Some More Thoughts on Substack

Hi,

There has been a bit of discussion in the New Zealand press around me taking Webworm (my main job and passion) off of Substack (a tech company co-founded by a New Zealander, valued at $1.1 billion in their latest funding round) and onto Ghost (an open source system, around before Substack ever existed, doesn’t have the social media and algorithmic element of Substack).

The focus of this coverage has tended to be on the fact Substack happily hosts Nazi newsletters - which is a good thing to point out. 

But I wanted to clarify a few things that I think are getting missed. 

Firstly, I think it’s super important to note that we’re not talking “newsletters with a Nazi symbol” - we are talking full blast Nazi newsletters. Hitler himself could have written them. They’re that Nazi. 

As bad as that is, I think even outside of this Nazi issue, there are other aspects I left that have been entirely missed. Because I didn't just make this decision to leave just based on the Nazi thing (although obviously that was a part of it).

In my leaving post - down further - I wrote a bit about the lock-in effect that Substack has, and how I think long term that it's not a great thing for writers.

As Substack currently swims in investment, it’s fine. But Substack is not currently making money. And at some point, the rug will be pulled out, and it will be even harder for writers like me to leave then. I am talking about reliance on the Substack App and the algorithm, and there is also no guarantee that writers will be able to take their subscribers with them in the future (Substack’s big sell to me 5 years ago).

I mean, the week after I left Substack, they introduced a thing where subscribers can pay via the Apple store. That's great and all - but a writer doesn't have any of that data. If they leave, they can't take it with them. That's just more lock-in. Or as this journalist put it: “With the forced introduction of Apple in-app payments, the Substack enshittification process is complete for publishers.”

I wanted to get out while I still could.

As far as why I left Substack, and yet am still on other “evil” social media (fair point) - I guess I think we have to make decisions when we can. To live 100% ethically would probably involve throwing yourself in the ocean and never coming back - but I don’t advocate for that approach. 

I deleted my public Facebook a few months ago - and nuked Twitter (bye over 170k followers). But I remain on Bluesky, and other Meta outlets like Threads and Instagram. I guess in my mind, a difference I clock is that I am not paying them 10% of my income, like I was to Substack.

I give them "content" (silly photos, pithy typed text, THIS essay I am screenshotting and sharing), but I feel much more comfortable knowing I am not paying those companies directly.

I'd also argue those platforms have more of a stand against Nazi stuff than Substack does (ie more than none). I have reported stuff on those platforms, and it's been removed. On top of this, my followers who trust me on social media are not at risk of getting a direct email essentially saying essentially "Like Dave? You might like this Nazi post."

I also fundamentally think Substack has the wrong interpretation of "free speech". I quoted from my conversation with TechDirt's CEO and founder at the end of my leaving post - and I agree with him. I am going to repeat it here:

“I’ve spent 25 years talking about the importance of free-speech and trying to get across how important free speech is. But I think they misunderstood what free speech really means — and free speech includes the right to associate and not associate with certain individuals. And they sort of took it to mean, “We must allow all speech, no matter what.”

But when confronted with this, Chris [Chris Best, Substack CEO] basically said, “We don't care. Like, anyone can be on our platform.” And when it was presented to them even further, that there were outright neo-Nazis using the platform, like, “How do you feel about that?” they were kind of, “Well, you know, it would go against free speech to take it down.”

Which is not true, right? No-one’s saying that Nazis have no right to speak — but you can say, “They can't speak in my living room. This is my house and I can decide.” That is true of Substack: Substack is a private company. They get to decide who uses their thing. That’s not saying Nazis have nowhere to speak! If they wanna go speak, they can go set up their own website!

That you are saying, “We’re not going to moderate that” also does a second thing, which is that it paints a giant sign on Substack itself and says “Nazi-friendly.” 

The open source nature of Ghost makes me feel confident. I am paying them for hosting at the moment, but they start supporting Nazis in a big way, I can take that Ghost code, and self host. 

No lockin, either. The design of the new Webworm feels crisper, and some of my readers like aspects of it more than where they were, which I was pleasantly surprised by. 

As a publisher, it also allows me to do things I could not do before: like offer a way for people to make one-off payments instead of regular subs, that kinda thing. Substack always told me that defeated the idea of locking a user into monthly or yearly subs - which is good for planning and my stability as a writer, but also some people will never be able to afford that, so a "tip jar" is great.

I may crash and burn without Substack's algo, but I also think that algo was bringing me a lot of spam readers and inflated numbers. I'm OK with not being there. And I am confident that if I do good work, people will find it. Word of mouth, the old fashioned shit that spread my films Tickled and Mister Organ around. I haven’t lost faith in that world. 

David.