This week: attentional blink and why your second point never lands

Paper: Raymond, Shapiro & Arnell's attentional blink work — when two targets appear in quick succession, the second is often missed entirely if it lands 200–500ms after the first.

Why it matters here: if you stack two important claims back to back in a fast edit, the second one may not be perceived at all. Not "not remembered" — not perceived.

Practical version: after any high-salience moment, leave a beat before the next one. The beat isn't dead air, it's the cost of the previous moment landing.

Argument I want: does this survive outside lab conditions, where stimuli are self-paced and viewers can rewind?