Blog

I am a innovative. What I do is alchemy. It is a secret. I don’t perform it as much as I let it be done by me.

I am a innovative. Certainly all creative people approve of this brand. Not all people see themselves in this manner. Some innovative persons incorporate technology into their work. That is their reality, and I respect it. Sometimes I even envy them, a minor. But my operation is different—my becoming is unique.

Apologizing and qualifying in progress is a diversion. That’s what my mind does to destroy me. I’ll leave it alone for today. I may regret and then qualify. After I’ve said what I should have. Which is challenging enough.

Except when it is simple and flows like a beverage valley.

Sometimes it does go that approach. Maybe what I need to make arrives right away. I’ve learned to avoid saying it right away because they think you don’t work hard enough when you realize that sometimes the thought just comes along and it is the best plan and you know it is the best idea.

Maybe I work and work and work until the thought strikes me. It occasionally arrives right away, but I don’t remind people for three weeks. Sometimes I blurt out the plan so quickly that I didn’t stop myself. like a child who discovered a medal in one of his Cracker Jacks. Maybe I get away with this. Maybe other people agree: yes, that is the best idea. Most times they don’t and I regret having given way to joy.

Joy should be saved for the meeting, where it will matter. not the informal gathering that two different gatherings precede that appointment. Anyone knows why we have all these discussions. We keep saying we’re going to get rid of them, but we end up merely trying to. They occasionally yet excel. But occasionally they detract from the real job. The percentages between when conferences are important, and when they are a sad distraction, vary, depending on what you do and where you do it. also who you are and what you do. Suddenly I digress. I am a artistic. That is the style.

Sometimes, despite many hours of diligent effort, someone is hardly useful. Often I have to accept that and move on to the next task.

Don’t question about method. I am a artistic.

I am a innovative. I don’t handle my goals. And I don’t handle my best tips.

I can nail aside, surround myself with information or photos, and maybe that works. I can go for a walk, and occasionally that works. There is a Eureka, which has nothing to do with boiling pots and sizzling petrol, and I may be making dinner. I frequently have a plan for action when I wake up. The idea that may have saved me disappears almost as frequently as I become aware and part of the world once more in a senseless wind of oblivion. For imagination, I believe, comes from that other planet. The one we enter in aspirations, and possibly, before conception and after death. But that’s for writers to know, and I am not a writer. I am a artistic. And it’s for philosophers to build massive soldiers in their imaginative world that they claim to be true. But that is another diversion. And a miserable one. Possibly on a much bigger issue than whether or not I am creative. But that’s not how I came around, though.

Often the process is mitigation. And hardship. You know the cliché about the abused designer? It’s true, even when the artist ( and let’s put that noun in quotes ) is trying to write a soft drink jingle, a callback in a tired sitcom, a budget request.

Some individuals who detest the idea of being called artistic perhaps been closeted artists, but that’s between them and their gods. No offence meant. Your wisdom is correct, too. However, mine is for me.

Creatives identify artists.

Negatives are aware of cons, just like queers are aware of queers, just like real rappers are aware of true rappers. Creatives feel enormous regard for creatives. We love, respect, emulate, and nearly deify the excellent ones. To revere any man is, of course, a horrible mistake. We have been warned. We know much. We know people are simply people. They dispute, they are depressed, they regret their most critical decisions, they are weak and thirsty, they can be cruel, they can be just as terrible as we can, if, like us, they are clay. But. But. However, they produce something incredible. They give birth to something that was unable to occur before them or otherwise. They are the inspirations ‘ mother. And I suppose, since it’s only lying it, I have to put that they are the mother of technology. Ba ho backside! Okay, that’s done. Continue.

Creatives disparage our personal small successes, because we compare them to those of the wonderful people. Wonderful graphics! Also, I‘m no Miyazaki. Now THAT is brilliance. That is brilliance straight out of the Bible. This half-starved small item that I made? It essentially fell off the pumpkin vehicle. And the carrots weren’t even clean.

Creatives knows that, at best, they are Salieri. That is what Mozart’s artists do, also.

I am a innovative. I haven’t worked in advertising in 30 years, but in my hallucinations, it’s my former artistic managers who judge me. They are correct in doing so. I am very lazy, overly simplistic, and when it actually counts, my mind goes blank. There is no medication for artistic function.

I am a artistic. Every project I create has a goal that makes Indiana Jones appear to be a retiree snoring in a balcony head. The more I pursue creativity, the faster I can complete my work, and the longer I obsess over my ideas and whizz around in circles before I can complete that task.

I can move ten times more quickly than those who aren’t imaginative, those who have just been creative for a short while, and those who have just had a short time of creative work. Simply that I spend twice as long putting the work off as they do before I work ten times as quickly as they do. When I put my mind to it, I am so confident in my ability to do a great career. I am that attached to the excitement scramble of delay. I also have a fear of the climb.

I am not an actor.

I am a artistic. No an actor. Though I dreamed, as a boy, of eventually being that. Some of us criticize our abilities and fear our own selves because we are not Michelangelos and Warhols. That is narcissism—but at least we aren’t in elections.

I am a innovative. Though I believe in reason and science, I decide by intelligence and desire. And sit with what follows—the calamities as well as the successes.

I am a artistic. Every term I’ve said these may offend another artists, who see things differently. Ask two artists a problem, get three ideas. Our dispute, our enthusiasm about it, and our responsibility to our own reality are, at least to me, the facts that we are artists, no matter how we may think about it.

I am a artistic. I lament my lack of taste in almost all of the areas of human understanding, which I know very little about. And I trust my preference above all other items in the regions closest to my soul, or perhaps, more precisely, to my passions. Without my passions, I had probably have to spend time staring living in the eye, which almost none of us can do for very long. No actually. No really. Because many in existence, if you really look at it, is terrible.

I am a innovative. I believe, as a family believes, that when I am gone, some little good part of me will take on in the head of at least one other people.

Working frees me from worrying about my job.

I am a innovative. I fear that my little product will disappear.

I am a artistic. I spend way too much time making the next thing, given that almost nothing I create did achieve the level of greatness I conceive of.

I am a artistic. I think that approach is the greatest secret. I think I have to consider it so strongly that I actually made the foolish decision to publish an essay I wrote without having to go through or edit. I didn’t do this generally, I promise. But I did it right away because I was even more frightened of forgetting what I was saying because I was afraid of you seeing through my sad movements toward the wonderful.

There. I think I’ve said it.

I’d like you to consider this a “yes … and” piece to complement Joe’s post. I’m just trying to contradict what he’s saying, but I’m just trying to give some context to initiatives and opportunities where AI can make a difference for people with disabilities. To be clear, I’m not saying that there aren’t true threats or pressing problems 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 hope that we’ll get there one day.

Other words

Joe’s article spends a lot of time examining how computer vision models can create other word. He raises a number of true points about the state of affairs right now. And while computer-vision concepts continue to improve in the quality and complexity of information in their information, their benefits aren’t wonderful. As he rightly points out, the state of image research is currently very poor, especially for some graphic types, in large part due to the lack of context for which AI systems look at images ( which is a result of having separate “foundation” models for words analysis and picture 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. However, I still think there’s possible in this area.

As Joe mentions, human-in-the-loop publishing of alt word should definitely be a factor. And if AI can intervene to provide a starting place for alt text, even if the rapid might say What is this BS? That’s not correct at all … Let me try to offer a starting point— I think that’s a gain.

If we can specifically station a design to examine image usage in context, this may help us more quickly determine which images are likely to be elegant and which ones are likely to be descriptive. That will clarify which situations require image descriptions, and it will increase authors ‘ effectiveness in making their sites more visible.

Although complex images, such as graphs and charts, are challenging to summarize in any way ( even for humans ), the image example provided in the GPT4 announcement provides an intriguing opportunity as well. Let’s say you came across a map that merely stated the chart’s name and the type of representation it was:” Pie chart comparing smartphone use to have phone usage in US households making under$ 30, 000 annually.” ( That would be a pretty bad alt text for a chart because it would frequently leave many unanswered questions about the data, but let’s just assume that that was the description in place. ) Imagine a world where people could ask questions about the vivid if your computer knew that that picture was a dessert chart ( because an ship model concluded this ).

• Would more people use smartphones or other types of phones?
• How many more?
• Is there a group of people who don’t collapse under any of these categories?
• 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 might also be helpful in educational settings to assist those who can, because is, comprehend the data contained in these charts.

What if you could request your website to make a complicated map simpler? What if you asked it to separate a single line from a collection curve? What if you could request your computer to transform the colors of the various lines so that it works better for your type of color blindness? What if you asked it to switch colours in favor of habits? Given these resources ‘ chat-based interface and our existing ability to manipulate photos in today’s AI devices, that seems like a chance.

Now imagine a specially designed model that could take the data 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

When Safiya Umoja Noble chose to call her book Algorithms of Oppression, she hit the nail on the head. Although her book focused on the ways that search engines can foster racism, I believe it to be equally accurate to say that all computer models have the potential to amplify conflict, bias, and intolerance. We all know that poorly written and maintained algorithms are incredibly harmful, whether it’s Twitter constantly showing you the most recent tweet from a drowsy billionaire, YouTube sending us into a q-hole, or Instagram warping our ideas of what natural bodies look like. A large portion of this is attributable to the lack of diversity in those who create and shape 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 serve as a network of employment for people who are neurodivers. They match job seekers with potential employers using an algorithm based on more than 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. Mentra made the decision to change the script when it came to typical employment websites because it was run by neurodivergent people. They lower the emotional and physical labor on the job-seeker side of things by recommending available candidates to companies who can then connect with job seekers that they are interested in.

More people with disabilities can be used to create algorithms, which can lessen the likelihood that they will harm their communities. That’s why diverse teams are so important.

Imagine if the social media company’s recommendation engine was tuned to prioritize follow recommendations for people who discussed topics similar to those that were important but who were not in your current sphere of influence in any significant way. For instance, if you were to follow a group of non-disabled white male academics who talk about AI, it might be advisable to follow those who are disabled, aren’t white, or aren’t men 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 attempting to combine this with other tasks, I’m sure I could go on and on, giving various examples of how AI could be used to assist 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. People who have ALS ( Lou Gehrig’s disease ), motor-neuron disease, or other medical conditions that can prevent them from talking can greatly benefit from having an AI model that can mimic your voice. 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 are assisting people with disabilities in the collection of recordings of people with atypical speech, thanks to the assistance of the Speech Accessibility Project. 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. More people with disabilities will be able to use voice assistants, dictation software, and voice-response services as a result of this research, which will result in more inclusive data sets that will enable them to use their computers and other devices more easily and with just their voices.
• Text transformation. The most recent generation of LLMs is capable of altering already-existing text without giving off hallucinations. This is incredibly empowering for those who have cognitive disabilities and who may benefit from text summaries or simplified versions, or even text that has been prepared for bionic reading.

The value of various teams and sources of data

We must acknowledge that our differences matter. The intersections of the identities that we exist in have an impact on our lived experiences. These lived experiences—with all their complexities ( and joys and pain ) —are valuable inputs to the software, services, and societies that we shape. The data we use to train new models must be based on our differences, and those who provide it to us need to be compensated for doing so. Inclusive data sets produce stronger models that promote more justifiable outcomes.

Want a model that doesn’t demean or patronize or objectify people with disabilities? Make sure that you include information about disabilities that is written by people who have a range of disabilities and that is well represented in the training data.

Want a model that doesn’t use ableist language? Before ableist language reaches readers, you might be able to use already-existing data sets to create a filter that can intercept and correct it. That being said, when it comes to sensitivity reading, AI models won’t be replacing human copy editors anytime soon.

Want a copilot for coding that provides recommendations that are accessible after 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.

I offer a single bit of advice to friends and family when they become new parents: When you start to think that you’ve got everything figured out, everything will change. Just as you start to get the hang of feedings, diapers, and regular naps, it’s time for solid food, potty training, and overnight sleeping. When you figure those out, it’s time for preschool and rare naps. The cycle goes on and on.

The same applies for those of us working in design and development these days. Having worked on the web for almost three decades at this point, I’ve seen the regular wax and wane of ideas, techniques, and technologies. Each time that we as developers and designers get into a regular rhythm, some new idea or technology comes along to shake things up and remake our world.

How we got here

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 birth of web standards

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 languages like PHP, Java, and .NET overtook Perl as the predominant back-end processors, and the cgi-bin was tossed in the trash bin. With these better server-side tools came the first era of web applications, starting with content-management systems (particularly in the blogging space with tools 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. Suddenly, pages could update their content without needing to reload. 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 let crafty designers and developers display fonts of their choosing. And technologies like Flash made it possible to add animations, games, and even more interactivity.

These new technologies, standards, and techniques reinvigorated the industry in many ways. Web design flourished as designers and developers explored more diverse styles and layouts. But we still relied on tons of 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). Complicated layouts required all manner of nested floats or absolute positioning (or both). 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 easy for anyone to add a dash of interaction to pages, although at the cost of doubling or even quadrupling the download size of simple websites.

The web as software platform

The symbiosis between the front end and back end continued to improve, and that led to the current era of modern web applications. 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. Alongside these tools came others, including collaborative version control, build automation, and shared package libraries. What was once primarily an environment for linked documents became a realm of infinite possibilities.

At the same time, mobile devices became more capable, and they gave us internet access in our pockets. Mobile apps and responsive design opened up opportunities for new interactions anywhere and any time.

This combination of capable mobile devices and powerful development tools contributed to the waxing of social media and other centralized tools for people to connect and consume. 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 offered connections on a global scale, with both the good and bad that that entails.

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

Where we are now

In the last couple of years, it’s felt like we’ve begun to reach another major inflection point. 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 make a website, from the tried-and-true classic of hosting plain HTML files to static site generators to content management systems of all flavors. The fracturing of social media also comes with a cost: we lose crucial infrastructure for discovery and connection. Webmentions, RSS, ActivityPub, and other tools of the IndieWeb can help with this, but they’re still relatively underimplemented and hard to use for the less nerdy. 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.

Browser support for CSS, JavaScript, and other standards like web components has accelerated, especially through efforts like Interop. New technologies gain support across the board in a fraction of the time that they used to. I often learn about a new feature and check its browser support only to find that its coverage is already above 80 percent. 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.

Today, with a few commands and a couple of lines of code, we can prototype almost any idea. All the tools that we now have available make it easier than ever to start something new. But the upfront cost that these frameworks may save in initial delivery eventually comes due as upgrading and maintaining them becomes 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 used to let us adopt new techniques sooner—have now become hindrances instead. 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 when scripts fail (whether through poor code, network issues, or other environmental factors), there’s often no alternative, leaving users with blank or broken pages.

Where do we go from here?

Today’s hacks help to shape tomorrow’s standards. And there’s nothing inherently wrong with embracing hacks—for now—to move the present forward. Problems only arise when we’re unwilling to admit that they’re hacks or we hesitate to replace them. 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 developer-friendly tools. They may make your job a little easier today, but how do they affect everything else? What’s the cost to users? To future developers? To standards adoption? Sometimes the convenience may be worth it. Sometimes it’s just a hack that you’ve grown accustomed to. And sometimes it’s holding you back from even better options.

Start from 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 true of third-party frameworks. Sites built with even the hackiest of HTML from the ’90s still work just fine today. The same can’t always be said of sites built with frameworks even after just a couple years.

Design with care. Whether your craft is code, pixels, or processes, consider the impacts of each decision. 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. Rather than rushing headlong to “move fast and break things,” use the time saved by modern tools to consider more carefully and design with deliberation.

Always be learning. If you’re always learning, you’re also growing. Sometimes it may be hard to pinpoint what’s worth learning and what’s just today’s hack. You might end up focusing on something that won’t matter next year, even if you were to focus solely on learning standards. (Remember XHTML?) But constant learning opens up new connections in your brain, and the hacks that you learn one day may help to inform different experiments another day.

Play, experiment, and be weird! This web that we’ve built is the ultimate experiment. It’s the single largest human endeavor in history, and yet each of us can create our own pocket within it. Be courageous and try new things. Build a playground for ideas. Make goofy experiments in your own mad science lab. Start your own small business. There has never been a more empowering place to be creative, take risks, and explore what we’re capable of.

Share and amplify. As you experiment, play, and learn, share what’s 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.

Go forth and make

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 imbue our values into the things that we create, and let’s make the web a better place for everyone. Create that thing that only you are uniquely qualified to make. Then share it, make it better, make it again, or make something new. Learn. Make. Share. Grow. Rinse and repeat. Every time you think that you’ve mastered the web, everything will change.

Picture this. You’ve joined a squad at your company that’s designing new product features with an emphasis on automation or AI. Or your company has just implemented a personalization engine. Either way, you’re designing with data. Now what? When it comes to designing for personalization, there are many cautionary tales, no overnight successes, and few guides for the perplexed. 

Between the fantasy of getting it right and the fear of it going wrong—like when we encounter “persofails” in the vein of a company repeatedly imploring everyday consumers to buy additional toilet seats—the personalization gap is real. It’s an especially confounding place to be a digital professional without a map, a compass, or a plan.

For those of you venturing into personalization, there’s no Lonely Planet and few tour guides because effective personalization is so specific to each organization’s talent, technology, and market position. 

But you can ensure that your team has packed its bags sensibly.

There’s a DIY formula to increase your chances for success. At minimum, you’ll defuse your boss’s irrational exuberance. Before the party you’ll need to effectively prepare.

We call it prepersonalization.

Behind the music

Consider Spotify’s DJ feature, which debuted this past year.

We’re used to seeing the polished final result of a personalization feature. Before the year-end award, the making-of backstory, or the behind-the-scenes victory lap, a personalized feature had to be conceived, budgeted, and prioritized. Before any personalization feature goes live in your product or service, it lives amid a backlog of worthy ideas for expressing customer experiences more dynamically.

So how do you know where to place your personalization bets? How do you design consistent interactions that won’t trip up users or—worse—breed mistrust? We’ve found that for many budgeted programs to justify their ongoing investments, they first needed one or more workshops to convene key stakeholders and internal customers of the technology. Make yours count.

​From Big Tech to fledgling startups, we’ve seen the same evolution up close with our clients. In our experiences with working on small and large personalization efforts, a program’s ultimate track record—and its ability to weather tough questions, work steadily toward shared answers, and organize its design and technology efforts—turns on how effectively these prepersonalization activities play out.

Time and again, we’ve seen effective workshops separate future success stories from unsuccessful efforts, saving countless time, resources, and collective well-being in the process.

A personalization practice involves a multiyear effort of testing and feature development. It’s not a switch-flip moment 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 need these cards. But we strongly recommend that you create something similar, whether that might be digital or physical.

Set your kitchen timer

How long does it take to cook up a prepersonalization workshop? The surrounding assessment activities that we recommend including can (and often do) span weeks. For the core workshop, we recommend aiming for two to three days. Here’s a summary of our broader approach along with details on the essential first-day activities.

The full arc of the wider workshop is threefold:

1. Kickstart: This sets the terms of engagement as you focus on the opportunity as well as the readiness and drive of your team and your leadership. .
2. 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.
3. Work your plan: This phase is all about creating a competitive environment for team participants to individually pitch their own pilots that each contain a proof-of-concept project, its business case, and its 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: Whet your appetite

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

Spark conversation by naming consumer examples 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. We have a catalog of these in the cards. Here’s a list of 142 different interactions to jog your thinking.

This is all about setting the table. What are the possible paths for the practice in your organization? If you want a broader view, here’s a long-form primer and a strategic framework.

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 divide connected experiences into five levels: functions, features, experiences, complete products, and portfolios. Size your own build here. This will help to focus the conversation on the merits of ongoing investment as well as the gap between what you deliver today 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 critical because it emphasizes how personalization can not only help your external customers but also affect your own ways of working. 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 vote on where they see your product or service putting its emphasis. Naturally, you can’t prioritize all of them. The intention here is to flesh out how different departments may view their own upsides to the effort, which can vary from one 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 naming your personalization gap. Is your customer journey well documented? Will data and privacy compliance be too big of a challenge? Do you have content metadata needs that you have to address? (We’re pretty sure that you do: it’s just a matter of recognizing the relative size of that need and its remedy.) In our cards, we’ve noted a number of program risks, including common team dispositions. Our Detractor card, for example, lists six stakeholder behaviors that hinder progress.

Effectively collaborating and managing expectations is critical to your success. Consider the potential barriers to your future progress. Press the participants to name specific steps to overcome or mitigate those barriers in your organization. As studies have shown, personalization efforts face many common barriers.

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

Hit that test kitchen

Next, let’s look at what you’ll need to bring your personalization recipes to life. Personalization engines, which are robust software suites for automating and expressing dynamic content, can intimidate new customers. Their capabilities are sweeping and powerful, and they present broad options for how your organization can conduct its activities. This presents the question: Where do you begin when you’re configuring a connected experience?

What’s important here is to avoid treating the installed software like it were a dream kitchen from some fantasy 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.

The ultimate menu of the prioritized backlog will come together over the course of the workshop. 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.

The dishes will come from recipes, and those recipes have set ingredients.

Verify your ingredients

Like a good product manager, you’ll make sure—andyou’ll validate with the right stakeholders present—that you have all the ingredients on hand to cook up your desired interaction (or that you can work out what needs to be added to your pantry). 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 isn’t just about discovering requirements. Documenting your personalizations as a series of if-then statements lets the team: 

1. compare findings toward a unified approach for developing features, not unlike when artists paint with the same palette; 
2. specify a consistent set of interactions that users find uniform or familiar; 
3. and develop parity across performance measurements and key performance indicators too. 

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.

Compose your recipe

What ingredients are important to you? Think of a who-what-when-why construct: 

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

We first developed these cards and card categories five years ago. We regularly play-test their fit with conference audiences and clients. And we still encounter new possibilities. But they all follow an underlying who-what-when-why logic.

Here are three examples for a subscription-based reading app, which you can generally follow along with right to left in the cards in the accompanying photo below. 

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: When there’s a newly registered user, an email is generated to call out the breadth of the content catalog and to make them a happier subscriber.
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.

A useful preworkshop activity may be to think through a first draft of what these cards might be for your organization, although we’ve also found that this process sometimes flows best through cocreating the recipes themselves. 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.

You can think of the later stages of the workshop as moving from recipes toward a cookbook in focus—like 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.

Better kitchens require better architecture

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

When personalization becomes a laugh line, it’s because a team is overfitting: they aren’t designing with their best data. Like a sparse pantry, every organization has metadata debt to go along with its technical debt, and this creates a drag on personalization effectiveness. Your AI’s output quality, for example, is indeed limited 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 definitely stand the heat…

Personalization technology opens a doorway into a confounding ocean of possible designs. Only a disciplined and highly collaborative approach will bring about the necessary focus and intention to succeed. So banish the dream kitchen. Instead, hit the test kitchen to save time, preserve job satisfaction and security, and safely dispense with the fanciful ideas that originate upstairs of the doers in your organization. There are meals to serve and mouths to feed.

This workshop framework gives you a fighting shot at lasting success as well as sound beginnings. Wiring up your information layer isn’t an overnight affair. But if you use the same cookbook and shared recipes, you’ll have solid footing for success. We designed these activities to make your organization’s needs concrete and clear, long before the hazards pile up.

While there are associated costs toward investing in this kind of technology and product design, your ability to size up and confront your unique situation and your digital capabilities is time well spent. Don’t squander it. The proof, as they say, is in the pudding.

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.

How to Adapt, Thrive, and Stay Human in an AI-Driven World written by John Jantsch read more at Duct Tape Marketing

The Duct Tape Marketing Podcast with John Jantsch In this episode of the Duct Tape Marketing Podcast, we dive into the evolving world of marketing in 2025, where artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping how businesses operate. The discussion highlights the importance of balancing cutting-edge AI tools with timeless human elements like emotional intelligence (EI) and […]

How to Adapt, Thrive, and Stay Human in an AI-Driven World written by John Jantsch read more at Duct Tape Marketing

The Duct Tape Marketing Podcast with John Jantsch

In this episode of the Duct Tape Marketing Podcast, we dive into the evolving world of marketing in 2025, where artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping how businesses operate. The discussion highlights the importance of balancing cutting-edge AI tools with timeless human elements like emotional intelligence (EI) and authentic connection. As marketing trends accelerate and marketing tools multiply, the challenge lies in leveraging these advancements strategically while staying true to your brand voice and fostering personalization.

AI in marketing has the power to disrupt industries, but as discussed, it’s critical to focus on strategic marketing and storytelling to maintain authenticity. The conversation also explores hyper-personalization, marketing automation, and how businesses can navigate the fast-paced evolution of marketing tools while creating meaningful relationships with their customers.

By blending cutting-edge AI with timeless human values, businesses can adapt, thrive, and stay human in an AI-driven world. As marketing evolves, success will depend on leveraging personalization, EI, and a clear brand voice to cut through the noise.

Key Takeaways:

• Strategy Before Technology
  Without a solid marketing strategy, shiny new AI tools can lead to faster failure. Focus on aligning AI applications with your business goals to maximize impact.
• The Role of Emotional Intelligence (EI)
  As AI democratizes intelligence, EI becomes a key differentiator. Skills like empathy, communication, and contextual understanding are more important than ever in strategic marketing.
• The Power of Storytelling in Marketing
  Storytelling remains a vital way to humanize your brand and connect with audiences. AI can’t replicate personal experiences, making your authentic stories a unique advantage.
• Brand Voice and Personalization
  Define and maintain your brand voice to stand out in an AI-saturated landscape. Use AI-driven hyper-personalization to deliver tailored messages that resonate with your audience.
• Navigating AI Disruption
  AI is transforming marketing trends and tools across content creation, design, and personalized sales. However, businesses that prioritize the human element in marketing will create stronger, more authentic connections.

Chapters:

[01:15] AI vs Previous Tech Excitement
[03:25] Approaching AI Strategically
[05:02] Adopting the Right Mindset Around AI
[10:47] The Human Element Stands Out
[13:04] Importance of Storytelling for Your Brand
[13:49] AI’s Impact on Marketing
[16:08] The Future of Personalization
[18:55] Marketing Focus for 2025

Based on all ten incidents of winter 1, this article is a no-spoiler for Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man. Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man’s path to success appeared very clear when it was first announced around the close of 2021. As long as the Marvel Disney + series projected the same energy of previous animated Spider-Man ]…]

The article Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man Review: No X-Men ‘ 97 But Never Poor appeared first on Den of Geek.

Tubi has picked up Roboforce: The Active Series, an interesting new sci-fi present from The Nacelle Company and Dwayne Johnson &#8217, s Seven Money Productions, set to launch this April on the channel.

&#8220, Based on the nostalgic toys of the 1980s, the animated series, written by Gavin Hignight ( Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 2012, Transformers: Cyberverse ) and Tom Stern ( Freaked ), will continue the narrative inspired by the original robot action figures. In 2089 Detroit, Soraya Aviram’s RoboForce debuted with ideas to help a new galactic nation on Earth. However, the same day as the announcement, Soraya’s foe, Silas Duke, revealed his fresh Utopia Aegis 101 collection of machines, which made RoboForce soon obsolete. Without any hope of ever becoming heroes, RoboForce split up and was forced to work in mundane jobs for 15 years before abruptly the Utopia Aegis 101s turn against humanity and no one else can stop them. &#8221,

Read more about the news around.

LEGO and Minecraft have been working together for well over a century, but the style may cross over into new territory when new models based on A Minecraft Movie, which debuted in spring venues, are released.

&#8220, Warner Bros. Pictures, Legendary and Mojang &#8217, s A Minecraft Movie, releasing in April, has attracted considerable attention since its first trailer debuted in September. LEGO has now revealed two tie-in set, both of which will be available on March 1st. &#8221,

Learn more at Brickset

Lady Gaga addresses the repulsive greeting of the Joker movie, which features her portrayal of the well-known DC criminal Harley Quinn in an open letter.

&#8220, Released next October, Joker: Folie À Deux was the costly musical movie to 2019&#8217, s amazement hit Joker. Harley Quinn and Lady Gaga, both returning as Arthur Fleck/Joker, are in Joaquin Phoenix’s shoes. Before its launch, the film had a lot of hype, but detractors hated it afterward. Viewers didn’t care for it, sometimes. Worst of all, it was just a dull musical music that wasted Gaga’s talents and posthumously made the first film worse with its bizarre end, which wasn’t actually a fun type of negative. It grossed$ 207 million on a reported budget of$ 200 million, which means it flopped hard. Lady Gaga has now expressed her thoughts on the failed sequel from WB and DC. &#8221,

Read more at Kotaku

Charli XCX, who helmed the pop culture scene with her album Brat last summer, is stepping up to the plate with her acting work, co-starring and producing in an upcoming movie from A24.

&#8220, Charli XCX’s creative journey takes an exciting turn as she ventures into filmmaking with her upcoming A24 feature, The Moment. In addition to starring in the film, she will produce it through her newly founded production company, Studio365. Although plot details are being kept secret, Charli’s unique artistic vision and its promising creative team have already caused a lot of buzz with the project. &#8221,

Read more at HypeBeast

A new TV spot for James Gunn&#8217, s Superman debuted during the NFL conference championship games this past weekend, and some fans aren&#8217, t happy about a new shot of Superman flying.

&#8220, A new look at James Gunn’s Superman has the internet in a tizzy. Warner Bros. released a new TV spot for the movie this weekend during the NFL games, and while the footage mostly comes from the teaser trailer, there are some fresh shots, including one of Superman gliding across a icy plain. The camera looks like it’s flying with him and, well, it looks a little weird. In fact, Gunn had to jump on social media to stop the spreading wave of misinformation and presumptions. &#8221,

Read more at Gizmodo

The post Link Tank: Roboforce: The Animated Series Headed to Tubi in April appeared first on Den of Geek.

If the world isn’t already intimidating much, horror can provide a secure, managed release of pressure. It’s no wonder, therefore, that now despair is more common than ever. 2025 has already seen the release of some hotly anticipated names, including Eric LaRocca’s story about a grieving father, At Dark, I Become Loathsome, and the latest ]… ]

The biggest despair novels of 2025 first appeared on Den of Geek.

Tubi has picked up Roboforce: The Active Series, an interesting new sci-fi present from The Nacelle Company and Dwayne Johnson &#8217, s Seven Money Productions, set to launch this April on the channel.

&#8220, Based on the nostalgic toys of the 1980s, the animated series, written by Gavin Hignight ( Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 2012, Transformers: Cyberverse ) and Tom Stern ( Freaked ), will continue the narrative inspired by the original robot action figures. In 2089 Detroit, Soraya Aviram’s RoboForce debuted with ideas to help a new galactic nation on Earth. However, the same day as the announcement, Soraya’s foe, Silas Duke, revealed his fresh Utopia Aegis 101 collection of machines, which made RoboForce soon obsolete. When RoboForce split up, he was forced to work in menial work for 15 years without any hope of ever becoming a hero. Until immediately, the Utopia Aegis 101s change on humanity and no one else can stop them. &#8221,

Read more about the news around.

LEGO and Minecraft have been working together for well over a century, but the style may cross over into new territory when new models based on A Minecraft Movie, which debuted in spring venues, are released.

&#8220, Warner Bros. Pictures, Legendary and Mojang &#8217, s A Minecraft Movie, releasing in April, has attracted considerable attention since its first trailer debuted in September. LEGO has now revealed two tie-in set, both of which will be available on March 1st. &#8221,

Learn more at Brickset

Lady Gaga makes an honest comment about the awful answer to the Joker movie, which features her as the well-known DC criminal Harley Quinn.

&#8220, Released next October, Joker: Folie À Deux was the costly musical movie to 2019&#8217, s amazement hit Joker. Harley Quinn and Lady Gaga, both returning as Arthur Fleck/Joker, are in Joaquin Phoenix’s shoes. Prior to its launch, the film received a lot of positive press, but critics disliked it. Viewers didn’t care for it, neither. And worst of all, it was just a dull musical music that wasted Gaga’s talents and posthumously made the first film worse with its bizarre end, which wasn’t actually a fun sort of negative. It grossed$ 207 million on a reported budget of$ 200 million, which means it flopped hard. And now Lady Gaga has revealed her thoughts on the lackedluster sequel from WB and DC. &#8221,

Read more at Kotaku

Charli XCX, who helmed the pop culture scene with her album Brat last summer, is stepping up to the plate with her acting work, which she co-stars in and directs for A24’s upcoming feature.

&#8220, Charli XCX’s creative journey takes an exciting turn as she ventures into filmmaking with her upcoming A24 feature, The Moment. In addition to starring in the film, she will produce it through her newly founded production company, Studio365. The project has already generated a lot of buzz thanks to Charli’s unique artistic vision and its promising creative team, despite keeping plot details a secret. &#8221,

Read more at HypeBeast

A new TV spot for James Gunn&#8217, s Superman debuted during the NFL conference championship games this past weekend, and some fans aren&#8217, t happy about a new shot of Superman flying.

&#8220, A new look at James Gunn’s Superman has the internet in a tizzy. Warner Bros. released a new TV spot for the movie this weekend during the NFL games, and while the footage mostly comes from the teaser trailer, there are some fresh shots, including one of Superman gliding across a icy plain. The camera looks like it’s flying with him and, well, it looks a little weird. In fact, Gunn had to jump on social media to stop the spreading wave of misinformation and presumptions. &#8221,

Read more at Gizmodo

The post Link Tank: Roboforce: The Animated Series Headed to Tubi in April appeared first on Den of Geek.

The first two bouts of Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man have clues in this post. Straight from its beginning funds, Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man teaches people what they can believe. The Math Club’s” Neighbor Like Me” features Relaye and Melo Makes Music, a remix of the timeless design from the animated series from 1967.

The first article on Den of Geek was Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man Really Remixed Spidey’s Comic and MCU Origin Stories.

Tubi has picked up Roboforce: The Active Series, an interesting new sci-fi present from The Nacelle Company and Dwayne Johnson &#8217, s Seven Money Productions, set to launch this April on the channel.

&#8220, Based on the nostalgic toys of the 1980s, the animated series, written by Gavin Hignight ( Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 2012, Transformers: Cyberverse ) and Tom Stern ( Freaked ), will continue the narrative inspired by the original robot action figures. In 2089 Detroit, Soraya Aviram’s RoboForce debuted with ideas to help a new galactic nation on Earth. However, the same day as the announcement, Soraya’s foe, Silas Duke, revealed his fresh Utopia Aegis 101 collection of machines, which made RoboForce soon obsolete. Without any hope of ever becoming heroes, RoboForce split up and was forced to work in mundane jobs for 15 years before abruptly the Utopia Aegis 101s change on mankind and no one else can stop them. &#8221,

Read more about the news around.

LEGO and Minecraft have collaborated for nicely over a century, but the style may cross over into new territory when new models based on A Minecraft Movie, which debuted in spring theaters, are released.

&#8220, Warner Bros. Pictures, Legendary and Mojang &#8217, s A Minecraft Movie, releasing in April, has attracted considerable attention since its first trailer debuted in September. LEGO has now revealed two tie-in set, both of which will be available on March 1st. &#8221,

Learn more at Brickset

Lady Gaga makes an honest comment about the awful answer to the Joker movie, which features her as the well-known DC criminal Harley Quinn.

&#8220, Released next October, Joker: Folie À Deux was the costly musical movie to 2019&#8217, s amazement hit Joker. Joaquin Phoenix made a comeback as Arthur Fleck/Joker, along with Lady Gaga as Harley Quinn. Before its launch, the film received a lot of publicity, but critics detested it afterward. Viewers didn’t care for it, neither. And worst of all, it was just a dull musical music that wasted Gaga’s talents and posthumously made the first film worse with its bizarre end, which wasn’t actually a fun sort of negative. It grossed$ 207 million on a documented budget of$ 200 million, which means it flopped hard. And now Lady Gaga has revealed her thoughts on the lackedluster spinoff from WB and DC. &#8221,

Learn more at Kotaku

Charli XCX, who helmed the pop culture scene with her record Brat last summer, is stepping up to the plate with her speaking work, co-starring and producing in an upcoming movie from A24.

&#8220, Charli XCX’s creative trip takes an interesting move as she enterprises into filmmaking with her future A24 function, The Moment. In addition to starring in the movie, she did make it through her recently founded manufacturing business, Studio365. The project has now generated a lot of buzz thanks to Charli’s special artistic vision and its promising innovative team, despite keeping plot details a secret. &#8221,

Learn more at HypeBeast

A new Television area for James Gunn&#8217, s Superman debuted during the NFL conference championship matches this past weekend, and some fans aren&#8217, t content about a new photo of Superman flying.

&#8220, A fresh look at James Gunn’s Superman has the web in a huff. Warner Bros. released a new TV place for the movie this weekend during the NFL game, and while the majority of the film is from the preview video, there are some fresh shots, including one of Superman flying across a icy simple. The camera looks like it’s flying with him and, well, it looks a little weird. In fact, Gunn had to jump on social media to stop the spread of misinformation and false information. &#8221,

Read more at Gizmodo

The post Link Tank: Roboforce: The Animated Series Headed to Tubi in April appeared first on Den of Geek.

Companion’s significant part is mental tension. After all, it was made to be a function in the movie’s mythical companion series, artificial microbes that provide physical and emotional support to their masters ( or “fuck-bots” as Jack Quaid’s Josh refers to his purchase ). These deliberately clever machines are intended to resemble individual perception.

The Stepford Wives Sequel We Deserve Companion Review initially appeared on Den of Geek.

Tubi has picked up Roboforce: The Active Series, an interesting new sci-fi present from The Nacelle Company and Dwayne Johnson &#8217, s Seven Money Productions, set to launch this April on the channel.

&#8220, Based on the nostalgic toys of the 1980s, the animated series, written by Gavin Hignight ( Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 2012, Transformers: Cyberverse ) and Tom Stern ( Freaked ), will continue the narrative inspired by the original robot action figures. In 2089 Detroit, Soraya Aviram’s RoboForce debuted with ideas to help a new galactic nation on Earth. However, the same day as the announcement, Soraya’s foe, Silas Duke, revealed his fresh Utopia Aegis 101 collection of machines, which made RoboForce soon obsolete. When RoboForce split up, he was forced to work in menial work for 15 years without any hope of ever becoming a hero. Until abruptly, the Utopia Aegis 101s change on humanity and no one else can stop them. &#8221,

Read more about the news below.

LEGO and Minecraft have been working together for well over a century, but the style may cross over into new territory when new models based on A Minecraft Movie, which debuted in spring venues, are released.

&#8220, Warner Bros. Pictures, Legendary and Mojang &#8217, s A Minecraft Movie, releasing in April, has attracted considerable attention since its first trailer debuted in September. LEGO has now revealed two tie-in set, both of which will be available on March 1st. &#8221,

Learn more at Brickset

Lady Gaga addresses the repulsive welcome of the Joker movie, which features her portrayal of the well-known DC villain Harley Quinn in an open letter.

&#8220, Released next October, Joker: Folie À Deux was the costly musical movie to 2019&#8217, s amazement hit Joker. Harley Quinn and fresh cast member Lady Gaga reprise their roles as Arthur Fleck/Joker. Before its launch, the film had a lot of publicity, but reviewers hated it afterward. Viewers didn’t care for it, sometimes. Worst of all, it was just a dull musical music that wasted Gaga’s talents and posthumously made the first film worse with its bizarre end, which wasn’t actually a fun sort of negative. It grossed$ 207 million on a reported budget of$ 200 million, which means it flopped hard. Lady Gaga has now expressed her thoughts on the failed sequel from WB and DC. &#8221,

Read more at Kotaku

Charli XCX, who helmed the pop culture scene with her album Brat last summer, is stepping up to the plate with her acting work, co-starring and producing in an upcoming movie from A24.

&#8220, Charli XCX’s creative journey takes an exciting turn as she ventures into filmmaking with her upcoming A24 feature, The Moment. In addition to starring in the film, she will produce it through her newly founded production company, Studio365. The project has already generated a lot of buzz thanks to Charli’s unique artistic vision and its promising creative team, despite keeping plot details a secret. &#8221,

Read more at HypeBeast

A new TV spot for James Gunn&#8217, s Superman debuted during the NFL conference championship games this past weekend, and some fans aren&#8217, t happy about a new shot of Superman flying.

&#8220, A new look at James Gunn’s Superman has the internet in a tizzy. Warner Bros. released a new TV spot for the movie this weekend during the NFL games, and while the majority of the footage is from the teaser trailer, there are some fresh shots, including one of Superman flying across a icy plain. The camera looks like it’s flying with him and, well, it looks a little weird. In fact, Gunn had to jump on social media to stop the spread of misinformation and false information. &#8221,

Read more at Gizmodo

The post Link Tank: Roboforce: The Animated Series Headed to Tubi in April appeared first on Den of Geek.