco in Pohlad’s most recent project.

Miles &amp, Juliette follows 22-year-old Miles Davis ( Idris ) on a transformative trip to Paris in 1949, where he develops a passionate romance with French singer, actress, and Left Bank icon Juliette Gréco ( Vartolomei ). What starts off as an intimate gathering develops into a strong bond between two emerging musicians just before they become historical legends.

The Hollywood Reporter has more information available.

The Miniature Wife, a marriage comedy series starring Jennifer Ames and Steve Turner, was granted worldwide distribution rights on Sunday by Sony Pictures Television. &nbsp,

Elizabeth Banks and Matthew Macfadyen, both of whom won Emmys, play the lead roles in the line ‘ star-studded cast of patrons and recurring figures. You’re probably wondering: What do Ames and Turner mean by the small woman? The comedy series produced by Media Res is really based on Manuel Gonzalez’s short tale, which features a man who unintentionally shrinks his wife.

The partnership comedy series examines the shifting power dynamics between spouses, examining how a modern error creates the biggest marital crisis, pitting them against one another in a fight for dominance. Peacock may be broadcast on the American network. S” .&nbsp,

Learn more at Variety.

The 2025 Cannes Film Festival officially kicked off on Tuesday. Wes Anderson and Ari Aster’s long-awaited projects are set to debut as well as six female-directed movies in the Official Contest.

Sean Baker won the Palmed’Or last year for Anora, which is the highest award given to the chairman of the Best Feature Film of the Official Contest, for Anora, which eventually won the Academy Award for Best Picture on March 2. Who will get this year’s Palmd’Or, and will the films featured at Cannes serve as an early indicator for the 2026 awards season like next year? We’ll have to see, but for the time being, stay tuned for daily happenings in Cannes over the next two weeks, even if you can’t attend the festival.

” Pundits complained that Cannes last year was a light affair, but that certainly had to do with the bottleneck created by the strikes.” This year, many auteurs make a lot of noise at the Croisette.

More information is available at IndieWire.

By far Ethan Coen’s upcoming dark comedy Honey Don’t! is the film I’m most excited to learn more about following its Cannes Film Festival premiere. The movie follows Margaret Qualley as Honey O&#8217, a small-town private investigator who investigates bizarre deaths connected to a enigmatic church. Who is the priest of that vicious church? Of course, Captain America! &nbsp,

The movie will premiere in Cannes on the final day of the festival as part of the midnight screenings, despite not competing. Although I’ll have to wait until August 22 for the dark comedy to be released in theaters, I’m expecting a lot of buzz after its premiere.

Ethan Coen’s latest film, co-written with longtime collaborator and wife Tricia Cooke, is firmly of a piece with Drive-Away Dolls, and stars Margaret Qualley once more as a lesbian private investigator on the trail of a cultist played by former Captain America Chris Evans.

More information is available at Empire.

Watch the HONEY ,DON’T! trailer! below:

The first post from Den of Geek was Link Tank: Lena Dunham Brings &#8216, Too Much &#8217, to Netflix This Summer.

Warning: contains trailers for Conditions One through Three of Bridgerton. The creators of Bridgerton have shown strong instincts when rearranging their version of Julia Quinn’s text series for a TV viewers. They skipped back in order to keep up with Anthony Bridgerton’s love story and keep in line with Quinn’s timeline.

Is Netflix About to Leave Bridgerton Siblings? second appeared on Den of Geek.

Following the success of her 2012 comedy-drama set Girls, Lena Dunham is my Roman Empire. Everyone is aware of the plot: the published articles that examine the immediate breakdown of her long-term connection with producer Jack Antonoff, the widespread criticism of Women for its lack of diversity, and the terribly received abortion-related comments. We saw a public outcry against Dunham, calling her one of the most contentious artists of her time. But what was she thinking as a result of that reaction?

On July 10, Dunham and her father, Luis Felber, may provide a flimsy account of their first encounter in 2021. The line will be jam-packed with comedy, mental honesty, and strong introspection if it’s anything like her previous work. When I met my husband, I was surprised by how much baggage two people may take with them, according to Dunham in a Variety discussion about meeting Felber.

To Little, a highly anticipated television series co-written by Dunham and Felber, debuted on Netflix on July 10.

Too Little, a New York hardworking in her mid-thirties who is reeling from a broken relationship that she thought would continue forever, is a co-created by Dunham and Luis Ferber. The only way to escape New York City when every stop contains a tale of her own negative behavior is to work in London, where she intends to lead a life of solitude like a Bronte sister. But when she encounters Felix ( Will Sharpe ), a walking series of red flags, she discovers that their unusual connection is unavoidable, even though it causes more issues than it solves. They must then consider whether Americans and Brits really share a common speech.

Learn more at Deadline.

A romantic comedy about two young artists who fall in love in Paris only before they are recognized as historical icons is being produced by Mick Jagger, who will also be responsible for the production of Miles and Juliette, which was directed by Bill Pohlad. &nbsp,

Damson Idris, who is currently filming opposite Brad Pitt in Paramount’s future story video Children of Blood and Bone, has been cast as Miles Davis in Pohlad’s most recent film just in time for the new wave of buzz surrounding fresh movies during the Cannes Film Festival. Along with Anamaria Vartolomei as Juliette Gréco, she will also be appearing alongside Anamaria Vartolomei as Juliette Gréco in Pohlad’s most recent project.

Miles & Juliette follows 22-year-old Miles Davis ( Idris ) on a transformative trip to Paris in 1949, where he develops a passionate romance with French singer, actress, and Left Bank icon Juliette Gréco ( Vartolomei ). What starts off as a small conversation develops into a powerful bond between two young artists before they become cultural legends.

Read more about The Hollywood Reporter.

The Miniature Wife, a relationship comedy series starring Jennifer Ames and Steve Turner, was given global distribution rights on Sunday by Sony Pictures Television. &nbsp,

Elizabeth Banks and Matthew Macfadyen, both of whom are in the lead roles, make up the star-studded cast of regulars and recurring characters in the series. You might be wondering,” What does Ames and Turner mean by the miniature wife?” The comedy series produced by Media Res is actually based on Manuel Gonzalez’s short story, which features a man who unintentionally shrinks his wife.

The relationship comedy series examines the shifting power dynamics between spouses, putting them in a domineering fight against one another as a result of a technological error. Peacock will be broadcast on the program in the U.S. S” .&nbsp,

More information is available at Variety.

The 2025 Cannes Film Festival officially opened on Tuesday. Wes Anderson and Ari Aster’s long-awaited projects are set to debut as well as six female-directed movies in the Official Competition.

Sean Baker won the Palmed’Or last year for Anora, which is the highest award given to the director of the Best Feature Film of the Official Competition, for Anora, which later won the Academy Award for Best Picture on March 2. Who will win this year’s Palmd’Or, and will the films featured at Cannes serve as an early indicator for the 2026 awards season like last year? Stay tuned for more information about the daily happenings in Cannes over the next two weeks.

” Pundits complained that Cannes last year was a light affair, but that certainly had to do with the bottleneck created by the strikes.” Many auteurs make a number of comebacks to the Croisette this year, making for a highly anticipated festival.

More information is available at IndieWire.

By far Ethan Coen’s upcoming dark comedy Honey Don’t! is the film I’m most excited to learn more about following its Cannes Film Festival premiere. The movie follows Margaret Qualley as Honey O&#8217, a small-town private investigator who investigates bizarre deaths connected to a enigmatic church. Who is the priest of that heinous church? Of course, Captain America! &nbsp,

The movie will premiere in Cannes on the final day of the festival as part of the midnight screenings, despite not competing. Although I’ll have to wait until August 22 for the dark comedy to be released in theaters, I’m expecting a lot of buzz after its premiere.

Ethan Coen’s latest film, co-written with longtime collaborator and wife Tricia Cooke, is firmly of a piece with Drive-Away Dolls, and stars Margaret Qualley once more as a lesbian private investigator on the trail of a cultist played by former Captain America Chris Evans.

Empire has more information available.

Watch the HONEY ,DON’T! trailer! below:

The first post on Den of Geek: Link Tank: Lena Dunham Brings &#8216, Too Much &#8217, to Netflix This Summer.

When Iron Man first launched in 2008, it was a resounding victory, making over half a billion dollars and confirming without a doubt that Marvel Studios and the later known as the Marvel Cinematic Universe had arrived. Iron was also working on films about Thor, Captain America, and Ant-Man at the time, but Marvel was also working on them.

The first article on Den of Geek was Iron Man 2: The Sequel That Set The Template For Some Device Mistakes.

Following the success of her 2012 comedy-drama set Girls, Lena Dunham is my Roman Empire. Everyone is aware of the plot: the published essays that examine the immediate breakdown of her long-term connection with producer Jack Antonoff, the widespread criticism of Ladies for its lack of diversity, and the unfavorable abortion comments that have been made. We saw a public outcry against Dunham, calling her one of the most contentious artists of her time. What was she thinking as a result of that reaction?

On July 10, Dunham and her father, Luis Felber, may provide a hazy account of how life was when they first met in 2021. The line will be full of comedy, personal honesty, and strong introspection if it’s anything like her previous work. When I met my husband, I was amazed by just how much baggage two individuals could bring to the table, while Dunham put it in a Variety discussion about meeting Felber.

The very anticipated Netflix series Too Little, co-written by Dunham and Felber, debuted on July 10.

Too Little, a New York hardworking in her mid-thirties who is reeling from a broken connection that she thought would continue forever, is a co-created by Dunham and Luis Ferber. The only way for her to escape New York City is to work in London, where she intends to lead a life of loneliness like a Bronte sister, when every block contains a tale of her own negative behavior. But when she encounters Felix ( Will Sharpe ), a walking series of red flags, she discovers that their unusual connection is unavoidable, even though it causes more issues than it solves. They now have to consider:” Would Americans and Brits basically speak the same language?”

Learn more at Deadline.

A romantic comedy about two young artists who fall in love in Paris just before they are recognized as historical icons? Yes, please, and Mick Jagger will be the producer of Miles and Juliette, a Bill Pohlad directed film. &nbsp,

Damson Idris, who is currently filming opposite Brad Pitt in Paramount’s future story video Children of Blood and Bone, has been cast as Miles Davis in Pohlad’s most recent film just in time for the new wave of buzz surrounding fresh movies during the Cannes Film Festival. Along with Anamaria Vartolomei as Juliette Gréco, she will also be appearing alongside Anamaria Vartolomei as Juliette Gréco in Pohlad’s most recent project.

Miles & Juliette follows 22-year-old Idris Davis ( Idris ) on a transformative trip to Paris in 1949, where they fall in love with French singer, actress, and Left Bank icon Juliette Gréco ( Vartolomei ). Just before they became social traditions, what starts out as an intimate conversation develops into a strong bond between two emerging artists.

The Hollywood Reporter has more information available.

The Miniature Wife, a marriage comedy starring Jennifer Ames and Steve Turner, received worldwide distribution rights on Sunday, according to Sony Pictures Television. &nbsp,

Elizabeth Banks and Matthew Macfadyen, both of whom are in the lead jobs, make up the star-studded cast of patrons and recurring figures in the line. You might be wondering,” What does Ames and Turner mean by the small woman?” Actually, the comic series produced by Media Res is based on Manuel Gonzalez ‘ little story, which is about a guy who unintentionally shrinks his wife.

The partnership comedy series examines the shifting power dynamics between spouses, putting them in a domineering fight against one another as a result of a technical error. Peacock may be broadcast on the American network. S” .&nbsp,

More information is available at Variety.

The 2025 Cannes Film Festival officially kicked off on Tuesday. In the Official Contest, Wes Anderson and Ari Aster will release six female-directed movies as well as long-awaited jobs.

Sean Baker won the Palmed’Or ( Golden Palm ), which is the highest award given to a director of Anora, which later won the Academy Award for Best Picture on March 2; and will the films featured at Cannes serve as a prelude to the 2026 awards season like it did last year? We’ll have to see, but for the time being, stay tuned to the everyday experiences in Cannes over the next two months, even if you didn’t attend the event.

” Critics complained that Cannes last year was a light matter, but that certainly had to do with the bottleneck created by the hits.” Some filmmakers make a number of comebacks to the Croisette this time, making for a very anticipated festival.

More information is available at IndieWire.

By much Ethan Coen’s future dark comedy Honey Don’t! is the one I’m most excited to learn more about after its Cannes Film Festival debut at the 2025 festival. The movie follows Margaret Qualley as Honey O&#8217, a small-town personal inspector who investigates bizarre incidents connected to a enigmatic religion. Who is the priest of that vicious religion? Of course, Captain America! &nbsp,

The movie will premiere in Cannes on the last day of the event as part of the evening checks, despite not competing. Although I’ll have to wait until August 22 for the black humor to be released in theaters, I have a feeling that the movie will generate a lot of interest once it premieres.

Ethan Coen’s latest film, co-written with longtime partner and partner Tricia Cooke, looks like a black comedy through and through, strongly of a piece with Drive-Away Dolls, once starring Margaret Qualley, this time as a gay private investigator on the trail of a cultist played by original Captain America Chris Evans.

More information is available at Empire.

Watch the HONEY ,DON’T! trailer! below:

The first post from Den of Geek was Link Tank: Lena Dunham Brings &#8216, Too Much &#8217, to Netflix This Summer.

This Duster evaluation doesn’t contain any clues. Do you mind if you looked at that? Josh Holloway and J. J. Abrams have reunited for the first time since Lost vanished from ABC 20 years earlier. I have a few memories of the set because I was more a fan of Heroes, but I always felt like going back. Nonetheless, ]… ]

The second article on Den of Geek was Duster Review: Josh Holloway and J. J. Abrams Reunite for a 70s Thriller.

Following the success of her 2012 comedy-drama set Girls, Lena Dunham is my Roman Empire. Everyone is aware of the plot: the published articles that examine her long-term partnership with maker Jack Antonoff, the widespread disapproval of Women ‘ lack of diversity, and the unfavorable abortion responses. Dunham was hailed as one of the most contentious authors of her day by the general public. But what was she thinking as a result of that storm of criticism?

On July 10, Dunham and her husband, Luis Felber, may provide a hazy account of how life was when they first met in 2021. The line will be full of comedy, personal honesty, and strong introspection if it’s anything like her previous work. When I met my husband, I was surprised by how much baggage two people could take with them, according to Dunham in a Variety discussion about meeting Felber.

The very anticipated Netflix series Too Little, co-written by Dunham and Felber, debuted on July 10.

Too Little, a New York hardworking in her mid-thirties, reeling from a broken relationship that she thought do last long and quietly isolating all she knows, is co-created by Dunham and Luis Ferber. The only way to escape New York City when every prevent contains a tale of her own negative behavior is to work in London, where she intends to lead a life of solitude like a Bronte sister. But when she encounters Felix ( Will Sharpe ), a walking series of red flags, she discovers that their unusual connection is unavoidable, even though it causes more issues than it solves. They now have to consider:” Would Americans and Brits truly speak the same language?”

Learn more at Deadline.

A romantic comedy about two young artists who fall in love in Paris just before they are recognized as historical icons? Yes, please, and Mick Jagger will be the producer of Miles and Juliette, a Bill Pohlad directed film. &nbsp,

Damson Idris, who is currently filming opposite Brad Pitt in Paramount’s future fantasy film Children of Blood and Bone, will play Miles Davis in Pohlad’s most recent film just in time for the new wave of buzz surrounding fresh movies during the Cannes Film Festival. Along with Anamaria Vartolomei, the duo will also be appearing in the role of Juliette Gréco in Pohlad’s most recent project.

Miles & Juliette follows 22-year-old Idris Davis ( Idris ) on a transformative trip to Paris in 1949, where they fall in love with French singer, actress, and Left Bank icon Juliette Gréco ( Vartolomei ). What starts off as a small conversation develops into a powerful bond between two young artists before they become historical legends.

Read more about The Hollywood Reporter.

The Miniature Wife, a marriage comedy series starring Jennifer Ames and Steve Turner, was granted worldwide distribution rights on Sunday by Sony Pictures Television. &nbsp,

Elizabeth Banks and Matthew Macfadyen, both of whom are in the lead jobs, make up the star-studded cast of patrons and recurring figures in the line. You might be wondering,” What does Ames and Turner mean by the small wife?” The comedy series produced by Media Res is basically based on Manuel Gonzalez’s little story, which is about a man who unintentionally shrinks his wife.

The connection comedy series examines the shifting power dynamics between spouses, putting them in a domineering fight against one another as a result of a technical error. Peacock may be broadcast on the American network. S” .&nbsp,

More information is available at Variety.

The 2025 Cannes Film Festival officially kicked off on Tuesday. Wes Anderson and Ari Aster’s long-awaited tasks are set to debut as well as six female-directed movies in the Official Contest.

Sean Baker won the Palmed’Or last year for Anora, which is the highest award given to the chairman of the Best Feature Film of the Official Opposition, for Anora, which eventually won the Academy Award for Best Picture on March 2. Who will get this year’s Palmd’Or, and will the films featured at Cannes serve as an early indicator for the 2026 awards season like next year? We’ll have to see, but for the time being, stay tuned for daily happenings in Cannes over the next two weeks, even if you can’t attend the festival.

” Pundits complained that Cannes last year was a light affair, but that certainly had to do with the bottleneck created by the strikes.” This year, many auteurs make a lot of noise at the Croisette.

Read more at IndieWire

By far Ethan Coen’s upcoming dark comedy Honey Don’t! is the one I’m most excited to learn more about after its Cannes Film Festival debut at the 2025 festival. The movie follows Margaret Qualley as Honey O&#8217, a small-town private investigator who investigates bizarre deaths connected to a enigmatic church. Who is the church’s priest who is responsible for that sinister affair? Of course, Captain America! &nbsp,

The movie will premiere in Cannes on the final day of the festival as part of the midnight screenings, despite not competing. Although I’ll have to wait until August 22 for the dark comedy to be released in theaters, I have a feeling that the movie will generate a lot of interest once it premieres.

Ethan Coen’s latest film, co-written with longtime collaborator and wife Tricia Cooke, is firmly of a piece with Drive-Away Dolls, and stars Margaret Qualley once more as a lesbian private investigator on the trail of a cultist played by former Captain America Chris Evans.

Read more at Empire.

Watch the HONEY ,DON’T! trailer. below:

The first post on Den of Geek was linked to Link Tank: Lena Dunham bringing Too Much &#8217 to Netflix this summer.