SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " Read More About " 25 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Reuters Entertainment News Summary
Read more about Reuters Entertainment News Summary on Devdiscourse
Reuters Science News Summary
Read more about Reuters Science News Summary on Devdiscourse
Scaring Up Customers for Halloween Streaming
(Welcome to the Entertainment Strategy Guy, a newsletter on the entertainment industry and business strategy. I write a weekly Streaming Ratings Report and a bi-weekly strategy column, along with occasional deep dives into other topics, like today’s article. Please subscribe.) Way back in 2022, I did a deep dive into each streamer’s horror offerings, looking at the top horror film and TV shows, and which streamers had the best library titles and best Halloween landing pages. If you’d like to check out those articles... Way back in 2022, I ranked all the streamers’ Halloween landing pages. I updated my thoughts in 2023... ...and 2024. After taking last year off, I’m back at it again this year. My theory—then and now—is that Halloween landing pages provide a subtle but surprisingly valuable insight into how the streamers position themselves, and what they do well and what they don’t. They show who relies on libraries, whose libraries across TV and film have the most value, who understands how customers want to access those libraries, and, being blunt, which product teams actually put the time in to make a quality holiday user experience. Plus, three “horror” TV shows had big debuts this month! So today, I’ll answer the questions... What are the all-time biggest horror shows and films on streaming? What streamer has the best library? What streamer has the best landing page? And what does this say about the streaming wars today? But first, let’s look at three big new horror shows on streaming... Subscribe Horror TV Has Dominated October So Far In a fun twist this month, three different streamers released three different horror TV shows. Many scary stories come out every October, but the twist is that all three did well: Two of the shows got over 20 million hours, which is just good. You can see that Below is helping Netflix start October/Q4 off well: And that Carrie is a top seven show for Amazon through two weeks: But here’s the crazier note: even though it doesn’t look huge, Crystal Lake is Peacock’s biggest debut yet: Let’s discuss the streaming elephant in the room: two of these shows are based off classic horror IP: Jason and Carrie. So once again, IP works, in theaters and on streaming. It just does. Oddly enough, horror IP doesn’t draw a tenth of the ire that other IP does, even though, arguably, horror films are the original franchise films, starting in the 1930s and continuing on through the slasher film 80s. So horror TV shows are off to a great start. While I’ve written before that horror films do NOT over-perform on streaming, TV shows are a different story. The Top Horror Films and TV Shows on Streaming All Time To start, here are the top first seasons for all streaming TV shows since 2020 (the start of the Streaming Ratings Era): First take: yep, that’s some power laws at work right there. The biggest TV show hits aren’t just bigger than other hit shows, they’re orders of magnitude bigger. Wednesday dwarfs The Last of Us (a big hit!) and is ten times bigger than the next six most popular horror shows. Wow! So yes, horror or horror-adjacent shows can do as well as the top shows on streaming. Wednesday is proof of this. (Though, even Wednesday is more horror-adjacent than proper horror.) Also, note that Below, Carrie and _Crystal Lake_could/should keep moving up the charts. That said, there is some weakness in these numbers. Only eighteen horror first seasons made the charts, which is low. For context, 541 season ones have made the Nielsen originals charts since 2020. Eighteen out of 541 isn’t great! Plus, again, the IP issue. Wednesday and The Last of Us came from popular IP, and It: Welcome to Derry and Goosebumps are spinoffs. Next up, every horror show from season two on: The bad news here? Besides one iconic example, horror shows don’t last long i.e. generate very many seasons. While many straight-to-streaming horror shows were limited series, many weren’t and only four horror shows got to a second season or beyond. That’s a bad hit rate. And yeah, only one horror show made it to a fifth season! This genre is just not elite (on streaming). Okay, on to the top horror films all time (er, since 2020): We’re just getting started with this issue, but the rest is for paid subscribers of the Entertainment Strategy Guy, so if you’d like to find out… ...What streamers have the most horror films... ...And how FASTs have embraced horror films... ...How many elite horror films are on linear TV or aren’t on TV at all… ...How streamers make it very, very hard to find horror films… …And a lot more... ...please subscribe! We can only keep doing this great work with your support. If you’d like to read more about why you should subscribe, please read this article about the Streaming Ratings Report, why it matters, why you need it, and why we cover streaming ratings best.
Reuters Science News Summary
Read more about Reuters Science News Summary on Devdiscourse
Ellen Anthony’s care goes above and beyond
Ellen Anthony’s reputation precedes her at ECU Health Edgecombe Hospital, and for good reason. Read more about a valued team member.
Sherrill signs new law expanding mental health resources in schools
New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill has signed the SPARK program into law. Read more about the new program and others offered to South Jersey residents.
Astrana Health Data Breach Reported; Impact Under Investigation
Do you believe your information may have been exposed in the Astrana Health data breach? Read more about the incident.
Is 50 the new 60?
Subscribe TL;DR: Younger generations are showing signs of worse health compared to earlier-born cohorts at the same age This backward “drift” is showing up both in mortality risk and chronic disease Worsening trends in obesity and diabetes are the most consistent signals Taking the long view, we’ve made astonishing gains in health and life expectancy in the last century. Global average life expectancy has more than doubled from 32 years in 1900 to 73 years in 2024. (But don’t forget, there were still old people when life expectancy was 32). As people lived longer, they also generally lived healthier along the way. It turns out that avoiding things that can kill you early, like malnutrition and lots of childhood infections, also keeps you healthier later in life. In a classic 2004 paper, Finch and Crimmins proposed that cohorts of children who benefited from fewer early life infections had less lifetime exposure to inflammation and cardiovascular disease later in life, accelerating mortality improvements at older ages. Poor nutrition in the womb has also been linked to a higher risk of later chronic disease. The upshot is that improvements in childhood health can pay dividends many decades later. The combination of better living conditions (nutrition, sanitation) and medical advances (antibiotics, vaccines, blood pressure meds, etc) meant that people’s healthy lifespan generally expanded, even as they lived longer. Aging researchers call this best-case scenario “compression of morbidity”—meaning we delay the onset of disease and disability even faster than the years of life we are adding. During my 20+ year research career, we could generally bank on the idea that younger generations would not only live longer but also keep getting healthier along the way. “60 is the new 50” as they say… Enter “Generational Health Drift” Sadly, this expectation of steady progress may be changing. You’ve probably heard that US life expectancy gains have slowed to a crawl in the past couple of decades. Mortality improvements are also slowing (though less dramatically) in many other high-income countries (you can read more about that in a review paper I wrote here). Mortality is a very blunt health measure, but it is often a good barometer for the broader population health trends happening underneath. And we are now seeing that younger generations may be in worse health at similar ages compared to earlier born cohorts. My collaborator Prof. George Ploubidis at University College London coined this worsening health in more recently born cohorts “generational health drift.” “Generational health drift” is bad news on multiple fronts. Most obviously, we don’t want our health progress to go backward. But the timing is also bad, since our populations are aging. In demographic terms, “population aging” means that the proportion of the population at older ages (i.e >65 years) is increasing. Fun demography fact: Current population aging is not due to the recent declines in the birth rates making the news, but declines in fertility decades ago, after the “baby boom.” As baby boomers reach older ages, the smaller cohorts behind them mean the percentage of older adults will increase. For example, the share of the population age 65 and older in the US increased from 12.4% in 2004 to 18.0% in 2024. This story of population aging was written long ago. Many worry that population aging will put pressure on health care and pension systems. But if people reach older ages in better health than in years past, those fiscal pressures would be less dire than projected. Healthy older people can also continue to contribute to society in many valuable ways, including paid work, caregiving, community service….even high political office 🤷. On the flip side, if younger generations reach retirement age in worse health and with more disabling conditions, this could magnify the societal challenge of population aging. Evidence for worsening generational health A recent paper that I LOVED in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences by Dr. Leah Abrams and colleagues examined which birth cohorts (aka generations) were behind worsening US mortality. Behold the Lexis diagram (cue swooning demographers). Calendar time is on the x-axis, age on the y-axis. Birth cohorts can be followed over time as they age on the diagonal lines moving up and to the right. This figure plots the year-on-year % change in all-cause mortality at a given age. Green shading indicates mortality improvements over time, white is stagnation, and gray shading indicates worsening mortality. Following the diagonal line for those born in 1950, you can see a noticeable shift from green to gray that follows this cohort for most of their lives. This gray shading shows generally worsening mortality for the 1950 to 1959 birth cohorts compared to their predecessors across all ages. Concerningly for my GenX and elder millennial peeps, there was also a deterioration in mortality for birth cohorts born in the 1970s and 1980s, visible as dark gray areas at ages 30 to 45 during the 2010s. While some of these mortality changes reflect specific shocks such as the opioid epidemic, most deaths still occur from major causes of death such as cardiovascular disease and cancer. For cancer, the gray in the top left corner of the figure below reflects the legacies of smoking for older cohorts, followed by a period of green with improvements in cancer mortality as smoking rates declined. But the white/gray shading in the bottom right corner highlights a stagnation and reversal of the cancer trends, with cohorts born around 1970 to 1985 experiencing worsening cancer mortality. This deterioration was most noticeable for colon cancer mortality, possibly linked to obesity or dietary factors. Not just dying more, but less healthy along the way. A recent paper by Dr. Laura Gimeno of University College London (of which I am a co-author), found evidence that more recently born cohorts in Great Britain have stagnating or worsening health. A stylized picture of what“generational health drift” might look like: The review paper found: Rates of childhood overweight and obesity were highest among Gen Z. Rates of diabetes in the 40s almost doubled from 3.1% among the Baby Boomers to 5.9% in Generation X. Gen Z reported higher rates of poor mental health in adolescence compared to earlier-born groups. These UK results are consistent with studies showing worsening health across generations in the US as well. A 2021 US study found that more recently born cohorts had worse biological markers (like blood pressure and blood sugar) than earlier generations at the same age. A separate 2022 study of Americans aged 50 and over found that more recently born generations had a higher number of chronic diseases, with younger age of disease onset. A 2024 Lancet paper found that in the US, women born in 1945 had 33% obesity prevalence at age 50, rising to 48.2% for women born in 1970 turning 50. So what’s going on, and can we turn it around? We don’t have a definitive answer for what’s causing the deteriorating health of younger cohorts, but circumstantial evidence points to worsening trends in obesity and diabetes in both the US and UK. Remember that cohort trends reflect lagged effects of early environments, and younger generations have faced both earlier onset and more severe obesity across their lifetimes. Despite these very concerning trends, the future is not set in stone. We’ve reversed poor generational health trends before: drops in smoking are a major reason cancer and heart disease deaths fell so dramatically in recent decades. GLP-1 drugs may finally turn the tide against rising rates of obesity and diabetes, though it is still early days. But things could also get worse…for example from a return to higher levels of childhood infectious diseases that can have a lasting impact on health. See for example: [ ](https://jenndowd.substack.com/p/dont-you-forget-about-measles-the) [ Don’t You Forget About Me(asles): The Virus That Erases Immune Memory ](https://jenndowd.substack.com/p/dont-you-forget-about-measles-the) Jenn Dowd, PhD · March 24, 2025 [ Read full story ](https://jenndowd.substack.com/p/dont-you-forget-about-measles-the) Even as an optimist, emerging data on the “generational health drift” has my full attention. For most of my research career, we took it for granted that each generation would be healthier than the last. But if present trends continue, **50 could be the new 60….**and Gen Z celebrities will soon look older than Paul Rudd :). Stay well, Jenn Share the Health! If you found this post useful, please share it with a friend. Share
Wildfire Smoke Linked to Greater Health Risks Than Other Pollution
Wildfire smoke may pose greater heart, lung, and cancer harms than other air pollution. Read more about the findings.
Cardinals Starting DL Is Surprise Addition to Thursday’s Injury Report
Three days remain until the Arizona Cardinals‘ week two battle against the Seattle Seahawks, as of Sept. 17.The game status for key Cardinals is shaping up to benefit the squad heading into Sunday, although one key surprise came about following Thursday’s practice.Read more about Arizona’s addition to the report, as well as a focus on […] The post Cardinals Starting DL Is Surprise Addition to Thursday’s Injury Report appeared first on HEAVY.
The 98 Biggest TV Show Flops, Bombs and Misses in the First Half of 2026
(Welcome to the Entertainment Strategy Guy, a newsletter on the entertainment industry and business strategy. I write a weekly Streaming Ratings Report and a bi-weekly strategy column, along with occasional deep dives into other topics, like today’s article. Please subscribe.) In July, I updated my look at how the “streaming bubble” popped since 2023, showing the decline in streaming TV shows over time. But after compiling and analyzing and writing about over one hundred TV show flops in the first half of 2026—I counted 99 “nominees” and there are even more honorable mentions—I couldn’t have told you that the number of shows is going down. When it comes to scripted, English-language TV shows, it feels like we have as many bombs as ever. I don’t keep a specific count, but some streamers probably had as many flops as they’ve ever had.1 That’s right, it’s time for part two of my analysis of the biggest flops, bombs and misses on streaming in the first half of 2026. Two weeks ago, I took a look at films. Today, TV shows. If you want to read the full methodology for how I assemble this list, you can find it at the bottom of this article. In short, this list is… ...scripted and unscripted TV shows,...from the nine major streamers,...in the US (using US-only ratings),...excluding true crime, kids and foreign-language shows,...that got no/poor ratings,...from Jan-2026 to the end of June-2026. Reminder: this article does not represent my personal opinion—many of these shows are great!—but I follow the data, and a miss is a miss and a bomb is a bomb. Also, price matters. If a TV show costs north of $100 million, it needs to get lots and lots of streaming viewership to justify that budget. As with past editions, I ordered this list by streamer, going from best (fewest flops) to worst (the most misses)—taking the size of the flops into consideration—and like the last edition, three or four streamers vied to take the win/loss of having the most flops. (But the actual winner is no surprise.) I try to avoid tooting my own horn too much, but seriously, in just under 5,000 words (including the methodology section) I provide a mostly comprehensive overview of the eight major streamers (Netflix, Disney+, Prime Video, Hulu, HBO Max, Peacock, Paramount+, and Apple TV) for the first half of the year, mentioning most of their hits and all their misses. It summarizes the entire first half of 2026! If you want to support this work, please subscribe. Subscribe Tubi Big Mood Boarders The Freak Brothers Twenty Twenty Six Honorable Mentions: Busted on Bodycam, Deestroying the Pitch, Destination World Cup 2026 I don’t think that Tubi spends all that much making or (mostly) licensing these original TV shows—Big Mood, Boarders and Twenty Twenty Six all come from the UK—but they’re not free and they didn’t chart anywhere. Winner: The Freak Brothers Have you even heard of this show? It’s an animated comedy...that’s on its third season! And Pete Davidson, Woody Harrelson, John Goodman and Tiffany Haddish all provide voice talent for it. Yes, animated shows don’t cost as much as live action shows, but cheap isn’t free! So a show with this level of talent needs to perform better. Disney+ Daredevil: Born Again Star Wars: Maul – Shadow Lord Honorable Mentions: Behind the Attraction, Donna Hay Coastal Celebrations, We Call It Imagineering Disney+ doesn’t make all that many original shows anymore. They had two flops, and one was animated. Their one not-a-miss show, Wonder Man, got just good enough viewership to not be considered a “miss”...but it’s since been cancelled. At this point, Disney has pivoted entirely away from making big budget TV shows for Disney+ to making...almost nothing for Disney+? Sure, Disney’s spending circa 2019-2022 was unsustainable, but now they’re pivoting too far in the other direction. At some point, Disney needs to stop shifting strategies so wildly. Really, Disney should have made fewer shows for Disney+ at launch and the shows they did make at that time needed to be made at more reasonable budgets. And they should adopt that strategy now. Winner: Daredevil: Born Again Daredevil, the Marvel Comics character, is on my personal Mount Rushmore of favorite superheroes, so it pains me to give him the win/loss today, but this show deserves it. I’ll repeat my hot take from last spring: “Based on his popularity, Daredevil should be in movies, and probably ones that cost a lot less than the MCU’s usual price tag. Disney/Bob Iger/Ike Perlmutter (who, based on reporting, made the decision) made a huge mistake selling TV shows to Netflix in the 2010s, thus limiting this character to the small screen. Daredevil could have anchored Marvel’s post-Infinity War plans, and if he did, the MCU would probably be in a better place than it is now.” HBO Max We’re just getting started with this issue, but the rest is for paid subscribers of the Entertainment Strategy Guy, so if you’d like to find out… What four streamers had the most misses... HBO’s strong start to 2026… The caveat to Peacock’s turnaround this year... Paramount+’s key man problem… What country isn’t delivering hits for Netflix or Hulu... The cavalcade of stars on a streamer where no one is watching their shows... Across nearly 5,000 words of analysis… And a lot more... ...please subscribe! We can only keep doing this great work with your support. If you’d like to read more about why you should subscribe, please read this article about the Streaming Ratings Report, why it matters, why you need it, and why we cover streaming ratings best.
Florence Harding Photographed Taught Me About Women Partaking in Politics
What would Florence Kling Harding think now? A week or so ago when I cast my ballot at my designated polling place this thought crossed my mind. I imagine the former first lady would be pleased about how routine voting has become for women in the United States. But perhaps she would not be satisfied. Today, a published essay I wrote for In Pursuit spotlights a lesson in leadership demonstrated by First Lady Florence Harding. In my research, I discovered there’s a lot to be said about this strong female historic figure. But it was the blurry photograph capturing Mrs. Harding voting for her husband Warren G. Harding, one of two presidential candidates from Ohio, on Nov. 2, 1920—Election Day—that drew my attention. It was the first presidential election held in the United States after the ratification and certification of the 19th Amendment, granting women the right to vote. Its 106th anniversary was marked on Wednesday. I remember thinking what a shame it was that her presence in the image was imperfect while the mostly men surrounding her were in sharp focus. Perhaps cynically I thought, “No surprise!” On further examination, though, the clear reaction of the people surrounding Mrs. Harding was equally important. In that snapshot of time, many of their expressions were serious. One man stood elevated above the rest with a slight smile as he caught a glimpse of history. Mr. Harding hovered over his wife’s shoulder closely observing the last seconds of her vote being cast. Their gazes were locked in on who would hours later become first lady. Subscribe The attention she drew is worth noting, mostly because, as I learned, Mrs. Harding understood the power her image could have on women across the country. She and I share in common a career in newspapers—hers the business side and mine on the editorial side. Nevertheless, it became clear to me as I write in the essay that she understood if she was seen voting, other women would follow suit. That wouldn’t necessarily be the case in that 1920 election, though, Karen Kedrowski, the director of the Carrie Chapman Catt Center for Women and Politics at Iowa State University, explained to me. Florence Harding was a suffrage advocate. But, suffrage was a contentious issue and women were far from united at the time of the election. In fact, a substantial number of women and active anti-suffrage organizations thought women participating in elections was a “bad idea and antithetical to their roles in the private sphere as mothers and homemakers,” Kedrowski said, adding that women were also viewed as the moral compass for their husbands and sons. If women got involved in politics they would become contaminated by it. Suffragists, on the other hand, wanted to bring that moral presence into politics to help clean things up. Only about 30% of women voted in that 1920 presidential election. That was a start. More than 100 years later in the 2024 presidential election, 66.9% of eligible women voted (91.3 million), compared to 63.7% of men who voted (82.6 million), according to the League of Women Voters. Yes, Florence Harding would be pleased. Subscribe That imperfect Election Day image was important symbolism about women’s potential during what was known as the “Modern Woman” era and the growing public role women were taking in the 1920s. I imagine Florence Harding might agree with other succeeding first ladies when it comes to gender equality and the importance of the vote. Like Michelle Obama when she said in her memoir Becoming, “We all play a role in this democracy. We need to remember the power of every vote.” Or Hillary Clinton during her unsuccessful run for president in 2016 when she remarked on International Women’s Day: “We celebrate the progress we’ve made to advance the full participation of women in economies and societies. And most importantly, we recommit to finishing the unfinished work that remains …” I hope if you are reading this, you will also read my essay on Florence Harding’s leadership lesson for In Pursuit. And perhaps that will move you to dig deeper and read more about Florence Harding’s life circumstances in biographies like First Lady Florence Harding: Behind the Tragedy and Controversy by Katherine A. S. Sibley. No, I do not think Florence Harding would be satisfied despite how far women have come from that day she first entered her polling place. She once wrote to the Camp Fire Girls, “The part that women play in the world has been greatly changed … It has been broadened and enlarged …” It has. And as women continue to engage in civics it continues to be. I imagine Florence Harding would want women to keep meeting the moment. Read the In Pursuit essay Watch on C-SPAN Share East Wing Magazine is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Subscribe
Gov. Stein announces STEP-NC, the first health care apprenticeship program in state government
Gov. Stein announced STEP-NC, the first healthcare apprenticeship program in state government on July 16. Read more about the program here.
#paramount #streaming #entertainment
Paramount Skydance isn't waiting around for its planned merger with Warner Bros. Discovery to bolster its flagship streaming service. Paramount's streaming leaders have told employees that they're planning major upgrades to Paramount+ in the coming weeks. An internal presentation, which was unveiled during a streaming town hall this week and viewed by Business Insider, shows "Product Priority Highlights" for Paramount's streaming business this quarter. These initiatives are part of Paramount CEO David Ellison's plan to improve the tech of a 114-year-old media company that trails Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, and Disney in streaming subscribers. Buying WBD would help Paramount catch up quickly and give it over 200 million streaming customers, the company has said. Read more about Paramount’s streaming projects on Business Insider: https://lnkd.in/eKfn9wyH (Credit: Getty Images) #paramount #streaming #entertainment
California seeks feedback on psychiatric hospital staffing regulations
The California Department of Public Health will hold a stakeholder meeting July 23 from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. to gather feedback on emergency regulations establishing nurse-to-patient staffing standards for acute psychiatric hospitals. Here are three things to know: Read more about the questions for stakeholders here.
Two Women Arrested in Millcreek Township Illicit Massage Business Raid - The Institute to Address Commercial Sexual Exploitation
On June 16, law enforcement executed a search warrant on Magic Health Massage Spa in Millcreek Township in an ongoing effort targeting illicit massage businesses in Erie County. Law enforcement arrested two New York women who allegedly lived at the … Read more about Two Women Arrested in Millcreek Township Illicit Massage Business Raid »
WWE Files To Trademark 'Bakusai' - Fightful | WWE News, AEW News, Pro Wrestling Backstage News
On June 26, 2026, WWE filed a new trademark for 'Bakusai.' Fans can click the article to read more about this.
War, sports collide as Iran's World Cup kicks off in Los Angeles
CBC News reported on the unchartered territory FIFA World Cup 2026 is finding itself in as members of Team Iran arrive in Los Angeles, inviting a divisive collision of geopolitics and sports in an area with a large Iranian diaspora. "You've never had two countries engaged in active military conflict matching up against each other, competing in the same tournament," said Salma Mousa, an assistant professor of political science and affiliated faculty with the Bedari Kindness Institute. Mousa, who studies the intersection of sports and conflicts, worries that a potential July 3 face-off between Iran and the U.S. in Texas might “increase tensions to kind of a cataclysmic degree.” Read more about UCLA in today’s Washington Times.
What Genres and Streamers Won 2025? And Who Lost? Plus Six Strategy Thoughts
(Welcome to the Entertainment Strategy Guy, a newsletter on the entertainment industry and business strategy. I write a weekly Streaming Ratings Report and a bi-weekly strategy column, along with occasional deep dives into other topics, like today’s article. Please subscribe.) Okay, time for the tenth and final article in my ten-part series recapping 2025. As I wrote two articles ago, my barometer for whether these articles are worth writing/publishing is whether they yield strategic insights, and once again, every subsection in this article has a strategic takeaway (or two). Honestly, these are the most important takeaways, since I step back and look holistically at the streaming wars in 2025. After I declare which streamers won and lost the year and which genres won and lost the year, I have six bonus thoughts. If you’d like to review the whole series... You can find the film flops here and here. You can find the TV shows flops here and here. You can find the top films here. You can find the top TV shows here, here and here. Then I declared my winners and losers in various categories here. You can find my 2024 recaps here. You can find the 2023 recaps here and here. And my 2022, 2021 and 2020 are all stored here. Yeah, it’s halfway through the year, and I’m just finishing this series up now. This year, I tried to space things out to not clog up my writing calendar, plus I had to wait for Fallout to (finally) drop off the charts. Well, that ended up pushing this series wayyyyy too far back on the calendar. Oh well. Next year, the goal will be to finish this series in March, but frankly, I just need more staff to make that happen. So please subscribe. Or, if you’re an advertiser (movie studio, FYC firm, or other), please reach out. Subscribe Streamer of the Year: Netflix Honorable Mention: Paramount (and CBS) So, just last week, I wrote about how Netflix has lost seven of its top twelve scripted shows in the last year. And I shared two very dour looks at Netflix’s potential slowdown this year and last. Guess what? They’re still the number one streamer in America. In 2025, they dominated new streaming shows (even if most of those new hit shows aren’t coming back for future seasons), they had the two biggest films, and they had the top returning TV show by a mile. The world is complicated, nuanced and messy. There may be warning signs of a future Netflix slowdown, but in 2025, Netflix was still the number one streamer. Note what I didn’t say? That Netflix has “won” the streaming wars, because obviously the streaming wars are still ongoing and, more importantly, YouTube is still growing—so now YouTube has “won” the streaming wars?—while Netflix’s share of TV consumption has stalled out. Avoid simplistic talking points, especially if they’re constantly repeated and could fit on a bumper sticker. I had trouble picking the second-place streamer this year, because all of the candidates for second place—Prime Video, HBO Max, and Paramount+—had some hits, but no one stood out. Then I saw this update from Nielsen on the top shows on TV in the 2025-206 season. Sure enough, Netflix had five of the top ten shows! And they had ten of the top 31 shows and fifteen of the top fifty. But CBS/Paramount+ actually had more shows in the top thirty and the top fifty. Paramount+/CBS had twelve of the top thirty shows and nineteen of the top fifty. Let me emphasize that: CBS/Paramount+ had more top shows in the 2025-2026 season than Netflix. And this look was just for TV shows, not live sports, an arena Netflix barely plays in. Meanwhile, Paramount-Skydance’s market cap is a fraction of Netflix’s. That’s weird, right? Streaming Loser of the Year, TV… We’re just getting started with this issue, but the rest is for paid subscribers of the Entertainment Strategy Guy, so if you’d like to find out… ...what streamer lost the year in TV... …whether Netflix could win the title for “film” streamer too… …who won the Disney vs Warner Bros. battle for theaters… ...what TV genres won and lost the year... ...what film genres won and lost the year... ...what film genre people think is thriving on streaming but isn’t… …why F-BOSSS TV shows don’t hold the same sway in the 2020s… …what it means to “flop” as a film on streaming… …UK shows underperforming on streaming… And a lot more... ...please subscribe! We can only keep doing this great work with your support. If you’d like to read more about why you should subscribe, please read this article about the Streaming Ratings Report, why it matters, why you need it, and why we cover streaming ratings best.
Bari Weiss: Think For Yourself, Not By Yourself
When we launched The Free Press, the plan was simple: Tell the truth plainly, and let readers come to their own conclusions. I thought there would be a sizable enough group of people who would pay the cost of one coffee a month to read high-quality news and opinion journalism. But what happened next surprised even me. Yes, you came for the stories—for the investigations, essays, debates, interviews, podcasts, and arguments. But over the past few years, you also found one another. I’ve watched strangers become friends in the lobby before our debates. I’ve seen people trade numbers after live recordings of Honestly, launch businesses after Free Press dinners, fall in love after our meetups—even get married (!?), and say some version of the same sentence over and over again: I thought I was the only one. We live in the most connected age in history, and yet, millions of people feel isolated, alienated, politically homeless, and starved for real conversation. We have followers and no neighbors. Algorithms instead of interlocutors. Our social media feeds are like troughs, but what we really need is a table to gather around. The Free Press is a publication, yes, but it is also a gathering place for independent minds. So today, I’m thrilled to share our new investment in you. We are launching a new world of community experiences for our paid subscribers, designed to bring _Free Press_ers together online and in real life. Introducing Our Community Launch The Free Press Forum Our new digital home for paid subscribers, the Forum, is now live. This is where _Free Press_ers can meet, debate, recommend, organize, joke, argue, and converse like civilized people. Imagine that. This is not social media as you know it. No bots. No algorithmic rage bait. No performative nonsense. Just smart people talking to one another. Inside the Forum, you’ll find conversations on the things our readers already care about most: the issues of the day, recommendations (books, music, travel), work and networking, parenting, dating, and where to find your people—online and in real life. Jump in! Introduce yourself and join the first conversations in the Free Press Forum here. You’ll also find announcements from us (paid subscribers are first to hear!) and our writers, hosting regular Ask Me Anythings (AMAs)—live conversations where subscribers can ask questions, push back, and continue the discussion beyond the page. This Thursday, subscribers can chat with our brilliant reporter, culture vulture, and co-founder Suzy Weiss. Friday, I’ll be lending you Nellie Bowles, queen of TGIF, to answer subscriber questions live. Read more about The Forum directly from Nellie here. The Free Press Supper Club The best part of being a _Free Press_er is meeting other _Free Press_ers. So we’re inviting you all to dinner to do just that. It’s part salon, part blind date, part old-fashioned dinner party. Here’s how it works: You answer a short questionnaire. We match you with a small group of _Free Press_ers in your city. We send you to a great restaurant. You show up for supper. The rest is up to you. Your next best friend, co-founder, or future spouse may already be waiting at the table. Learn more and sign up here for our first Supper Club in 12 cities in three countries taking place on June 18. Don’t see your city? Raise your hand if you’d like a Free Press Supper Club near you. Yes, St. Louis—we hear you. The Free Press Retreats and Excursions We’re also building something new for 2027: immersive experiences for Free Press readers who want to continue the conversation trailside, poolside, or around a fire long after dessert. The Free Press Retreat will be an intimate long weekend built around big ideas, outdoor adventure, great meals, and the kinds of discussions that happen when curious people spend meaningful time together. Bring your spouse, your parents, your children—or come on your own. Free Press Excursions will take us farther afield: curated trips with Free Press writers and contributors exploring places that help explain the world we live in, from the battlefields of Gettysburg and Normandy to the Vatican in Rome. We’ll share more details this summer. If you’d like an early look when these experiences open for registration, show your interest here.**A Note to Our Subscribers** These new offerings exist because of our paying subscribers. If you’re already one: Thank you. You built this. And you keep us going. If you’ve been reading us for free and wondering whether to join, this is a very good time. For a short while only, we’re offering a rare 20 percent discount for you to join our community as a paid subscriber. You’ll unlock everything we publish, plus exclusive access to our members-only Forum, Supper Clubs, and more insider perks. Thinking for yourself shouldn’t mean thinking by yourself. See you there. —Bari
2026 Best Business Schools | Employment & Internship Rates For 2025 Graduates
Read more about First Jobs on Poets&Quants for Undergrads
2025 American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) Fellow
Department Chair, Professor Alexander Spokoyny has been selected as a 2025 Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) in recognition of his distinguished contributions in main group and organometallic chemistry and academic community engagement and leadership. AAAS is the world’s largest general-scientific society and publisher of the journal Science. Spokoyny is among the 449 scientists, engineers, and innovators spanning 24 scientific disciplines who are being recognized for their scientifically and socially distinguished achievements. Four of the new fellows are UCLA faculty members. The new Fellows will be celebrated in Washington, D.C., in late May 2026. Read more about the new AAAS Fellows here. AAAS Fellows in the UCLA Department of Chemistry & Biochemistry are Professors Kendall Houk (1988), Paul Weiss (1999), Richard Kaner (2000), David Eisenberg and Todd Yeates (2001), Juli Feigon (2002), Miguel Garcia-Garibay and Steven Clarke (2007), Heather Maynard, Carla Koehler, Xiangfeng Duan and Neil Garg (2018), Paula Diaconescu and Thomas Mason (2019), Joseph Loo (2021), and Yi Tang (2022). Penny Jennings, UCLA Department of Chemistry & Biochemistry, penjen@g.ucla.edu.
Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 6, 8 Elite Gen 6 Pro specifications leaked well before official announcement
Leak reveals Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 6 chips with 2nm process, dual variants, LPDDR6 support, and upgraded GPUs. Read more about expected specifications here
#dubai #expatexperience #dubailife #expat #expatcommunity
The thought of leaving Dubai fills Kiran Ali with dread. Ali, a Washington, DC, import, moved to Dubai in March 2024. Speaking to Business Insider on Tuesday, she said she'll only leave Dubai if it becomes dangerous for her two young kids. "Dubai is the most fulfilled and happy I have been in my adult life," she said. "I have an incredible career, a purpose in community organizing, and great work life balance." For more than two decades, Dubai has marketed itself as a safe haven for expats with zero income tax, high salaries, and a luxury lifestyle. But the US and Israel's strikes on Iran over the weekend have thrown the Middle East into turmoil and raised questions about Dubai's future as a business, tourism, and expat hub. Read more about how expats on the ground aren't giving up on their expat dream so easily on Business Insider: https://lnkd.in/eM_ARYRU (Credit: Getty Images) #dubai #expatexperience #dubailife #expat #expatcommunity
2026 Business Leaders of the Year
Central Massachusetts is full of amazing professionals, each with their own unique skills, talents, and dedication to their companies, industries, and communities. You could make a strong case for hundreds of them to be considered as WBJ’s Business Leader of the Year. Yet, to actually win the award, you need to have that little something extra: a magic spark, an insight no one else sees, years of knowledge that pay off with the right decision at the right time, a leadership style inspiring people to follow, a push for a paradigm shift at a stagnant organization. Business Leader of the Year is WBJ’s oldest award, launched in 1982 when Herb Dunnington of First Safety Fund Bank won the sole award. In the decades since, BLOY has expanded to honor winners from different corners of the economy: small businesses, large businesses, nonprofits, innovation, families. Each of the six winners this year has that something special setting them apart as true leaders in our Central Massachusetts business community: Neelu Mohaghegh’s creativity, Nick Haritos’ compassion, Nicolette Sacco’s adaptability, Julie Bowditch’s energy, Sean Rose’s steadiness, the Vaccaro family’s culture. You can read more about each of them through the links below.