Leaving Substack . . .

Photo by Lukas Zischke on Unsplash

I’ve watched, read and listened to many arguments for and against staying or leaving Substack. The one “thing” I’m convinced of is that there is no “right” answer. There is also no “truth”, with a capital T, to be found. The people to avoid on Substack (and in life) are those convinced that they are right and know the truth.

It isn’t just the “nazi” issue that sees me pack my bags for no greener pasture. I do find it deeply ironic that I’m leaving just as Stephen Fry, someone I have immense respect for and have enjoyed his work for decades, arrives (I hope he wasn’t groomed/paid by Substack). So be it, I still get to enjoy his books (especially his audio books), TV appearances and endless re-runs of QI.

A story published about Substack being a pyramid scheme in the Guardian I found illustrative (the quotes below are from this story). I know many will claim this is an attempt by one media company to discredit another (a claim often leveled). That path leads to the unhelpful position of “never believe anything you read”.

My reasons are as follows.

The Nazis – they were strike one

Possibly the issue that has dented Substack’s reputation is the question swirling around Nazis and free speech. Having read logically written, cogently argued pieces on both sides of the fence, it is difficult to find solid ground on which to form an opinion.

Ultimately, for me, it was Substack’s “wet” response to the issue that irked. It once again displayed to me that money trumps morals - seemingly always. Despite the rhetoric from Substack, I found myself on just another tawdry money-making platform reminding me of the line Rik Mayall delivered in Filthy, Rich and Catflap (which featured Stephen Fry) – “we’ll do anything for half of lager”.

“… Substack’s position on content moderation was alienating, demonstrating that the company had little interest in actively addressing some of the thorny questions about how to host healthy media communities online.”

Notes and algorithms – strike two

I’m sure others have different opinions but isn’t Notes just another algorithm-based way to maximise revenue? That, to me, makes it a social media platform that will, inevitably, end up dividing as it reproduces into a sea of small echo chambers – exactly like Twitter. The point of the algorithm is not to enlighten, not to make the world a better place, it is to draw your attention (sell your attention) to content likely to engage and/or enrage.

I’m not sure who coined the phrase – if you’re not paying, you are the product.

Multi-level marketing – strike three, I’m outta there

I don’t have the following Stephen Fry or many other big-name celebrities have. He will make money easily from being on Substack, like taking candy from children. He, in turn, makes money for Substack which exists to take a cut of the children’s candy (and, despite the rhetoric, nothing else).

The platform itself, Notes, the pumping-up of high-profile celebs, paying people to be on Substack, the people publishing content about how to increase your subscribers, the people celebrating their 100, 1,000 or 10,000th subscribers etc etc. It’s not a pyramid scheme in the traditional definition, but it’s a pyramid scheme in practice.

“Some anonymous writers were destined to succeed while the vast majority were providing Substack with free content, hoping to one day be able to monetize. As the New York Times columnist Ben Smith put it, Substack was surreptitiously making some writers rich and turning others into ‘the content-creation equivalent of Uber drivers’.”

Remembering why was I on Substack?

When I’m not writing, I make a living as a business consultant (I sure haven’t made a living through Substack). The question I ask most often is – what are you trying to achieve?

I joined Substack to broaden my reader base, not to read what Stephen Fry is thinking (as interesting as that maybe). On Substack, I’ve come across (I won’t say met) some wonderful people who happen to be writers. I haven’t read their material, I have no idea if they’re good writers, because I didn’t join Substack to find reading material. I read approximately 25 books a year - I prefer books that writers have gone through a process to produce. Newsletters (let’s call them what they are - blogs) have little editorial review.

Initially I followed the general Substack advice (their own and other writers) and I wrote thousands of words in a weekly newsletter over the past year – 200 odd hours creating content that I could have spent writing books. In hindsight, I’m not seeing the difference between my time on Substack and the time I spent on Blogger, all those years ago.

Fellow writer Garrett Francis summed it up when he said that he didn’t want to be in the online equivalent position of sitting in front of his cap, hoping someone will throw in a fiver. That’s what the bottom of the pyramid resembles, and has to resemble for the pyramid to work - fuck that.

The more it changes, the more it stays the same

I’ll leave things here for a week and then, as if I was never here, I’ll be gone. I’m not finding a different identically motivated platform, I’m going back to writing books and putting my random thoughts on my website. I’m not exporting my email list either, those who want to can find me.

As for Substack, strategically they appear to me to be in what we call a five-minutes-to-midnight position … and coaches are few and far between.

PS - I’ve just finished “Dry January” - I never had a more productive start to the year!