generation

Generation Z has found the remedy to streaming subscription fatigue: buying DVDs again

by

Sales of DVD, Blu-ray and 4K UHD stopped their decline in 2025. They only fell 9% compared to declines of more than 20% in the previous two years. What is the reason for this slowdown? To an unexpected factor, an unforeseen audience: young people from Generation Z who are filling video stores, promoting labels boutique like Criterion and Arrow and turning the physical format into a gesture of resistance against the massification of streaming. Plummet. For more than a decade, the physical format market in home video followed a downward trajectory that seemed irreversible. Between 2019 and 2023 it was reduced by 40% in the United States alone, and the disappearance of chains such as blockbuster it reinforced the feeling that the album was an exhausted medium. In 2024, DVD and Blu-ray sales were below a billion dollars for the first time. Gasping. However, in 2025 a different phenomenon has been detected: the physical disk market generated 870 million dollarsthat is, it only decreased by 9.3% compared to the previous year. What’s more: in the 4K UHD segment (which allows high-quality viewing at home), US consumer spending grew 12% year-on-year. All this in an extremely unfavorable context: with the unstoppable growth of streaming (19.8% in 2025), the physical format represents only 1.4% of total home entertainment. Fed up with streaming. The overdose of supply in streaming is ultimately causing a tiredness effect. According to recent studies47% of American consumers say they pay too much for their insurance services streamingand 41% consider that the available content does not justify the price. The average number of subscriptions per household has been four for a couple of years, an amount that could be at its critical point. DVD solution. Added to this saturation is a problem that film fans know well: the platforms are unreliable and the catalogs change without prior notice. Movies and series disappear for reasons ranging from the completion of exploitation contracts to tax reasons. In a ‘Los Angeles Times’ piece that has investigated this interest Of the youngest to recover physical formats, some young people under thirty spoke about how they became interested in cinema during the pandemic, describing DVD collecting as an act of rebellion against the fragmentation of streaming. Blockbuster, meeting point. That same article talks about renovated versions of old video stores as meeting points for these new collectors. Of course, it is something that mainly concerns the United States, where such specific types of businesses make sense: Vidiots, in Los Angeles, also functions as a movie theater, and is registering its highest revenue peaks since its opening, with an average of 170 daily rentals. Also from there is Cinefile, which has 500 paying members. Visiting the video store functions as a social activity that streaming cannot offer and the community dimension is key to understanding why the phenomenon exceeds pure nostalgia. And you don’t have to go to such specialized stores: Barnes & Noble, one of the few large chains in the country that maintains a space dedicated to the physical format after the withdrawal of Best Buy and Target, speaks of a double-digit percentage growth during the last year. And they point out that the demographic profile of their buyers is increasingly younger. Stamps boutique. The situation experienced by domestic editions is completely unprecedented in the history of the medium: while the major studios reduce their commitment to the physical format, independent labels are experiencing a moment of expansion. Criterion Collection speaks of “significant year-over-year increases” in sales. The cult film specialist Vinegar Syndrome also experiments similar trends. Of course, sales are incomparably lower than the good times of the physical format, but we are not talking about residual phenomena either. In Spain alone, for example, there are half a dozen labels specialized in reissues of films that cannot be found in streaming (El 79, Cameo, Gabita Barbieri, Trashorama…) that survive crises and recessions alluding to a loyal audience and a cinema that cannot be seen any other way. The inevitable comparison. It is inevitable to think of an analogy with the vinyl recoverythe cassette and the VHS that the previous generations, Millennials and Gen-Xers, have carried out. This has been going on since the mid-2010s, in a mix of nostalgia, vindication of the physical and endless discussions about audio and video qualities. Two decades latervinyl is facing its eighteenth consecutive year of growth, with $1.4 billion in sales (the highest figure since 1984) and 44 million units in stores, surpassing the CD for the third consecutive year. The key difference is that vinyl has an industrial infrastructure that supports it: record companies that prioritize the format, active manufacturers and a distribution chain. The physical video, on the other hand, loses player manufacturers and the big studios prioritize streaming about the disc editions. Video game consoles, eternal support of the format, already have institutionalized versions of their hardware without disc readers. At the moment, the recovery of DVD and Blu-Ray is an isolated phenomenon. But those who we keep listening to cassettes We know better than to look over our shoulders at a format that seems dead. Header | Photo of Lance Anderson in Unsplash In Xataka | Despite streaming, I still buy Blu-Rays and DVDs. But the reason has nothing to do with image quality.

We believed that Generation Z was returning en masse to the Church. An error in a survey is to blame for the mirage

by

Stadiums vibrating with thousands of twenty-somethings raising their arms, eyes closed, singing to god. International pop stars posing in nun’s habits on the covers of their most anticipated albums. And, as a backdrop, an incessant barrage of headlines announcing the unthinkable: the massive return of the youth to the church pews. Over the past few months, the world seemed to witness a fascinating twist in the script. Generation Z, the most secular and secularized demographic cohort in history, was re-embracing Christianity. However, when you scratch the surface of this apparent spiritual awakening, what emerges is not a collective epiphany, but a trap. A gigantic demoscopic mirage. What they sold us as the great rebirth of faith is, in reality, a monumental miscalculation where the armies of artificial intelligence, the mischief of paid online surveys and the desire to believe in a revival have completely distorted the true—and much more complex—religious transformation of young people. We believed that faith was returning to the streets, but the fault was in the method. The spark that ignited the narrative of the great Christian revival jumped in the United Kingdom with the publication of the report The Quiet Revivalcommissioned by the Bible Society. Based on survey data YouGov, The study showed a spectacular figure: monthly church attendance among English and Welsh young people aged 18 to 24 had quadrupled, going from a marginal 4% in 2018 to a resounding 16% in 2024. The news spread like wildfire. Entire dioceses held conferences to “turn up the volume” on this revival, and politicians in the British Parliament used the report as proof that “Christianity is neither oppressed nor decayed,” as reported by BBC. However, demographic experts were quick to raise alarm bells. Surveys considered the “gold standard” of sociology for using random probability samples—such as the British Social Attitudes wave Labor Force Survey— showed a diametrically opposite film. According to these rigorous metersthe percentage of practicing Christians between 18 and 34 years old had not only not risen, but had fallen from 8% in 2018 to 6% in 2024. The danger of surveys opt-in If young people are not filling the churches, where do the miracle figures come from? The answer lies in the architecture of the internet itself. The report of the Bible Society was based on surveys opt-inthat is, panels where users voluntarily register in exchange for financial rewards or points. Demographer Conrad Hackett warns that this format suffers an “existential threat.” Those who respond to these surveys usually seek to maximize your profits filling out questionnaires at full speed, lying about their age to access more surveys, or using Virtual Private Networks (VPN) from other countries to get paid in hard currency. Worse still, Artificial Intelligence has come into play. The researchers have detected armies of chatbots programmed to imitate humans and fill out surveys en masse. The fake young people in these polls are so unreliable that, in similar studies carried out in the USA12% of those surveyed opt-in under 30 years old even stated that he had a license to pilot a nuclear submarine. The “great awakening” was largely an algorithmic hallucination. The situation in our land In Spain, the optical illusion is similar. Phenomena like Hakuna Group Music They managed to bring together 12,000 young people at the Vistalegre Palace, while events such as Calls They gathered 6,000 people at the Movistar Arena. Both are betting on Contemporary Worship Music (CWM), an evangelization format of Protestant and evangelical heritage, full of giant screens, pop-rock and raw emotions. But the noise of the stadiums clashes head-on with the silence of the parishes. The comparison of the official reports of the Spanish Episcopal Conference (CEE) is devastating. If we analyze the transition from the previous exercises to the most recent data, the fall of the sacraments is an undeniable constant: Baptisms: They fell from 152,426 registered in 2023 at 146,370 in 2024which represents a year-on-year decrease of 3.97%. The magnitude of the collapse is better understood if we look in the rearview mirror: in 2007the Church celebrated no less than 325,271 baptisms annually. Communions and weddings: Inertia drags the rest of the life cycle. First communions fell by almost 5% (standing at 154,677), and Catholic marriages fell by 6%, remaining at a reduced 31,462 ecclesiastical unions. Institutional collapse has other profound social consequences. Given the collapse of baptismal prayers, more than 150 Spanish town councils now offer “civil baptisms” or lay welcome ceremonies to celebrate the arrival of newborns. At the same time, the bleeding of vocations has left Spain with only 15,285 priests, whose average age is around a worrying 65 years. The problem It’s so pressing that has forced bishoprics like that of Tui-Vigo to make lay women official to lead “Celebrations of the Word” in the villages in the face of the total lack of priests. The only discordant note—the small statistical lifeline to which the Church clings—is the baptism of children over 7 years of age. This figure experienced a reboundrising from 11,835 in 2023 to 13,323 in 2024. A figure that suggests a paradigm shift in Spanish Catholicism: conversions that are much more thoughtful, personal and less conditioned by “cultural” inertia. The great gap between Spirituality and Religion To understand Generation Z in Spain, two concepts must be drastically separated: the Catholic institution and the search for the transcendent. Here comes into play what my partner in Xataka defined as: “The 29-59% paradox.” According to the Barometer on Religion and Beliefs in Spain (BREC) of 202561% of young people between 18 and 24 years old declare themselves indifferent, agnostic or atheist. Only 29% define themselves as Catholic, a figure much lower than the 46% national average. However, just because they don’t set foot in a church doesn’t mean they are pure materialists. That same report reveals that 59% of young people firmly believe in the existence of the soul and 45% in “energies.” As the sociologist Mar Griera explainswe are not facing a return to dogma, … Read more

China is clear about who should lead the advances of its best AI and robotics companies: Generation Z

by

Those who now enter the labor market find themselves with a rival that is difficult to beat: they have no agreement or need for rest or fulfillment. In addition, it does the tasks of junior profiles quite well: artificial intelligence is limiting the landing of Generation Z in the offices. in the United States, we have seen it in the UK and also in the Big Four that make up the Madrid skyline. Replacing those who start working with AI has been revealed as the West’s formula to boost productivity… from the point of view of the bosses. If you have to fight with her and validate her, not so much anymore. But it is by no means the only way, nor does it happen to everyone. In fact, China is betting just the opposite: it is turning Generation Z and millennials into heads of areas as strategic as robotics or artificial intelligence itself. They are not just any young people: they are true galacticos, their best assets. Give me someone young. As collect TechAsiaa trend is emerging in China: that of hiring millennials and young people from generation Z for positions with high-level technical profiles in large AI and robotics companies. The best example is Vinces Yao Shunyu: at 28 years old he has already been at OpenAI. A couple of months ago he returned to his native China to become the chief scientist of Tencent. He now reports directly to the CEO. Shunyu’s is just the tip of the iceberg of this new organizational strategy of Chinese companies. There are other cases, such as that of Luo Jianlan, formerly of Google since a year the chief scientist of AgiBot. Or of Dong Haochief scientist at PrimeBot after earning his PhD at Imperial College. By the way, OpenAI and Meta have copied the recipe: the first with Polish Jakub Pachocki and the second, with the Chinese Zhao Shengjia. They are scientists, but they could just as well be professional footballers: none of them are over 35 years old. Why is it important. When thinking about a boss within a modern business structure of a certain size, it is inevitable that team management, meetings and bureaucracy come to mind. However, this strategy of Chinese big tech is deliberately different from what we have in the West and is based on three reasons that SMCP explains: Institutional separation of research vs. product. A chief scientist looks to the future, he does not manage human teams or budgets. Competitive advantage in a saturated market, allowing you to build your own technologies without depending on third parties. If you have the best at home, you don’t have to ask for permission or sign abroad. The top youth asset. AI is evolving by leaps and bounds and with this movement, China is ensuring that it has those who have been at ground zero of the great milestones of recent years: elite universities or laboratories of renowned institutions such as OpenAI, Google or Princeton. China is a world source of engineers. That China is a country of engineers is no secret: it is a plan that has been underway for 4o years. In fact, now he has opted to go one step further and accelerate doctorates. The Chinese labor market is already showing signs of some saturationwhich has also brought diversification, changing routes to avoid even setting foot in the university in its new bet on FP. In any case, having an army of almost six million engineering professionals gives you an advantage with AI. And it has more than enough: it has engineers to export. Without going any further, the vast majority of signings of the Meta superintelligence team from last year they are Chinese. But young engineers who stay at home have an opportunity beyond joining a leading company in the sector: leading it. Disclaimer: a chief scientist is not a CTO. It is worth remembering a difference between positions that are often confused: a chief scientist is not the director of technology. While the first profile investigates, explores and plans in the medium and long term without touching products or marketing, the second manages teams, designs architecture and meets business objectives. Confuse both profiles or mix them, as the SMCP remembers what Alibaba or Baidu did, ends up subordinating science to the urgency of the market. In any case, it is a fragile position in a company that is not clear why it is needed. In Xataka | China looks at VET: why more and more generation Z students prefer trades over university degrees In Xataka | If Spain wants to imitate China and be a “country of engineers”, this map reveals the extent to which it has a problem Cover | and Hyundai Motor Group and cottonbro studio

Millennials used the term “TL;DR.” Generation Z is replacing it with something more radical: “AI;DR”

by

He infinite scrollsocial networks and AI have made our attention be a rare commodity too valuable to happily distribute it in contents without substance. Millennials got used to ask for quick summaries with the term “TL;DR” (Too Long; Didn’t Read). The summary: a lot of text. Generation Z, transgressive and cornered by AIyou have found another way to filter what is and is not worth your attention. If a content looks generated by AIis sent with only five characters: “AI;DR” (AI, didn’t read). This tag is used to mark content that is perceived as “slop”. AI-generated filler that wastes time without providing real value. Behind this label there is satiety, but also a form of defending something as basic as wanting to read people who have taken the trouble to write a text. From “too long” to “too artificial” Tony “Sid” Sundharam, co-founder of the app Sink Ithe defined in his blog the essence of the new term: “For me, writing is the most direct window into how someone thinks, perceives and understands the world.” For a growing portion of young people, delegating that window of humanity in an AI it breaks the pact of honesty between whoever writes and whoever reads. In the background, a much more powerful idea is latent: “Why should I bother reading something that someone else is not interested in writing?” “TL;DR” was born, as internet memes do, as an inside joke on forums and networks. A way to admit that the effort-reward balance had been exceeded. The text it was too long to dedicate time to it. Over time it became a kind of generational nod: there was a lot of information, little time and limited patience for infinite blocks of text. “AI;DR” reuses that same structure, but changes the paradigm. Now the problem is no longer the length (or at least it is not the main reason), now the problem is the origin of the content. The idea is not that the text is long, but that seems generated by an AIwithout its own voice, critical sense or experience behind it. When someone labels a text like this, they are not asking for a summary. You’re saying it’s not even worth starting to read. A few days ago, my colleague Javier Lacort, counted that AI is conditioning us to look for the “summarize” button in all the contents to save time, thus depriving us of the luxury of enjoying a reading in its entirety, with its nuances and its readings between the lines. AI may be more efficient saving reading time, but taking a toll on the essence of the message. Fatigue in the face of AI “slop” In the new paradigm of rapid content consumption, “AI;DR” becomes a kind of advertisement between humans. A quick way to point out that something smells automated and that it might be better to pass by. When someone answers “AI;DR” to a textis doing more than just complaining about AI. As Sid explained on his blog, the fact that someone has had an idea, fought over it in front of a blank page, and spent time putting it in order are “rudimentary work tests from a pre-AI era,” small stress tests that they legitimize the author before the reader. Faced with that, the famous “dead internet theory“. Machines writing for machines. The same generation that lives surrounded by automation and intelligent assistants is valuing what cannot yet be falsified so easily: one’s own style, strange ideas, imperfect phrases that reveal that there is a person behind it. TL;DR:Generation Z has popularized “AI;DR” (AI; ​​didn’t read) as an evolution of the classic millennial “TL;DR”, to quickly discard texts that appear to be generated by AI or artificial filler without an authentic human voice. In Xataka | While companies boast of efficiency due to AI. Generation Z only sees temporary contracts and closed doors Image | Unsplash (Firza Pratama)

“A generation that cannot stand boredom will be a generation of little value”

by

Before we get into philosophical matters, let me ask you a personal question: When was the last time you got on a train, no matter if it was an AVE or the subway that takes you from home to the office? And what did you do during that trip? What were the rest of the passengers doing? I don’t know the first answer. Regarding the other two… it is quite likely that I will be right because they will coincide with what I myself do when I travel: I take out my phone, read the news, open Instagram, browse TikTok, X… Anything to distract myself. Is the most normal No? The same thing happens when we are in the dentist’s waiting room, we wait our turn at the butcher shop, we wait for our son to get out of the pool or we are simply in the elevator that takes us from the hall to the floor where we live. We look for stimuli, a quick way to fill our attention. The opposite would be almost counterintuitive because, after all, who would choose to be bored when they have unlimited distractions in the palm of the hand? Who wants to be bored? Networks and cell phones may be relatively modern inventions, but the ‘allergy’ to boredom is not. Neither the debate about the place it occupies (or should occupy) in our lives. In fact, a few decades ago, one of the most prominent and media thinkers of the 20th century, the British philosopher, logician, mathematician and writer, was already reflecting on this matter. Bertrand Russell. Throughout his prolific career Russell delved into the highest terrains of mathematical theorybut he also wrote a huge number of articles and essays on topics much closer to the asphalt, with titles as suggestive as ‘Why I’m not a Christian’ (1927) or ‘The conquest of happiness’ (1930). In one of his many memorable lines he left a phrase precisely about idleness and boredom that today sounds with a special force. So much in fact that every so often it sneaks in articles about psychology or in those proverb collections philosophical ones that then tend to populate the footers of the agendas. The phrase in question says: “A generation that cannot stand boredom will be a generation of little value.” A whole plea in favor of torpor that is reminiscent of the proclamation of another great intellectual of the 20th century, Miguel de Unamuno, who in his day also confessed to appreciating boredom. “something sweet and calming”. But… What the hell does Russell mean by a “low-value generation”? Is it so important to know how to be bored? At the end of the day, Europe at the beginning of the 20th century in which he lived is one thing and our hyperconnected world, that of TikTok, Spotify and Netflix, is another. What sense does it make to tolerate boredom in an era in which production, efficiency reign, and in which there is no pocket without a cell phone? Should we cross our arms on the subway instead of take out the smartphone and see how our cousin is doing on his vacation, read the latest Xataka posts or watch videos of kittens on TikTok abandoned to the pleasure of scroll infinite? Today we know that Russell I was not wrong. At least if we base ourselves on the observations carried out a few years ago by Dr Teresa Belton, from the University of East Anglia, who already in the 1990s began to explore how television was affecting the development of children. It wasn’t the first. Their work was supported in turn in other previous studiessuch as macro research conducted in the 1980s in Canada that found that children raised in communities without TV obtained higher scores in “divergent thinking skills,” an indicator of their imagination. That advantage disappeared as soon as the small screen came into their lives. What did Belton verify? Basically, despite the ‘bad press’ of boredom, there are certain professionals who claim that boredom has played a key role in their creative development, both in childhood and in adulthood. As an example, he quotes Meera SyalEnglish writer, playwright and actress. “Boredom led her to keep a diary, and this is what she attributes her career to,” explains the researcher. Another example he presents is that of the neuroscientist and writer Susan Greenfieldwho is also convinced that the time she spent as a child with no other occupation than writing and drawing laid the foundations for her career as a student of human behavior. “You don’t need to have a special talent. You just let the mind wander from time to time seems important for mental well-being and functioning. One study has even shown that if we do some simple, undemanding activity, the wandering mind is more likely to generate imaginative ideas and solutions to problems,” reflect in The Conversation. “It’s good to help children learn to simply enjoy leisure, and not grow up with the expectation that they should always be active or entertained.” “Children need time to stop and observe, time to imagine and develop their own thought processes or assimilate their experiences through play or simply observing the world around them,” comments Belton. before warning that screens can “short-circuit” that process and the development of creativity. In one of his articles he even remembers “flow” concept coined by the psychologist Mihalyi Csickzentmihalyi, something that can also be transferred to adults who like to escape by taking out their cell phone in the subway or elevator. “Paradoxically, this attempt to avoid boredom can result in a kind of dissatisfaction that is experienced as boredom,” comment. “He flow is the satisfying feeling of total absorption that we obtain when we concentrate on an enjoyable activity, over which we have control, but which tests our ability. Climb, write, solve equations or assemble furniture. But if our skills are greater than those needed for that activity, such as casual use of the Internet, the … Read more

Is the AirTag 2 worth buying? Key differences from the first generation of Apple

by

Now that Apple has launched the new AirTag 2it is good to ask yourself if it is really worth buying it or staying in the first generation. Therefore, in this article we are going to review the key differences between AirTag and AirTag 2. AirTag 2 design and precision AirTag (left) and AirTag 2 (right). Broadly speaking, the design of the AirTag 2 is the same as the first generation AirTag, although there is a small difference that allows us to differentiate them when purchasing them: the silkscreen on the AirTag is in lower casewhile on the AirTag 2 it is capitalized. But if there is a significant change between both generations, it is related to the search, especially in precision. Specifically, the new generation offers a elderly precisionwhich means that it can be found from a greater distance (50% more). Additionally, Apple Watch support is added. There is also a increase in sound volume that we can reproduce to locate it quickly. Two very similar prices Although initially the first generation AirTag was launched at an official price of 35 euros, over time it has risen to reach 39 euros. However, some supplier stores tend to keep it on sale for long periods of time, as is the case with Amazon, which right now has it as 30.99 euros (one unit) or by 89.99 euros (four units). The price could vary. We earn commission from these links On the other hand, the AirTag 2 is not too far from what we currently see in the first generation, since it has officially been launched at a price of 35 euros (one unit) or 119 euros (four units), something that is attractive if we want to have the improvements of the AirTag 2 for a price similar to that of the AirTag, at least if we buy a single unit. The price could vary. We earn commission from these links Is it worth it? To assess whether it is really worth buying the AirTag 2, we can open three fronts. The first is if it is our first Apple locatorand in this case we may be interested in betting on the new, with the improvements that this entails, for a price very similar to that of the first generation. The second front is If we already have an AirTag. In this case, the differences really are not so great as to justify making the jump to the new generation, especially if the locator works perfectly. Finally, it may also be the case that you want buy the pack of four AirTag or AirTag 2. The new generation is also available in this pack at an official price of 119 eurosso if you want to have several Apple locators, it is worth opting for the previous generation pack, since its price is currently 89.99 euros. You may also be interested in these other locators SATECHI FindAll Key Finder with Apple Find My, Wireless Charging, Forgotten Alert with Powerful Sound, GPS Keychain Key Locator for iPhone 17 16 15 Series, iPad, Mac and More – Black The price could vary. We earn commission from these links SATECHI FindAll Air Tag Card GPS for Wallets with Apple Find My, Forgotten Alert, Powerful Sound, Wireless Charging, Lightweight GPS Card, Wallet Locator for iPhone, iPad, Mac – Black The price could vary. We earn commission from these links Some of the links in this article are affiliated and may provide a benefit to Xataka. In case of non-availability, offers may vary. Images | Anna MartiApple In Xataka | The best Airtag for Android. Which one to buy? Tips and recommendations In Xataka | Apple AirTag, Tile, Samsung SmartTag and more: Bluetooth locator buying guide with recommendations and differences

The last barrier against AI is good taste. The problem is that an entire generation is growing up without developing it

by

The new normal in three acts: You open X and find a clearly AI-generated image trying to look legitimate. But it’s not bad, it complies. You go to LinkedIn and find a piece that reeks of ChatGPT, but you get the idea that its author wanted to convey. In GitHub You find code that works, but that no sensible programmer would write like that. You let it go. welcome to the era of “good enough”. Generative AI has made it easy, fast, and free to produce “acceptable” things, and that has moved the collective bar for quality. Not upward but towards “functional”. The worrying thing is not that AI produces mediocrity, but that it is accustoming us to accepting it. Before, if we needed an image for the article, we had to look for it or – for those who had ID – order it. There was friction or there was cost. Now we generate it in fifteen seconds (wink), and since it “serves”, it stays there (wink, wink, nudge). Even if it is generic or has that artificial veneer that we all recognize but no one talks about anymore. The problem is that when something acceptable costs nothing to produce, we stop asking ourselves if it is worth doing. We’re just wondering if it meets the minimum. AND meeting the minimum is not the same as doing something good. In development this is also very noticeable. An experienced and talented programmer instantly recognizes whether a code has been written by an AI. Even if it works (we already take that for granted), you can tell by the verbiage, because it is redundant, because it is not very elegant. It does what it has to do, but no senior He would be proud to have it bearing his signature. What is going to happen to a generation that is going to learn to program using AI from day one? If you’ve never written bad code and then understood what makes it good, how are you going to develop judgment? Good taste does not come standard. It is built by seeing many bad things, many good things, making mistakes. AI saves you that path by giving you something that works from the first try. But without going down that path, you never develop the eye to distinguish. Therein lies the risk. AI has raised the floor (anyone can produce something decent), but the ceiling is still just as high. At least for the majority. Creating something exceptional requires the same things as always: talent, effort, judgment. Only now it is buried under tons of slop and mediocre but functional content. And since creating it is free, we produce it non-stop. Human value remains in taste. Knowing how to look at something and say “okay, it’s good, but it’s not good”. But that criterion is only formed with practice. If an entire generation grows up consuming and producing what “just delivers,” how are they going to learn what is excellent? If you have never seen the difference, that difference does not exist for you. We are heading towards a world where it will be normalized that “good enough” is the only standard because we forget how to recognize when something will be done well. In Xataka | There is a generation working for free as a documentarian of their own life: they are not influencers but they act as if they were. Featured image | Xataka with Nano Banana

The most popular artist among Generation Z right now is AI

by

That AI is going to be even in the soup is no longer a surprise: we saw it at CES 2026 and we confirm it more and more on the internet. Of course, music is no exception: Spotify has already had to use scissors to delete 75 million songs while already there are hits made in IA that triumph on legendary lists like Billboard. Three hours a week. While there are those who continue to debate whether or not to use artificial intelligence in art, life continues its course with a reality in the shape of a steamroller: agree with the “Audio Habits Survey” from Morgan Stanley prepared by Alphawise, in which for the first time they have included among their questions about music in AI, young people listen to music generated by artificial intelligence three hours a week. Why is it important. Because while there are artists associating on the one hand and on the other hand platforms acting against content generated with artificial intelligence, the fact that the younger audience is not only not reluctant but also feels comfortable with this type of audio gives food for thought. It may be that while media companies are debating whether to adopt or resist, the potential audience is making the decision for them. If you can’t beat the enemy… In fact, that is the invitation of the team led by analyst Benjamin Swinburne in his conclusions: “We believe AI will be a key driver for Spotify in 2026 and beyond. Specifically, we expect AI to be critical to Spotify’s efforts toward personalization 2.0.” They have also remembered the Warner Music Group record company, which recently partnered with Suno to monetize music made in AI: “The rise of AI music will increase the value of scarce catalog resources, while potentially generating new competition for top-of-the-line content.” In figures. According to the aforementioned survey carried out in the United States, on average 36% of the people interviewed listen to music made by AI for an average of 1.7 hours on average. But if there is an age segment that listens and accepts this reality more, it is between 18 and 29 years old, with 60% and three hours. Millennials follow, with 55% of people surveyed and 2.5 hours on average. In generation The generational division of those who listen to music made in AI. Via: Sherwood News In detail. The small print of the survey is that the most common sources from which this music generated with artificial intelligence comes are TikTok and YouTube. The first of them, the entertainment app par excellence of generation Z and the very young Alpha. However, the policies of different platforms regarding AI vary: TikTok encourages the use of AI as a creative tool although it is strict when it comes to labeling it, it also YouTube sees AI as an ally creative with the corresponding labeling and only allows monetization if there is added human value. Spotify, on the other hand, prioritizes the quality and protection of real catalogs and although it allows AI, it has declared war on music spam that it considers to be of low quality. In Xataka | The first chorus decides everything: streaming is making today’s songs much simpler In Xataka | Gen Z has become so disengaged from addiction that it is holding daytime raves with coffee and sound healing. Cover | Photo of Vitaly Gariev in Unsplash

Warren Buffet and Michael Bloomberg have advice for giving Generation Z better jobs: prioritize “good vibes”

by

Starting your professional career is not easy. Bringing it to fruition, even less so. The job market has changed drastically since Warren Buffet and Michael Bloomberg made their first steps (they are 95 and 83 years old), but of course their professional trajectories, decisions and holding the unofficial title of best investor in history It gives them enough authority to give advice. Because they also give them very good ones: Buffet has already spoken before about the importance of knowing how to say noas prioritize your professional goals either know how to focus. Well, Warren Buffet and Michael Bloomberg give a recommendation for Gen Z that is entering the labor market: pay attention to the environment. The beginnings of Bloomberg. As the tycoon said on the podcast In Good Company by Norges Bank Investment Management, after finishing university in the 60s, Michael Bloomberg barely earned $11,500 a year (not bad, considering the time and that today would be equivalent to $114,000). But Bloomberg, with a pretty good CV considering he had an MBA from Harvard under his belt, had the option of earning more. More money is not always better. Another company offered him $14,000, but he opted to stay at the Wall Street investment bank Salomon Brothers for the people. In fact, initially the bank had offered him $9,000 and a loan of $2,500, which he knew how to take advantage of by laying the foundations for his empire. He gave up that higher offer and it worked out fine. “Don’t feel sorry for me, but I will never forget that people make the mistake of going to work where they get paid the most,” he concluded in the aforementioned podcast. For Bloomberg, at the beginning of your career the essential thing is: “You have to gain experience, you have to build friendships, you have to try things and see what works and what doesn’t.” There are certain jobs you shouldn’t take. Warren Buffet also shared this same mentality of prioritizing people over pay. At its last shareholders meeting at Berkshire Hathaway was blunt: “Don’t worry too much about starting salaries and be very careful who you work with, because you will end up adopting the habits of the people around you” because “There are certain jobs you shouldn’t take.” And it’s not the first time he’s said it. In fact, more than 20 years ago at another shareholder meeting of the same company, a 14-year-old boy (who was already a shareholder) asked the question “What advice would you give to a young person like me to be successful?” His answer: surround yourself with people better than you. “Choose collaborators whose behavior is better than yours, and you will end up moving in that direction.” GenZ doesn’t have it easy. It must be recognized that the advice is good, but also that the youngest people face runaway inflation, an unstable and weak labor market threatened by AI and a pressing difficulty accessing housingso they need a good salary like never before. In any case, something has not changed from the generation of Buffet and Bloomberg to the genzetters: the fear of the unknown and uncertainty. In Xataka | “I never wanted to create a dynasty”: after announcing his retirement, Warren Buffet is clear about what to do with his immense inheritance In Xataka | Bill Gates and Warren Buffett have the same answer when someone asks them “the secret to success”: focus Cover | Bloomberg Philanthropies and Fortune Live Media (Flickr) USA International Trade Administration – YouTube

Disney+ has discovered that Generation Z does not want to watch its two-hour movies. So he’s going to give them vertical microdramas

by

Disney+ has decided to join the battle for the viewer’s thumb. The company announced this week at CES that will incorporate vertical videos to its platform during 2026, a commitment to the format that dominates TikTok and Instagram. The news marks a strategic shift for a giant traditionally associated with the traditional (and horizontal) cinematographic experience. What does it consist of? If Disney previously sold large screens in dark rooms, now it is not exactly seeking to replace them, but rather to create a new habit: that opening Disney+ is a gesture as automatic as doing so with any social network. Netflix measures its impact in monthly viewing hours, but Disney wants what YouTube and TikTok already have: compulsive daily views. In an industry where engagement Everyday life has become the battlefield, Mickey and Spider-Man will learn to do choreography in vertical format. What will it include? Now, as explained by Erin Teagueexecutive vice president of product management, the plan aims for a feed personalized with algorithms that will mix news and entertainment. The raw material will be varied: from original productions designed for vertical format to recycled material from social networks and scenes from series or movies reformatted for mobile screens. Teague acknowledges that what they intend is to turn Disney+ into “a must-visit destination every day.” It is no longer enough to be the service where you can watch the latest season of something, but to be the one that you open without thinking, several times a day, just like you do with other apps that don’t even charge a subscription. where does it come from. The strategy does not come from nowhere. Disney had already tested the waters with the so-called “Verts” in the renewed ESPN application, launched in August 2025. Those vertical sports clips (highlights, quick analyzes, statements) functioned as a laboratory before escalating the bet to the rest of the Disney+ ecosystem. Rita Ferro, global head of advertising at Disney, commented in the presentation that ESPN had captured 33% of all live sports audiences during 2025 in the United States, leaving its closest competitor at 20%. The evolution of the vertical format. The vertical format has been redefining how we consume audiovisual content for years. Teague herself, before signing for Disney, worked for years on YouTube and witnessed from the inside how Google initially underestimated TikTok’s push. The answer (YouTube Shorts) was a long time coming, but when it did it changed many preconceptions: most of these short videos they end up consuming themselves on televisionsnot on mobile phones. The vertical conquered the living room, and that’s where Disney+ wants to be. Aside from this, Netflix tried publishing vertical anime videos in 2021, but never took the proposal beyond limited experiments. No competitor has yet found the formula, and Disney wants to be the first to get it right. Who has already done it. None other than Procter & Gamble, the multinational consumer products companyreinvent the soap opera and launch this January ‘The Golden Pear Affair‘, a “micro soap opera” of 50 episodes designed specifically for consumption on social networks, since its distribution will start on platforms such as Instagram and TikTok before migrating to its own mobile application. This is not advertising disguised as content: it is content designed from scratch to sell products: if the product placement classic interrupted the narrative, here the narrative is born to serve the product. Meanwhile, the fever of microdramas that conquered Asia a few years agoreaches other continents with production companies like TelevisaUnivision making compressed soap operas. The Spanish-speaking network has been exploring the “microdramas”ultra-brief versions of the soap opera format. and disney you know this works: Apps like ReelShort and Crazy Maple Studio have been dominating niche markets with sixty-second vertical dramas for years. Its model (free hook episodes, payment to unlock more chapters) has shown that addictive narrative works even atomized. These Asian platforms generate tens of millions annually with content that Hollywood would have considered impossible to make profitable a few years ago. Advertising implications. The vertical format is not just an aesthetic or generational issue. It is, above all, a new advertising space: Disney announced a metric that merges Disney’s own data with information from external providers, saying that the format was a very attractive space for advertisers. And it also introduced an artificial intelligence-powered video generation tool that allows advertisers to convert existing materials into renewed ads. It is no longer necessary to produce spots from scratch; just feed the machine with assets priors and brand guidelines. So now Disney’s recent deal with OpenAI does. acquires a renewed meaning. Transformation or concession. Teague openly acknowledged that “Gen Z and Gen Alpha aren’t necessarily thinking about sitting through two-and-a-half-hour long content on their phones.” Disney does not want to attract new generations to its classic catalog, but rather to speak in the same language as these young people who have always been its potential audience. For millions of users, cinema is no longer the basic unit of entertainment, and Disney has decided that, rather than compete with Netflix, it has to do so with WhatsApp, Instagram and TikTok. In Xataka | “I cried 152 times in 2025”: Generation Z lists their emotional crises and turns them into infographics

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.