Welcome - start here
Or, why I finally gave in and started a Substack
Three years ago, I created this Substack. I let it collect dust because I was reluctant to participate on the platform for various reasons.
I believed (and still believe), Substack is massively overhyped (early on many called it ‘revolutionary’ with some comparing it to the gold rush). It’s subscription-based blogging with an intuitive interface. Nothing new there. Two years ago, I wrote a piece detailing my criticism (you can find it here), which I still stand by. I’ve included some snippets of my criticism below, if anyone is interested:
Snippets from my piece critiquing Substack
On having to build a ‘personal brand’ on Substack:
Because more people today are turning to individual creators rather than large media publications for their news, this puts more pressure on non-established writers to build their own personal brand to compete with these high-profile voices. Co-founder Chris Best confirms that Substack is more about personality than publication. The goal, Best says, is “to allow writers and creators to run their own personal media empire.” The direction towards building a ‘personal media empire’ may also foment blind idolatry of public figures, and put more focus on the personality than the story.
On the re-organization of establishment voices:
I fear this ‘mass migration’ to Substack will simply re-organize the establishment class in new ways and create more toll booths on the information highway. . .
The platform disproportionately benefits writers who have already amassed a large following through their previous positions writing for legacy media. . . [Bari] Weiss, like other establishment-turned-independent voices, including Andrew Sullivan and Matt Taibbi, don’t just hit reset once they join Substack – they bring over their existing following, connections and influence to this new space with them, giving them a leg up over emerging, independent writers. And in today’s age of information saturation, building up a following from scratch with no prior experience is an especially arduous feat. Already, the gentrification of Substack may well be underway, where less seasoned voices may have to work harder to build their following than these high-profile commentators.
On traditional media and the subscription-based model:
While newspapers are a physical embodiment of the ‘old guard,’ in many ways they are a democratizing force in themselves. The ‘penny paper’ – a tabloid-style newspaper produced in the US in the 1830s, revolutionized the industry by incorporating mass advertising into its model, making the news affordable and accessible to everyone. . . While there is a temptation to disparage all forms of legacy media – including newspapers – in many ways, it continues to be the most accessible form of media today. Many print and digital papers remain free, while others cost less than a Substack subscription. On the other hand, the newsletter-subscription model requires readers to subscribe (and sometimes pay) to many different writers, creating more competition on the writers’ side to fight for readers’ already limited attention span. And while Substack subscriptions range from $5 to $50 a month, costs quickly add up if readers want to support more than a couple creators – and I suspect very few people would be willing to pay for multiple subscriptions, and even fewer would be able to afford it.
On the Substack-induced echo chamber:
Additionally, because Substack is newsletter-based, readers may be inadvertently putting themselves in more filter bubbles, where they run the risk of being exposed to limited perspectives and opinions that confirm their existing beliefs. In contrast, in newspapers and newsrooms, readers are typically exposed to a wider range of voices and opinions. These traditional outlets – despite all of their issues – offer readers the opportunity to discover new voices all in one place.
While I still stand by my criticism, I also recognize my resistance to these trends aren’t doing me any favours. I have a blog on Ghost and it’s been an admitted colossal failure (see my above point about emerging, independent writers) — which is why I very infrequently post my work there. I’ve contributed to other publications, but it’s precarious work. I was on Medium for a bit, but it’s so depressingly ideological and disproportionately rewards establishment thinking and social justice ideology that it no longer became tenable to continue posting there. I’m also not active on social media.
I recently had the opportunity to take the reins on the
Substack (thank you to Crow— THE’s Substack), which allowed me to engage with likeminded people in a way that I’ve haven’t been able to before. I also admire thinkers like who has shown all of us what it looks like to build a supportive, nurturing community of critically minded, brilliant, and independent thinkers.And, I do appreciate that my criticism will at least not be censored here (at least for now).
I think there is a great need to create a platform that is actually an equalizer and democratizes voices while also being an ardent supporter of free speech and diversity of thought. The ideal platform would also make an effort to combat filter bubbles, but until, and if that ever happens, I’ll be here. Substack is the best of the worst, and there’s not much we can do about it.
If anyone has meta thoughts about Substack, I’d love to hear them.
So what will my Substack focus on?
A number of issues. Technology and society, politics, culture, gender, and everything in between. I’m not about clickbait, hit pieces, or attacking people over ideas. There’s a lot of reactionary, inaccurate content out there (i.e., ‘junk food’ content), and that’s one of the many downsides of living in the information age. We have too much information, but not enough absorption of knowledge. We simply don’t have the capacity to process all of this information at once.
I also think including memes in serious think pieces is tragic (my unpopular opinion is that memes should never belong in an essay).
I am for: critically engaging, thoughtfully expressed, and well-argued ideas and analysis. That’s what I hope to nurture here.
Note: I’ve migrated my meagre following from my Ghost blog to here. Feel free to unsubscribe if you no longer want to receive emails.
Rozali
Glad you're here. I gave up on Medium a while ago and moved over here. Your writing was one of the few things I missed. It's much easier to find like-minded people and build a following here.
"If anyone has meta thoughts about Substack, I’d love to hear them."
Alright then!
First, SS has a better visual format than other platforms. It could use a few more editing features, but it's working well enough for now. Of course since it's a business venture with a fixed address, it's susceptible to all the usual shenanigans encountered on other platforms. For example, I got a 7 day ban for pointing out a conflict of interest in one of the stackers they were featuring as an example of how to build a subscriber base. She (forget her name) was putting herself out as an expert on the vaccines, and the ban came when I pointed out she'd worked for the CDC, and also had no real understanding of virology or epidemiology. So basically free speech unless you gore their ox. No different from anywhere else.
In trying to avoid the advertising model they missed an opportunity. The main complaint about advertising is it's not in control of the author. Well, make it so! Provide a list of potential advertisers and let the writer decide which ones (if any) will appear on their site. For example, my site is about music, so I'd have no problem carrying a couple of music related ads per post - maybe Gibson, Marshal or Yamaha... things my subscribers might be interested in. Got a hiking or cooking site? Ads about hiking or cooking gear. It's so obvious I don't understand why they haven't done it.
The subscription model definitely gets in the way of what I'm doing, which is not so much about using the medium as studying it (Media Ecology). I visit a ton of substacks to see what people are talking about, but I don't have the budget to subscribe to many, so when I hit a paywall I just move on. Truth is my discretionary spending goes to legal defence funds and disaster/refugee relief. I can't really justify anything else.
For writers struggling to get traction in this medium, all I can say is try the music industry. Like the difference between talking and singing. For example, one of my favourite bands that nobody's heard of work in different cities, compose their material via the internet, and get together to rehearse and perform whenever they can schedule the time. They play in venues that barely cover their costs, and they'll probably never make any money at it, but they keep right on going because they love what they're doing, and I love them for that. Brothers and a sister I've never met.
https://ebear.substack.com/p/pinkshinyultrablast
Echo chambers and fan clubs? No different than anywhere else I've found. True, Substack carries content that would be banned elsewhere, specifically vaccine and pandemic related material, but those sites are just as much fan clubs as anywhere else, with minor exceptions. They're also pretty good money makers with large followings of paid subscribers, so no conflict there, right?
The killer app of publishing has yet to emerge IMO, but when it does, it will have to be open source and widely distributed using individual home computers as servers, which is practical now that the bandwidth is there. Substack, as much as they've stood for free speech for which I give them credit, are still vulnerable for the reasons mentioned. It's much easier to limit free speech when it has a fixed address and shareholders with financial interests. Ultimately what's needed is a new architecture for the internet, but that's a long way off (if ever) and beyond the scope of this comment, so I'll just leave it at that.