Before June 8, the skilled and respected ABC News television journalist Terry Moran was neither a household name nor political lightning rod. That changed abruptly when Moran posted on X that Donald Trump’s deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller was “a world-class hater,” followed by an addendum that the president was a hater as well. (The post was later taken down.) While the statements were certainly defendable, they apparently violated ABC policy, and Moran was suspended, then dismissed. Moran, though, had one move left. On June 11, he started writing on Substack.
Moran was joining a movement based on a dream: Journalists could start a Substack newsletter and garner subscription fees that would match or exceed their previous salaries. And they would be editorially liberated! No editors to screw up copy, no censorship from bosses when advertisers complain, no corporate overlord to fire you when you say the president of the United States is a hater. Substack says that some people are indeed living the dream. CEO Chris Best recently boasted in a speech that “more than 50” of its users were pulling in a million dollars in revenue.
As more journalists get pushed out of their jobs, get fed up with their bosses, or just want to breathe the cool air of freedom, they now have what appears to be a viable escape hatch. Recently a lot of them are taking advantage of it. Jeff Bezos has been good to Substack: The Washington Post editorial page’s apparent recent disinterest in stopping democracy from dying has led popular opinion writer Jennifer Rubin to start a publication called The Contrarian, and censored editorial Post cartoonist Ann Telnaes now publishes on Substack as well. Former MSNBC host Mehdi Hassan started his own publication. Even Chuck Todd has gone indie.
You might be tempted to think that the Substack revolution is shaking up the foundations of journalism, agreeing with Substack star Emily Sundberg that newsroom leaders everywhere should be barring their doors to prevent further defections. Well, not so fast. The Substack model may work very well for a few, but it’s not so easy to march in and match a salary. Readers have to pay a high price for a voice that they once enjoyed in a publication they subscribe to. And writers have to get used to the idea that the breadth of their wisdom is limited to a small percentage of patrons. Is Substack sustainable for writers addressing a general audience?
Just in the last week or so, a cluster of critics have been publishing that the platform may be on shaky ground. It started when Eric Newcomer—posting on his own successful Substack—celebrated Substack’s recent influx of big names and reported that the platform told investors it was taking in $45 million a year in revenue. He claimed it was seeking a new investment round which would value the company at $700 million. (Substack did not confirm those numbers.)
But then Dylan Byers of Puck looked at those numbers and wondered whether the bottom line valuation was actually less than in the previous rounds. Byers, like other critics, charged that once you get past the few real big earners, the platform was full of low-flying mediocrities: “The truth is that the vast majority of the content on Substack is boring, amateurish or batshit crazy,” he wrote. His conclusion was that Substack was a media company trying to be valued as a tech company, which is a familiar fail point for similar companies. (WIRED itself once failed at an IPO for that very reason.)
Ana Marie Cox, who once enjoyed blogging fame as Wonkette, is even grimmer, writing in her newsletter that Substack “is as unstable as a SpaceX launch.” She wasn’t impressed with the more recent influx of name writers. “How many Terry Morans does Substack have room for?” she wrote. “Is there even a public appetite for a dozen Terry Morans, each independently Terry Moran-ing in his own newsletter?”
Cox is referring to subscription fatigue, which is something I think of every time a sign-up page pops up when opening a new Substack. Typically, Substack pros solicit a monthly fee of $5-10 or an annual rate of $50-150. Usually there’s a free tier of content, but journalists who hope to make at least part of their livelihood on Substack save the good stuff for paid customers. Compared to subscribing to full-fledged publications, this is a terrible value proposition. After leaving The Atlantic, celebrated writer Derek Thompson started a Substack that cost $80 a year—that’s one penny more than a digital subscription to the magazine he just left! (The Atlantic will probably spend $300,000 to replace him with someone else worth reading.) It doesn’t take too many of those subscriptions to match the cost of The New York Times, which probably has 100 journalists as good as Substack writers, and you get Wordle to boot.
.jpg "How Microschools Became the Latest Tech Mogul Obsession")
