Substack shares details on its Pro program after criticism, saying 30+ writers with a “diverse set of viewpoints” have signed up, none of whom are anti-trans
a publisher, not a platform—but claims not to be one, which is a pretty shady dodge. https://thehypothesis.substack.com/ ... Kara Swisher / @karaswisher : It'd be nice to see all those who are paid in broad daylight, so those strivers on the platform can see it all. Pretending you are not a paid edit operation when you are seems shabby at the very least. I thought @Annaleen kind of nailed it here: https://thehypothesis.substack.com/ ... Dan Gillmor / @dangillmor : I'm not for or against Substack (though I don't intend to use it), but this piece from @annaleenewitz is harsh about, among other things, the platform's lack of transparency. https://thehypothesis.substack.com/ ... Alex Kantrowitz / @kantrowitz : @pt @benyt Fairly certain their perspective is that writing that relies on social media as its distribution channel — vs. email — is prone to be less thoughtful and more inflammatory. And they're trying to counter that. It's not that big tech is too woke. Parker / @pt : @benyt This post seems entirely reasonable, except the last graph, which is wild. You could read this as “social doesn't deliver intelligent discourse” or “big tech is too woke” and I'm not really sure which they mean. What is their agenda here if social was the competition from day 1? https://twitter.com/... @graceonfootball : However I might feel about Substack, I promise you I have no plans to move to Facebook any time soon. https://twitter.com/... Jude Ellison S. Doyle / @sadydoyle : OK. At this point, I want to be clear on the discussion with Substack. I got an email defending their business model which ended by offering me Pro money to stay. I told them that as long as the platform hosts and funds TERFs, I can't take that deal. Hamish McKenzie / @hamishmckenzie : Here's Substack's statement about recent questions and misconceptions around the Substack Pro program: https://blog.substack.com/... Sydney Bauer / @femme_thoughts : Substack says it still won't share the writers on pro deals, which is their right, but says the full list cannot be described as “anti-trans,” which I guess Substack and only Substack is the end judge of: https://blog.substack.com/... Ben Smith / @benyt : Substack gives a bit of detail on who has gotten “pro” deals, and (and this matches my reporting) suggests it's a more diverse group, ideologically and otherwise, than some assume https://twitter.com/... @yashar : I was offered one a couple years ago but it didn't make sense for me at the time. https://twitter.com/... Quinta Jurecic / @qjurecic : would you describe this as a business or an editorial decision? https://twitter.com/... See also Mediagazer
Substack Blog
Context & Ripple Effects
Substack has spent months insisting it is a tool, not a media company — the founders' platform-not-publisher stance dated back to at least November's profile coverage. But paying select writers upfront is an editorial act, as The Hypothesis argued, because leaders are choosing which kinds of writing to subsidize.
That contradiction drew open criticism from journalists like Kara Swisher and Dan Gillmor, who called for paid writers to be disclosed 'in broad daylight.' Today's statement answers part of it — 30+ sign-ups, no anti-trans writers among them — while explicitly refusing to name any of them.
First-order effects
The named critics' core demand — a public list of who is paid under Substack's editorially-driven Pro deals — goes unanswered; only aggregate numbers and a viewpoint characterization are offered.
Writers deciding whether to move their newsletters to Substack still cannot know whether the writer they are competing against for subscribers is being paid by the company itself.
Second-order effects
With transparency questions unresolved, Substack follows within days with detailed content moderation guidelines covering harassment, doxxing, and hate — an attempt to close the adjacent accountability gap rather than disclose names.
Defenders like Stratechery reframe the controversy around sovereign writers paid directly by subscribers, giving Substack an ideological counter-narrative to deploy against the disclosure push.
Third-order effects
If the pattern holds, newsletter platforms that subsidize talent while claiming neutrality will face the same publisher-style accountability pressures — editorial funding decisions become reputationally inseparable from the brand regardless of what the terms of service say.
Substack's later struggle to reconcile its author-first ideology with growth mechanics like its mobile app suggests the undisclosed-Pro tension was structural, not a one-off communications failure.
The trend: Newsletter platforms are discovering that paying writers editorially forces them into publisher-accountability territory even when their positioning depends on being merely a tool.
“The vast majority of Substack newsletter writers will never make money that's equivalent to a year's salary, which is what the staffers get. Instead, they will provide Substack with free content, hoping to get that sweet subscriber cash one day” https://twitter.com/...
Shorter Substack management: “It's not that we only give these deals to assholes, it's that only the assholes tell you about them” https://blog.substack.com/... https://twitter.com/...
Substack's new post on its Pros program articulates the company's values much better than previous efforts, I think. Worth a read https://blog.substack.com/... https://twitter.com/...
.@SubstackInc this is very disturbing and I will probably be looking for other services to use for my newsletter. I urge you to take steps to correct, especially in the area of financially subsidizing hate-mongers. https://twitter.com/...
It'd be nice to see all those who are paid in broad daylight, so those strivers on the platform can see it all. Pretending you are not a paid edit operation when you are seems shabby at the very least. I thought @Annaleen kind of nailed it here: https://thehypothesis.substack.com…
I'm not for or against Substack (though I don't intend to use it), but this piece from @annaleenewitz is harsh about, among other things, the platform's lack of transparency. https://thehypothesis.substack.com/ ...
@pt @benyt Fairly certain their perspective is that writing that relies on social media as its distribution channel — vs. email — is prone to be less thoughtful and more inflammatory. And they're trying to counter that. It's not that big tech is too woke.
@benyt This post seems entirely reasonable, except the last graph, which is wild. You could read this as “social doesn't deliver intelligent discourse” or “big tech is too woke” and I'm not really sure which they mean. What is their agenda here if social was the competition from …
OK. At this point, I want to be clear on the discussion with Substack. I got an email defending their business model which ended by offering me Pro money to stay. I told them that as long as the platform hosts and funds TERFs, I can't take that deal.
Substack says it still won't share the writers on pro deals, which is their right, but says the full list cannot be described as “anti-trans,” which I guess Substack and only Substack is the end judge of: https://blog.substack.com/...
Substack gives a bit of detail on who has gotten “pro” deals, and (and this matches my reporting) suggests it's a more diverse group, ideologically and otherwise, than some assume https://twitter.com/...
Here's why Substack's scam worked so well. They paid a secret group of writers to make newsletters seem lucrative. In my newsletter this week, I talk about how it all happened, and why I'm out. https://thehypothesis.substack.com/ ...
Must read from @Annaleen. I'd been planning to start a Substack but after learning more about what they've been doing I'm like nope, not going there. https://twitter.com/...
The scam is important, but the other big point in this piece is the killer: Substack is another dudebro tech platform run by, and for, entitled people who think they can get away with abusive behavior. https://twitter.com/...
I haven't paid a lot of attention to substack, but this is a fascinating (as this piece puts it) “Silicon Valley slight-of-hand move.” Sigh. https://twitter.com/...
Why hand selecting paid writers for your platform and refusing to divulge their identities is absolutely making editorial decisions, and pretty shitty ones at that. Read the entire thing 👇🏼 https://twitter.com/...