From 2010-2019 we saw a wide array of beauty looks, from 90s inspired hair accessories and natural texture to wine-colored lids and blue hair. Here, we've rounded up our 12 favorite Golden Globes beauty looks of the decade.
The mobile upstart launched its first smartphones, the Pre and Pixel, in 2009, and found a hardcore group of fans that loved the look of the devices, and all the features that set it apart from Android and iOS. Palm CEO Jon Rubenstein (one of the early pioneers at Apple making the iPod) made some waves onstage by claiming that he had never used an iPhone. Palm also saw its stock rise by 10% after it announced at a press conference that it would sell its devices through a lucrative deal with Verizon Wireless (which now owns TechCrunch).
One thing everyone can agree on is the past decade was eventful. But did civilization make progress in the 2010s or did the world move backward?
The last 10 years include dozens of controversies, including Jerry Sandusky's conviction, Anthony Wiener's sex scandals, and Hillary Clinton's emails.
Matt Harmon looks back at the last 10 years in fantasy football and gives his assessment on The People's submission for the best players of the past decade in this week's Fantasy Football Survival Kit.
As we bid farewell to the decade and say hello to a new one, it's time to take a good look back at all we've witnessed over the past 10 years.
Were we ready for the country? In 2019, the best efforts of veterans like Tanya Tucker, Rodney Crowell and Vince Gill and next-generation talents like Maren Morris, Yola and Kalie Shorr ensured we were. Here’s a ranking of some of the year’s finest country albums … followed by a genre best-of for the entire 2010s. […]
Hollywood studios have historically relied on typically cheaper and often endearing romantic comedy to fill out slates. The genre had its ups and downs during the 2000s, but studios and audiences rekindled their love affair with rom-coms over the course of the decade. Here’s a list of some of the most memorable romantic comedies from the 2010s.“Scott Pilgrim vs. the World” (2010) There are more than a few genre-bending films on this list, but maybe none more interesting and ambitious than “Scott Pilgrim vs. The World.” This meta, cult classic rom-com co-written and directed by Edgar Wright blends rom-com tropes with comic books as Scott Pilgrim, played by Michael Cera, fights off The League of Evil Exes in order to win the heart of the girl he’s fallen for, Ramona Flowers, played by Mary Elizabeth Winstead. The film truly is singular. And in addition to Winstead and Cera, stars Anna Kendrick, Keiran Culkin, Aubrey Plaza, Jason Schwartzman, Alison Pill, Chris Evans, and Brie Larson, among others. (Watch the trailer here).“Easy A” (2010) Emma Stone pops up a few times on this list, but her performance in “Easy A,” might be the one that truly helped cement her as a Hollywood fixture over the course of a decade. There’s often quite a deal of overlap in rom-coms and teen comedies, as there is here. “Easy A,” also starring Amanda Bynes, Penn Badgley and Lisa Kudrow, uses “The Scarlet Letter” as it’s inspiration, while pulling slightly from such films as “Can’t Buy Me Love.” In “Easy A,” Stone’s Olive Penderghast decides to lie about losing her virginity in an attempt to up her social status, but things get out of control as classmates ask for help doing the sam and ruse gets out of control. (Watch the trailer here).“No Strings Attached” and “Friends With Benefits” (2011) Two romantic comedies, both alike in storyline in the same year. Both films cast two two amazingly charming lead actors to carry films about two attractive people who become friends and, in order to avoid emotional feelings, decide to simply sleep together. Surprise, they end up catching feelings. The films came out months apart and similar turns of phrase associated with two friends in no-commitment sexual relationship. An interesting, but possibly low point for the genre, pointing to a dearth of ideas. “No Strings Attached” starred Ashton Kutcher alongside Natalie Portman, while “Friends With Benefits” starred Justin Timberlake and Kutcher’s now wife Mila Kunis. Emma Stone also makes a John Mayer-loving cameo. (Watch the trailers here, and here).“About Time” (2013) This list likely wouldn’t be complete without “About Time.” The film has virtually everything you’d want in a romantic comedy, chief among them, it’s written and directed by Richard Curtis, who’s on the Mount Rushmore of rom-coms, if there was such a thing. The “Love Actually,” “Notting Hill,” and “Four Weddings and a Funeral” screenwriter imbued the time traveling rom-com with all the British charm one would expect. To boot, the film stars Rachel McAdams, which, if you want a film to ooze charm, she is a fantastic place to start. Domhnall Gleeson stars as a man who’s able to travel back in time and uses this strange family gift throughout his life as he falls in love with McAdams’ character. (Watch the trailer here).“Crazy Rich Asians” (2018) “Crazy Rich Asians” broke down cultural barriers and was a box office it. With a virtually all-Asian cast audiences latched on the film, which was only the fifth romantic comedy to gross more than $100 million at the box office since 2009. The film was adapted from the best-selling book series by Kevin Kwan. (Watch the trailer here).Read original story 30 Most Memorable Rom-Coms of the 2010s, From ‘Easy A’ to ‘Crazy Rich Asians’ (Photos) At TheWrap
Streaming has completely reshaped the face of the music industry over the last decade, with the likes of Spotify and Apple Music proving to be overwhelmingly popular with music fans. The Recording Industry Association of America has revealed some stats that underline the mammoth sea change. The organization says streaming accounts for 80 percent of the US music market, compared with seven percent in 2010. Streaming subscriptions rose from about 1.5 million to around 61 million between 2010 and the first half of 2019, according to the RIAA.
You won’t make much money, your best stories will be forgotten, and you’ll be doomed to constant disappointment and despair. I recommend it highlyAs the decade of the 2010s began, I was ensconced in an exciting if modestly paid New York media job, writing every week about the recession-fueled layoffs and closures across the media world, while avoiding them personally. As the decade reached its end, I myself became a casualty of a publication closure and layoff, just another unemployed writer hustling for what comes next. In journalism, as in life, there are only lucky idiots and unlucky idiots. Successful people who are very convinced that they deserve everything they have are not to be trusted.In 2009, I was working at Gawker.com, a news and gossip site that rested in the sweet spot between the media establishment and the seething hordes – enough of an outsider to do whatever we pleased, but well known enough that the insiders still read us, often out of hate. It was fun. I was a media reporter, and watched wide-eyed as titans of the industry were ravaged by a combination of the global economic crisis and the rise of new media, like us.As the years went by, what had begun as a little blog by a handful of people working at home moved to a big office in Soho, with parties on a private roof deck, and then to a fancier office in Union Square, with wide open spaces that were the architectural equivalent of bragging. The mid-decade years were the high point; one liquor-soaked holiday bash featured a tower of crab legs and a bowl of macarons the size of a car trunk; famous media people routinely showed up at our parties, eager to slum with the mouthy kids who made fun of them, and to try to be friendly enough to inoculate themselves from criticism in the future. One day Brian Williams, the news anchor, came by the office for a chummy lunch with us, motivated, no doubt, by the fact that his daughter was about to star in Girls, an HBO show we were sure to mock mercilessly. We were loved, hated, and feared in equal measure. We were proud of the quality of our enemies. More importantly, we were financially sustainable and doing what we wanted.Then it all fell apart. A lawsuit secretly funded by a vindictive Republican billionaire outraged about our reporting on him bankrupted the company. Layoffs became common, and employees started to flee – one’s entire social life could have been built around going-away parties. The company was sold off to a big media company, which handled it ineptly, and after a couple of years sold off again to a private equity firm, often the last stop before the media ownership train goes fully off the tracks. In October, Splinter, the politics-focused successor to Gawker where I was working, was folded. If nothing else, it was a well-timed invitation for introspection on a decade in journalism. That and a box of old notepads are all you can walk away with.The point of journalism is the stories. Everything else is glitter. Furthermore, the vast majority of everything you write will be forgotten within a matter of days. The sooner a writer understands this, the better. We are all secretly precious, harboring hopes that our wise words will be pored over by future generations. But in reality, written journalism has a lot in common with television journalism: it will be enjoyed or despised when it comes out, and then everyone will move on. There will be a handful of stories you write that will be remembered for years, but you have no control over which these will be. They are just as likely to be your worst as your best. Any writer unable to reach a sort of zen acceptance of these facts will have their heart broken by reality soon enough.> The most esteemed positions in media, unfortunately, are often held by people whose greatest talent is 'getting good jobs'The people who really will remember what you write are the people you write about. The gift of journalism is the chance to tell the stories of those who would otherwise not be heard, and journalism tends to be worthwhile in direct proportion to how much this is its goal. In general, people are happy to have someone interested in them enough to tell their stories; the only segments of society who try to avoid being written about are those who feel that the media might threaten their tight hold on power. If you are a reporter and you find yourself talking to evasive PR people more than regular people, you are probably writing about the wrong things. This is always a hazard. Prestige in media is bestowed on absurd things. The most prestigious job, White House correspondent, is also the worst. At best, it offers the hope of schmoozing with bureaucratic leeches for bits of gossip that can be spun into news; more often, it involves looking good at televised press conferences while being lied to by officials.Likewise, the media attention lavished on presidential conventions is matched by an absolute lack of news. I covered three of them, and never heard a single newsworthy thing at any of them that did not come out of the mouth of a protester who was barred from actually accessing the convention by many well-armed police. America would be better off setting up a single live camera on the convention stage, and then sending the thousands of political reporters out to talk to homeless people instead. That would offer at least the hope of capturing some insight about what is happening in the country.There exists in journalism a discernible divide between those who see it as a cause, and those who see it as a career that might enable them to hang out with important people and get a hefty book deal one day. Some journalists will tell you what they want to write about, and others will tell you where they want to work. It is the latter, unfortunately, who get most of the jobs. The most esteemed positions in media are often held by people whose greatest talent is “getting good jobs”. The world is full of excellent writers and reporters who are barely getting by, because they make the mistake of pouring their efforts into stories rather than into career-building. A less self-pitying way to say this is: there are scores of people capable of filling every decent job in journalism. The New York Times could turn over its entire staff 20 times without suffering a loss in quality. This means, in fairness, that we should hold the work of the people at the top of the profession to high standards, because there are a hundred writers standing behind them who could do their jobs just as well. Everyone who has been around for a while has come to understand this. It is what drives the white-hot anger at every half-assed Ivy Leaguer who lands a plum columnist job.The rage of the creative underclass burns brightly just below the surface of the media. That is why the most meaningful legacy that Gawker left behind may not be any of its big scoops, but rather its role in setting off the wave of unionization that is still sweeping through America’s newsrooms to this day. Unions took off in media because journalists have, if nothing else, enough common sense to see that the people in charge make more money and have more power but are clearly not any smarter than us. That can’t last forever.Yes, journalism has flaws. Its highest level is full of self-important twits and lazy white men failing upwards; it is dour, sensationalistic, and ignorant of vast swaths of the country; it routinely publishes falsehoods, exaggerations, errors, and lies, due in large part to an unearned conviction that it is competent in many matters that are in fact wholly beyond its capabilities; and it is fascinated with nothing more than itself, forcing countless uninterested readers to slog through navel-gazing tripe such as this essay.The average sanitation worker contributes far more to the public good in a single day than most journalists do in a lifetime. If you choose to pursue it as a career, you are in for infinite disappointments. You wanted to cover Watergate, but you will end up writing reviews of Waterpiks; your dream job will instead be awarded to some halfwit celebrity’s kid; if you ever do secure a worthwhile position, you will surely lose it; the good times won’t last, but the bad times very well might. Your best stories will be forgotten, you won’t make much money, and your archives will be lost to tech glitches. When it’s all over, your entire body of work will have mattered to only a small handful of people, none of whom you will ever meet.Which is all to say: I recommend it highly. If you ever get a chance to be a journalist, grab it and hold on tight. It is much, much better than having a real job. * Hamilton Nolan is a writer based in New York City
The 2010s will be remembered as the decade tech companies became remarkably powerful — and valuable. Just take a look at where we were 10 years ago. In 2009, only one of the 10 most valuable companies in the world — Microsoft — was a tech company. Now, as we enter a new decade, six of the 10 most valuable companies are tech giants: Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet (the parent company of Google), Amazon, Facebook and Alibaba. What’s more, those six companies, in order, are the first through sixth most valuable companies on earth, with Apple and Microsoft both worth more than $1.2 trillion dollars. How’d it get to this point? A decade ago, oil juggernauts like Exxon Mobile and Royal Dutch Shell easily lapped some of these now-dominant tech firms. Tech has clearly crashed the party and now appears to hold a stranglehold on the market. Three key factors appear to have spurred the rise of tech, according to several experts who spoke to TheWrap: ubiquity, innovation and adaptability. On ubiquity, all of these companies have not only been adopted by more people in the last decade but are also being used more frequently. “Most consumers use Amazon, Apple, Google, Netflix...Read original story How Tech Giants Like Amazon and Facebook Became Wall Street Juggernauts in the Last Decade At TheWrap
Increased parity in college basketball led to some of the greatest games in the sport's history during the 2010s, from massive upsets to moments that had fans screaming from their couches. The Tar Heels worked the ball to Marcus Paige, who made an off-balance, double-clutch 3-pointer to tie the game with 4.7 seconds. Paige's shot will go down as one of the most memorable 3-pointers in NCAA Tournament history, but it was upstaged by what happened next.
"2009 was the year I lived in my car," the "Truth Hurts" singer tweeted, adding that she cried herself to sleep on Thanksgiving that year.
The last week of 2019 was marked by a bumper crop of comments that might have benefited from a little fine-tuning in a focus group. Here, in no particular order, are a few that provoked more than the usual amount of head-scratching.
“By encouraging this act of terror on our capital, Trump’s legacy is destroyed.”
“Both backers and critics of Trump agreed that he remade the federal judiciary — a change that will impact America for decades.”
“He was largely responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans who did not need to die.”
“I do know what the future should hold for this country. That is to say, a policy of Trumpism without Trump.”
“It will be decades before the consequences of his tenure are fully known.”