Substack's decision to pay certain writers to write on the platform is an editorial one as leaders decide what kind of writing they want to support
and do this instead Tweets: @annaleen : 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/ ... Benedict Evans / @benedictevans : All new social platforms run into content moderation issues. But increasingly, they also run into culture war issues. At a certain point, regardless of what you do, people will decide you picked a side (the wrong side, obviously) and you need to know how to manage that. Mike Monteiro / @monteiro : ...and if you want more detail about Substack's garbagefire, @annaleen makes the case very well here. (But honestly “they write paychecks to terfs and nazis” should be all you need.) https://thehypothesis.substack.com/ ... Annemarie Bridy / @annemariebridy : I humbly submit that it is not manageable, and it's what makes talking “across the aisle” about Section 230 impossible. https://twitter.com/... Anne Helen Petersen / @annehelen : Substack recruited me and gave me an advance based on my unpaid newsletter subscribers and my open rate. They had an idea of what my subscriber income would be, and they offered significantly less. In other words: people who take the advances make significantly less money Matthew Yglesias / @mattyglesias : Here's how the Substack “scam” worked in my case. I was interested in returning to my blogging roots, but with the new kind of subscription-based model that @benthompson pioneered and I'd also seen @emorwee and @JuddLegum succeed with. I thought I could make it work. But... Jesse Taylor / @jesseltaylor : The scam is “let's pick writers we agree with, pay them loads of money to write for us, pretend there's no editorial decision-making going on, then use this opaque process to persuade other people to use our service” Or, yes, bubbles and cancel culture bullshit part 5 million https://twitter.com/... Jonathan Chait / @jonathanchait : The scam is “people are allowed to write opinions I don't agree with and be paid by people who like to read their columns” https://twitter.com/... Gabe Schneider / @gabemschneider : “Substack's laissez-faire approach to bigoted speech is not uncommon for tech startups ... but we have seen it play out too many times not to know where it leads.” https://gen.medium.com/... Oliver Burkeman / @oliverburkeman : The logic here strikes me as tortured. I think Substack just saw a gap in the market, created by rapid recent ideological narrowing in existing media leaving large audiences underserved, and decided to capitalize on it. https://thehypothesis.substack.com/ ... @kottke : “Substack's business is a scam. They claim to offer writers a level playing field for making a living, and instead they pay an elite, secret group of writers to be on the platform and make newsletter writing appear to be more lucrative than it is.” https://thehypothesis.substack.com/ ... Benedict Evans / @benedictevans : I don't understand the criticism that Substack can only make you money if you already spent a long time building a big audience that will pay for your stuff. Isn't that just ‘media’? You need a lot of work and a lot of Luck and no publisher/platform/tool can do that for you Mike Solana / @micsolana : long story short “no one will pay for my writing and also i love censorship” https://twitter.com/... @blackamazon : THIS and Substack did this while openly antagonizing populations It decided to defend “not having censorship” while it did It started mentor ship programs on “building audience ” While these folks were paid other wise to be comfortable https://twitter.com/... Fred Oliveira / @f : This has been an eventful day and so I'm a little angry, but can we please all go back to just having websites with our words in them instead of dealing with all these jerks and their BS schemes? https://twitter.com/... @jason : It's impossible to run a platform on the internet anymore! Apparently, @SubstackInc's admission they pay advances to writers, including on the right (like @bariweiss @ggreenwald @sullydish), has lead the left to flee the platform! & the right can't write for the @nytimes! Mathew Ingram / @mathewi : “Substack is creating a de facto editorial policy. Their leadership — let's call them editors — are deciding what kinds of writing and writers are worthy of financial compensation. And you don't know who those people are” by @Annaleen https://thehypothesis.substack.com/ ... Eric Newcomer / @ericnewcomer : because I believe in transparency: I declined to take a $20K advance (and declined a confidentiality agreement). I receive a health insurance subsidy from them, but otherwise am a normal 10% Substack writer. https://twitter.com/... Dr. Thrasher / @thrasherxy : Right here (on Substack!) read how Substack is trying to disrupt “jobs” (or newsrooms or unions) by being “more attractive to a writer than a salary, so they don't have to stay in a job.” Same tactic as Uber, Lyft, Avon or Cutco Knives. Via @Annaleen https://thehypothesis.substack.com/ ... https://twitter.com/... Jefferson Simon / @jefferson1simon : @karaswisher @Annaleen Disagree with this article. And Substack had been pretty open about paying some of the writers. Darrin Hawe / @digifiend : @karaswisher @Annaleen So @analeen uses substack as a mass mailer (which it seems to do well), states that income stream isn't the goal of use, then isn't happy that potential readership growth isn't likely due to lack of transparency. If fulfilling it's intended use, I'm not seeing the problem. Brady Dale / @bradydale : @benedictevans @jjaron If you're a writer and you saw Taibbi and Yglesias go on Substack and thought: “Yeah I'll probably get the same results” you have larger problems Which is another way of saying: yeah it's a tough slog but those of us in the biz also get that Barbara Genova / @genova_ali : “You too could have a Substack that's as financially successful as this guy's Substack! Except you don't know whether this “successful” Substack was bankrolled by the company or not. There's no transparency about that.” https://thehypothesis.substack.com/ ... Jude Ellison S. Doyle / @sadydoyle : The Substack Problem (TM) is hard to talk about because it's happening on several fronts: Morally, politically, and in terms of sheer unethical business practices. Newitz has the cleanest explanation I've read of why the business end is so fucked: https://thehypothesis.substack.com/ ... Elliot Turner / @elliotturn : This is a really important piece on 1 of the major problems w/ Substack. I wouldn't go so far as to call it a scam, but I've had issues for a while now https://thehypothesis.substack.com/ ... Tom Hillenbrand / @tomhillenbrand : „Substack was paying (writers) to do it. And yet Substack was pretending that its successful newsletters were all bootstrapped." https://thehypothesis.substack.com/ ... Dan / @dangb88 : interesting on who substack pays and what that says about their business and editorial policy https://thehypothesis.substack.com/ ... Tim Maughan / @timmaughan : “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/... @cfiesler : 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/... Jason Sanford / @jasonsanford : 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/... @susanschorn : 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/... Katie Drummond / @katiedrumm : I especially love that this is written on Substack. Go @Annaleen https://thehypothesis.substack.com/ ... Tim Marchman / @timmarchman : Again, the specific criticism of Substack is that it is (in part) an editorial operation—a publisher, not a platform—but claims not to be one, which is a pretty shady dodge. https://thehypothesis.substack.com/ ... See also Mediagazer
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/ ...
All new social platforms run into content moderation issues. But increasingly, they also run into culture war issues. At a certain point, regardless of what you do, people will decide you picked a side (the wrong side, obviously) and you need to know how to manage that.
...and if you want more detail about Substack's garbagefire, @annaleen makes the case very well here. (But honestly “they write paychecks to terfs and nazis” should be all you need.) https://thehypothesis.substack.com/ ...
The scam is “let's pick writers we agree with, pay them loads of money to write for us, pretend there's no editorial decision-making going on, then use this opaque process to persuade other people to use our service” Or, yes, bubbles and cancel culture bullshit part 5 million htt…
“Substack's laissez-faire approach to bigoted speech is not uncommon for tech startups ... but we have seen it play out too many times not to know where it leads.” https://gen.medium.com/...
Substack recruited me and gave me an advance based on my unpaid newsletter subscribers and my open rate. They had an idea of what my subscriber income would be, and they offered significantly less. In other words: people who take the advances make significantly less money
The logic here strikes me as tortured. I think Substack just saw a gap in the market, created by rapid recent ideological narrowing in existing media leaving large audiences underserved, and decided to capitalize on it. https://thehypothesis.substack.com/ ...
Here's how the Substack “scam” worked in my case. I was interested in returning to my blogging roots, but with the new kind of subscription-based model that @benthompson pioneered and I'd also seen @emorwee and @JuddLegum succeed with. I thought I could make it work. But...
“Substack's business is a scam. They claim to offer writers a level playing field for making a living, and instead they pay an elite, secret group of writers to be on the platform and make newsletter writing appear to be more lucrative than it is.” https://thehypothesis.substack.…
I don't understand the criticism that Substack can only make you money if you already spent a long time building a big audience that will pay for your stuff. Isn't that just ‘media’? You need a lot of work and a lot of Luck and no publisher/platform/tool can do that for you
THIS and Substack did this while openly antagonizing populations It decided to defend “not having censorship” while it did It started mentor ship programs on “building audience ” While these folks were paid other wise to be comfortable https://twitter.com/...
This has been an eventful day and so I'm a little angry, but can we please all go back to just having websites with our words in them instead of dealing with all these jerks and their BS schemes? https://twitter.com/...
It's impossible to run a platform on the internet anymore! Apparently, @SubstackInc's admission they pay advances to writers, including on the right (like @bariweiss @ggreenwald @sullydish), has lead the left to flee the platform! & the right can't write for the @nytimes!
“Substack is creating a de facto editorial policy. Their leadership — let's call them editors — are deciding what kinds of writing and writers are worthy of financial compensation. And you don't know who those people are” by @Annaleen https://thehypothesis.substack.com/ ...
because I believe in transparency: I declined to take a $20K advance (and declined a confidentiality agreement). I receive a health insurance subsidy from them, but otherwise am a normal 10% Substack writer. https://twitter.com/...
Right here (on Substack!) read how Substack is trying to disrupt “jobs” (or newsrooms or unions) by being “more attractive to a writer than a salary, so they don't have to stay in a job.” Same tactic as Uber, Lyft, Avon or Cutco Knives. Via @Annaleen https://thehypothesis.substac…
@karaswisher @Annaleen So @analeen uses substack as a mass mailer (which it seems to do well), states that income stream isn't the goal of use, then isn't happy that potential readership growth isn't likely due to lack of transparency. If fulfilling it's intended use, I'm not see…
@benedictevans @jjaron If you're a writer and you saw Taibbi and Yglesias go on Substack and thought: “Yeah I'll probably get the same results” you have larger problems Which is another way of saying: yeah it's a tough slog but those of us in the biz also get that
“You too could have a Substack that's as financially successful as this guy's Substack! Except you don't know whether this “successful” Substack was bankrolled by the company or not. There's no transparency about that.” https://thehypothesis.substack.com/ ...
The Substack Problem (TM) is hard to talk about because it's happening on several fronts: Morally, politically, and in terms of sheer unethical business practices. Newitz has the cleanest explanation I've read of why the business end is so fucked: https://thehypothesis.substack.c…
This is a really important piece on 1 of the major problems w/ Substack. I wouldn't go so far as to call it a scam, but I've had issues for a while now https://thehypothesis.substack.com/ ...
„Substack was paying (writers) to do it. And yet Substack was pretending that its successful newsletters were all bootstrapped." https://thehypothesis.substack.com/ ...
“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/...
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/...
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/...
Again, the specific criticism of Substack is that it is (in part) an editorial operation—a publisher, not a platform—but claims not to be one, which is a pretty shady dodge. https://thehypothesis.substack.com/ ...