Where do you stand on sharing your Wordle results? In recent weeks, that innocuous little grid of yellow, green and black squares has become as much a staple of social media as pedantry and passive aggression; it is a cute little flashback to when people’s annoyance at online content peaked with seeing too many pictures of what a stranger had for breakfast.
The word-guessing game continues to grow and grow and millions of people are now playing it. One newish poll by Morning Consult suggested that as many as 14% of Americans have joined in and that 59% of players share their results, either “often” or “sometimes”. Whether people post often or sometimes, a kind of grid rage is growing. Perhaps it is the sudden influx, or the sense that people are showing off, or talking about something of little interest to others, all of which are about as standard on the internet as someone choosing My Way on Desert Island Discs. MI6 chief Richard Moore caused a minor stink last week when he tweeted that he was “thinking of unfollowing those who post their Wordle results”, which led to the double whammy of winning support from Anneka Rice and a jovial apology from GCHQ in the form of a mocked-up Wordle page.
I’ll admit, I had a moment. I popped over to Facebook to check in on the conspiracy theorists – odd that Facebook has seen its first ever drop in usage; I can’t think what might be putting people off – and I saw a few grids and clicked away even more hastily than usual. But then I mentioned this to my partner, who promptly told me off for being a misery. “What’s the harm?” she said, pointing out, with irritating reasonableness, that it was quite a nice thing to do.
Much of Wordle’s appeal is its niceness. It’s not too hard, not too demanding, and even when it dares to use American spellings or double-vowelled monstrosities, sharing the fact that nice old Wordle is being a pain in the arse is also a very unifying thing to do. Josh Wardle, its creator, sold the game to the New York Times last week and it’s hard to blame him for cashing in.
After “Black Thursday”, plenty of households will be looking down the back of the sofa for a Wordle. For now, it will remain free, which is nice. “At the time it moves to the New York Times, Wordle will be free to play for new and existing players,” said the buyer, although I note that it was choosing its words carefully.
The Queen: I can’t wait to celebrate her lovely Jubbly
Once seen, it cannot be unseen. At first, the commemorative plates, teacups and mugs made in China to be sold in the UK, created to commemorate the Queen’s platinum jubilee, look like any other lot of royal memorabilia. Elegant-ish portrait, bit of heraldry, a few flowers, the special dates and a crown. But look closer and it’s there. This batch of 10,800 items failed to commemorate the Queen’s platinum jubilee. Instead, it pays tribute to Her Majesty the Queen on the occasion of her Platinum Jubbly. Lovely.
A Jubbly may not sound quite as regal, but something about this affair is fundamentally British, which should please the play-the-national-anthem-on-the-BBC types. Four days off for a Jubbly? I’ll take it. It sounds like one of those old folk traditions, like cheese-rolling or shin-kicking. A competition to invent a special commemorative Jubbly pudding? I’ll order mine today, because it sounds delicious. Plant some trees for the Jubbly? As if schoolchildren won’t love it. Karl Baxter, the entrepreneurial boss of the clearance website that is selling them, told the BBC he is pitching the items as “limited edition” and “unique”.
This is the kind of behaviour that wins people The Apprentice, if not the world.
Taylor Swift: in-depth study of a superstar? Bring it on
Photograph: Evan Agostini/Invision/AP
It isn’t quite a degree in Taylor Swift studies, but students at New York University’s Clive Davis Institute can study a three-month course on the star, which “proposes to deconstruct both the appeal and aversions to Taylor Swift through close readings of her music and public discourse as it relates to her own growth as an artist and a celebrity”.
It will be taught by Rolling Stone writer Brittany Spanos and, as someone who has read a collection of academic essays on Buffy the Vampire Slayer, I have some envy for those who made it on to the course. Apparently, there is a long waiting list. Look what she made you do.
I would definitely read, for example, a paper that deconstructed the rise and fall of the Squad, though I do wonder what can be taught in the field of Swiftology that thousands of internet theorists have not already painstakingly pieced together and analysed. After all, this is a woman who can write a scarf into a song and revive that scarf’s status as an international obsession an entire decade later.
I have no time for snobbery about the study of pop culture, whether that’s an MA in the Beatles at the University of Liverpool or a module in Beyoncé, gender and race at Copenhagen University. But on hearing about Swift studies, my first thought was clearly conditioned by the shocking expense of higher education in this country. I didn’t think, that sounds intriguing. I thought, that sounds like it would be an expensive frivolity and that seems like such a shame.
• Rebecca Nicholson is an Observer columnist
