Nate Meyvis

You really don't have to use Substack

Writers write for a bunch of different reasons. Some of those reasons are, plausibly, reasons to use Substack. But:

  1. A lot of those reasons are equally good reasons to use other platforms (which also support monetization, have good infrastructure, and so on);
  2. At least some Substack writers seem to be choosing it without considering alternatives. (Either "Substack" is, to them, synonymous with "subscription newsletter," or they think it's the safest and most mature platform.)

I'm not interested in arguing over newsletter platforms, pronouncing upon Substack's moderation policy, or similar. But I do want to say that:

  1. I don't like how Substack treats readers. The popups and nudges make for a bad experience.
  2. I have more often been convinced by "here's why I didn't have to be on Substack" arguments than by "here's why I have no good alternative to Substack" arguments.
  3. John Gruber has a nice meta-guide to migrating away from Substack.1
  4. Not so long ago, Medium had an analogous role as a default writing platform.2 Far from everyone who wrote (or read) there considered themselves well-served by the platform in the long, or even medium, term.

I have no single recommendation either for monetized or free writing. (I am quite happy using Bear, but my use case is highly (!) idiosyncratic.) I do not think ill of anyone who chooses Substack, and I do read articles there. But writers would do well to consider, at least, the alternatives.

  1. Gruber also has useful notes about Substack here, here, here, and elsewhere.↩

  2. Not coincidentally, the reading experience it offfered was analogously frustrating.↩

#future of work #writing