Preliminary Ruling on Shared Streaming Choice
Two people have agreed they are happy with anything. Neither of them is happy with anything.
CLASSIFICATION NOTICE Subject: Shared Streaming Choice Status: Formally Recognized Phenomenon
What Is Being Classified
The extended selection process that occurs when two or more people attempt to choose something to watch together, during which each person claims to have no preference and both people have preferences.
Why It Is Being Classified
Because the shared streaming choice now takes, on average, longer than one episode of most shows. Because it occurs reliably enough to be called a procedure. Because calling it a procedure does not stop it from happening.
How It Operates
The first person opens the streaming service and says, "What do you want to watch?" This is a genuine question in tone and a negotiating position in function. The correct response, socially, is to demonstrate flexibility. The first person has demonstrated flexibility by asking. The second person now demonstrates flexibility by saying, "I'm happy with anything."
They are not happy with anything.
The first person scrolls. The second person watches the scrolling. Several shows appear. The second person's face communicates a mild lack of enthusiasm for each one, but says nothing, because they are happy with anything.
Ten minutes pass.
A social inconvenience may continue indefinitely if ending it would require naming the inconvenience. The inconvenience, in this case, is that both people have opinions they are too considerate to state.
The Escalation
The first person, tired of scrolling, suggests a show. The second person says, "Oh yeah, I heard that was good." This is not the same as enthusiasm. The first person, who has learned to read the difference, asks if the second person is sure. The second person says yes.
They watch the show. It is fine.
Afterward, neither person mentions that the show they both wanted to watch is still on the list.
Status
Formally classified. The governing rule requires that a social inconvenience may continue indefinitely if ending it would require naming the inconvenience. Naming the inconvenience would require one person to say: "I want to watch this, not that."
No one has said this.
No one will say this.
The streaming service's recommendation algorithm has begun to notice the pattern.