Shortening of Content

This is the season for Spotify wrapped and all the things-you-did-in-the-past-year reflections.

There has been a proliferation of shorter form content which helps to increase views and/or plays of the content. While the infinite doom-scrolling user interface of a few social media giants have been common for quite some time, the world of music and listening can't exactly benefit from doom-scrolling. So what do they do?Shorter song lengths, which helps to increase plays and repeatability.

I mean can you imagine putting a 14-minute song like Abdul Halem Hafiz's Sawah on loop? That's only 4 plays an hour. And if you put a 2-minute song on repeat? That's 30 plays an hour. 8x more!

In the spirit of accountability, here are my top 5 songs of the year from my 2025 wrapped:

If you've noticed, most of the songs on my top 5 are from recent years and all of them are below 3 minutes long - except TABOLA BALE, which is over 4 minutes long. The average of my top 100 songs is 3 minutes and 35 seconds. That is slightly more than the recommended length for a pop song, which should be between 2:30 to 3:30. This length increases playability, which signals to whatever streaming algorithm that this song is well-liked, and thus be pushed out to more people on streaming platforms and increases royalty for the artist. At least according to this guide by Major Mixing.

And this shortening of content does not only happen with music, it also happens to books. I know, back in the days we had shorter books that can be read in a day. We have Roman en Poche (literally: pocket novels) in France. But they are not rushed or effortless. They take a lot of effort for writers to write.

Books these days are pumped out quickly to increase sales and readership. But most books I've read lately feel rather empty and frankly, unmemorable. And don't get me started on special editions where people will buy different editions of the same books because they look pretty. They contain the same story!!!

I've been watching videos on this subject about how social media (particularly booktok) is ruining reading as a hobby. It has become competitive (people setting unrealistic reading goals), and more wasteful (buying books and then not reading them).

As someone who grew up with only a library card and very little fund to buy books for fun, I can tell you that this isn't new. I have, at one point in early adulthood when I had a little bit more fun money, bought books for fun but never really read them and they ended up in donation piles in the library. RIP my James Patterson books.

And now I'm back to square one: owning 2 library cards (one for Singapore, as I can access Libby using my NLB card, and one for Lille) and having zero budget to buy books.

Hobbies, particularly reading, requires money. But do we really need to buy the book? Do we need 5 copies of the same book just in different forms and formats?

I think what worked for me is realising how very little space I have in my apartment, and that pushed me to be more intentional with my purchases. Because at this point I don't think I have anymore space for books (or other small trinkets), even if I wanted to purchase more.

Owning the 2 library cards is also plenty for my needs. I... honestly don't think I can ever read that many books anymore. Sure, I'm not working full-time and I have plenty of time to spare but my lifestyle has changed and I don't have the energy to spare to read that much anymore. Especially since I'm trying to hone a new language. Reading in a language you've only started learning 3 years ago sucks ass, okay? Even my husband whose English is fantastic finds reading in English a chore.

Besides, reading isn't a competition. Reading was meant to be pleasurable, or to teach us new things and skills.

And maybe, just maybe we can go back to listening to classical Arabic music that lasts 55 minutes long to feel something.