Substack’s provided a beacon of hope for millions of citizens & benefitted many independent writers. However, recent trends suggest Substack’s not the total answer in the battle against authoritarians
Reminder to self: This article lists about 10 different Substack newsletters I enjoy. Still, as they say, one should never start listing names because you’re going to leave off a dozen people you really like and support and whose feeling you do not want to hurt.
Put it this way, there's dozens of great Substack authors I read on a regular basis. I want them all to do well ... as well as authors I've yet to discover and hope, one day, will reach large numbers of readers ... and make a difference.
It's hard keeping up with all the stuff you want to read, especially when you're also writing! There's far too many articles in my inbox that end up going totally unread because of the sheer volume. (And obviously not everybody is writing stuff that interests me 100% of the time)
I no longer subscribe to Berenson or Kirsch. (Never paid.) I found they became horribly boring in the long run. I also unsubscribed from Dr. Paul Alexander, yep, he got boring, too. I only still subscribe to Malone (not paid), because he has some interesting "insider" info sometimes. Many times I just delete his articles. Meryl Nass, too. IMHO, she gets a little full of herself sometimes.
So, I find it fascinating that you want to be like them. I enjoy most of your articles, you cover many things that are way more interesting to common people than the aforementioned writers. That being said, none of this raises the amount of money I get paid, compared to my monthly bills and I'm constantly trying to come up with something I could do on my own to make extra money, with way less luck than you have had. In the last year, I have been able to make approximately an extra $90 minus expenses. Wheeeee. 😳😖
Don't tell anybody, but I like my content better than most of the content I see from those "five Substack all-stars." I just focussed on them because I had subscription data from their newsletters and they do, roughly, write about some of the same topics.
I’m not clever enough to know what your comment means. I think you are one of the authors that I intend to subscribe to. I don’t want to use a regular credit card because of theft. So one of these days I’ll get around to using a pre paid for several substacks. I do feel guilty for reading and commenting on substacks that I haven’t subscribed to.
Was just a joke! Although I obviously appreciate all paid subscriptions (since that's what I do for money these days), I don't want anybody to ever feel guilty about reading for free -- I was writing for free for over a year! :)
My articles will always be free for anyone to view even if they are not subscribers. However I restrict comments to paid subs mainly because 1. I cannot afford to support myself with my writing anymore (my free subs have exploded but paid subs have declined), and 2. if anyone threatens violence or writes something stupid I will be liable under Australian law.
I just do not have time to babysit comments sections and I am in enough trouble already.
I wonder if those people who restrict comments to "paid subscribers" ... get more paid subscribers because of this restriction. Someone needs to do a study!
Personally, I'm keeping my Comments Section open to everyone. You never know when you can get a huge news tip or fascinating tidbit from your readers. Why limit this reader content to just the 4 percent of people who pay for subscriptions?
P.S. Many Substack posters seem to be smarter and better writers than we "pros." It's also a way for those people to "influence debates" or participate in important conversations ... because they are actually reaching large numbers of people via these Reader Comment sections.
(I think that's why most mainstream sites either abolished Reader Comment sections or restricted them to paid subscribers .... and then some employee "moderates" which comments they publish. I think these companies are afraid of the smart readers who would debunk that day's article).
Interesting! I always get frustrated when I can't comment b/c I'm not a paid subscriber--but you're SO RIGHT about not having time to babysit comments OMG. Damn. Food for thought.
Good points and very understandable. Here in this part of the Anglosphere we probably aren’t that far from gubmint censoring/enforcing bad think either.
As a hypothetical thought exercise, what if Facebook/Meta acquired Substack? Does ANYONE think Substack would be the same after this? Substack as we know it - and need it - would be gone. Which would leave writers like myself with what platform to reach X thousands of readers/citizens?
For those who say this could never happen, it's already happened. Think of the "case study" of The Drudge Report. For years Drudge was a "contrarian" muck-racker, publishing articles and commentary that was off-limits in the captured mainstream press. That's WHY this website became one of the biggest and most influential on the Internet.
Then, seemingly over night, Drudge's editorial bent changed 180 degrees. Even to this day, nobody knows what happened to Drudge. But "something" definitely changed with that speech platform.
The same thing could happen to Substack. It might already be happening in surreptitious increments.
I think I've been banned for life from ZH. They didn't like my anti-Putin comments. Apparently, people who feed Beryllium Borscht to their adversaries or send them on short walks out of high windows are the superheroes of their world. At any rate, you CAN say the wrong thing and get permanently censored. (They stopped carrying all my articles, too, after years of publishing them.) All was fine until I didn't like Putin's War. I find it it kind of funny because they are the ones endlessly complaining about getting banned/censored by Twitter and other organizations. Turns out they're no better.
The story with Zerohedge is that they used to provide fairly decent alternative commentary on economics etc. And the conversation was interesting and informative. Then something happened. I assume they were bought out. Anyway, I never got around to participating there. I was getting my early articles cross-posted on The Burning Platform and people seemed to like them. RedefiningGod.com refers to Zerohedge as Putin friendly controlled opposition. This label is becoming more common now among most of the controlled opposition gatekeeping alt-media in general and I'll admit I get confused trying to work out why these pundits appear to be following an agenda and who they really work for. I would add Infowars, Tucker Carlson, Joe Rogan, Russel Brand etc to the list of suspect operators. They all end up moving in lockstep as if someone is pulling their strings.
You've got them about right. The guy who owns ZH is Bulgarian, living in Florida, I believe, and his Bulgarian father, according to what I read, helped fund ZH as a start up and he either wrote disinformation as a journalist in Bulgaria or as a Russian agent, and had some sort of connection with Putin. So, my perception is that once the US started distancing itself from Putin, ZH focused on its original role of being a strong promotional site for Putin and became a lot more political when they had, as you say, been more economically focused.
ZH is glad for any story on the US economy that makes the US look bad and is always trying to make the US and the West look entirely like the bad guys in Putin's War on Ukraine. Why the people you mention all throw in so much with Putin who kills all his detractors and imprisons dissidents just for using the word "war" is beyond me. That certainly isn't my idea of liberty. They seem to have a lot of very deep hatred for the US, and ZH feeds it all they can.
Clearly Putin is every bit as imperial and land-grabbing as the US at its worst, and he has far less regarded for civilian slaughter.
That's a fair assessment. Yuri Bezmenov told us about the demoralization campaign that would destroy America from within and we see that playing out, but at the same time I see the rise in what I think is genuine patriotism, not only in America, but all over Europe. Maybe the goal has been to coopt this genuine movement, to stall it, to cause rifts and division, and maybe blame some major terrorist event on this group as predicted in the Tom Clancy Splinter Cell series of videogames. While the left ran their havoc campaign in the streets of America during the summer of 2020, the right have been saddled with the Jan 6 fiasco that the left can easily label as an attempt to carry out a coup. The current American govt/NATO backed propaganda here in Europe is so strong that any mention of Putin or Russians results in frothing at the mouth calls for all out attack and it's not all wrong given Soviet and KGB history, but they'll react the same way at the mention of Trump. Not so with old Joe or any left wing leaders in other countries. And if we read these pro BRICS, pro Putin type propagandists we get the complete opposite, a fairy tale where BRICS nations will save us all from the evil American empire. In my opinion, we're dealing with one or two corporate entities that like to set up these conflicts that keep everyone busy while they run off with the money and maintain their position of power. Even so, I still get caught up in the 'game' picking sides. It's difficult to be neutral. We all have biases. I guess I would like to see an American style constitution applied to entire world and for the people to make sure that corruption cannot get a foothold in that system. And for that to happen people would have to be more informed and more actively interested in that goal than they are currently. For now, it looks like we're being taken to war possibly so a savior character or organization can step in at some point to establish peace.
El Gato this week had an article on "Anonymity." In his situation he makes a good argument, plus he posts cat memes.
Tucker Carlson appeared in Australia recently and slammed an Australian mainstream (leftist) journalist.
If only 7 million read Substack, of a western English-reading population of up to a billion (not counting how many Indian educated citizens read English), then we are an ignorable fringe, deplorable cult, according to our despicable PM.
We recently had Steve Kirsch and Dr. Peter McCullough in town for a conference (picketed by the rainbow fag-flaggers at the behest of CHEK-TV!)
My point is that these Substack authors have alternate income streams and support. It would be fun to do a forensic audit on Robert Malone's income since 2019. Without public support we will remain poor and politically irrelevant. Igor Chudov has shifted his commentary to his own server/website which a certain (non-misplaced) paranoia and understanding of Edward Snowden makes reasonable.
The key Substack metrics I’ve found in my research are that this platform has/had 35 million subscribers and 17,000 newsletter authors are being paid for their content. For my research, I’d love to have answers to these questions (one of three posts):
Has the 35 million number increased in the past year or so? What is the current number?
How many new paid authors have been added to the 17,000 figure?
How many total newsletter authors (free and paid) does the platform have?
How many Substack authors have at least 300 (my figure) paid subscribers?
How many Substack authors have at least 6,000 (my figure) total subscribers?
What is the average number of paid subscribers a Substack author has?
How many Substack authors have at least 1,000 paid subscribers?
Of the 17,000 “paid” Substack authors, how many have FEWER than 100 paid subscribers?
Is the number of authors who might be labelled “Covid contrarians” or “freedom writers” growing?
Has the percentage of this sub-set of “dissident” authors remained constant, increased or decreased in recent years?
What percentage of Substack subscribers pay for at least one subscription?
What is the average number of subscriptions a Substack subscriber has?
Is this figure increasing or declining or how has it changed in the past 18 months?
How many of Substack’s 35 million subscribers do not pay for at least one subscription?
If Substack starts censoring then the readers will plateau and then that will be the end of a good idea.
Simple Bill and tis folks like you that will track this - and if and when it happens, and you can report upon it, then odds are the currency of Substack will have peaked and then start diminishing as just another "good idea gone wrong"....that is the time to jump ship if you haven't already and frankly I hope it doesn't happen, but evidence lately suggests it is in the cards.
It's nice to think they will live that way, but if they are the type to sell out on a good idea to make money, they'll live jetting between tropical islands and ski resorts and be deliciously happy because they haven't got enough soul to care ... IF that's the choice they make.
I haven't written about this metric in great detail yet, but this change also alarms me.
For at least the first 12 months of my Substack, my "Open Rate" was about 45 percent. This is the percentage of subscribers who got an email version of my articles and actually opened and then read said article.
For the last couple of months, my Open Rate has been about 32 percent.
One might think this is a decline of 13 percent (45 - 32), but it's actually a decline of 29 percent (13 divided by 45).
That is, only about 1/3 of my "subscribers" actually read an article when this figure used to be 45 percent (almost half).
My number or "reads" among my subscribers has decreased by almost 30 percent. This affects my "reach" and influence.
I've heard from other Substack authors that they have noticed the same decline in their "Open Rates."
Just as a point of info, my open rates for posts that are mostly free (as in mostly above the paywall) has hovered consistently from 30-33%. This that go only to my paying subscribers are consistently 66%. None of those number have changed much in the past year, even though people becoming paid subscribers has fallen off a cliff.
I get email versions of most of the substack offerings I subscribe to, but I usually delete them without opening simply because I have already read them on the site.
What is the average “Open Rate” for a Substack author today?
What was the average “Open Rate” for a Substack author in 2020 and 2021?
What is the average number of “reads” for a Substack author today?
What was the average number in 2020 and 2021?
How many new subscriptions does a typical Substack article generate today?
How many new subscriptions did a typical Substack article generate in 2020 and 2021?
Of Substack authors who have been publishing for at least four years, on average how many new subscriptions did these authors generate per month in 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024?
What story generated the most “reads” in Substack history and what is this number?
What story generated the largest number of “cross-posts” in Substack history and what is this number?
What is the largest source of “new subscribers” for Substack authors?
Is my estimate that 20 percent of Substack authors are “Covid contrarians” or “freedom writers” wrong? Is this percentage perhaps higher?
Is Substack facing pressure from outside sources to censor or suppress certain content or authors?
If so, who is applying this pressure and why?
Note: Readers are invited to submit their own questions about Substack metrics.
Just to close this out in the moment - I will make an effort to answer each and every question posed. Ready" (Tis a shame Substack doesn't allow for italics in comments or ways to better communicate while they are busy with other flux bullshit versus that which would proffer better communication):
What is the average “Open Rate” for a Substack author today?
From personal experience my open rate has been diminishing.
What was the average “Open Rate” for a Substack author in 2020 and 2021?
Are you probing about the evolution of the forum with this question - who cares!
What is the average number of “reads” for a Substack author today?
Give me a break - that depends and really is not a good indicator of veracity.
What was the average number in 2020 and 2021?
Now you are splitting hairs - what is the point of that?
How many new subscriptions does a typical Substack article generate today?
What info will be gleamed from the answer to this query?
How many new subscriptions did a typical Substack article generate in 2020 and 2021?
splitting hairs further
Of Substack authors who have been publishing for at least four years, on average how many new subscriptions did these authors generate per month in 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024?
I could share my data on this, and I don't know the answer myself, but I started publishing in 2023 I think and if you want the data, then I will share - even though I am small scale in readers and views
What story generated the most “reads” in Substack history and what is this number?
I'm curious about this as well - it would be telling
What story generated the largest number of “cross-posts” in Substack history and what is this number?
See above
What is the largest source of “new subscribers” for Substack authors?
This question needs elucidation
Is my estimate that 20 percent of Substack authors are “Covid contrarians” or “freedom writers” wrong? Is this percentage perhaps higher?
How is that defined - but I think you are somewhat accurate in the current moment
Is Substack facing pressure from outside sources to censor or suppress certain content or authors?
DUH - the answer to this is yes.
If so, who is applying this pressure and why?
You know Bill - so to bad my responses couldn't be in "italics", but I have responded in good faith and better times beckon with or without SubStack I reckon.
Substack has been a great blessing for me, as I get to consume a ton of content that is incredibly informative and makes me think about world events in a different way. And Bill, you are high up the list of my favorite substackers because of your journalist background and brutally honest approach.
I wish you had as many paid subscribers as some of the big names, but you are definitely making a difference with the people you have now and I, for one, thank you for your work.
Yes, but you need money, as does everyone else on this planet, in order to live (unless you happen to be part of an isolated indigenous community in some extremely remote rainforest that is still unknown to the "civilized" world, and God knows there are precious few human beings who are in that situation.)
The key is growing the 7 million number with people who are starting with a 'blank' slate of 'Stacks (and can therefore subscribe to multiple). For me, this has been difficult since I'm effectively still banned on Twitter and don't use FB.
When people ask me what I do, the most common response I get is "What's Substack?"
FWIW, If there's a substack that I think will further the awakening of a friend, I forward it to them. I have no clue if it helps, pisses them off, or if they even read them, but I'm giving it the old college try. FYI, all my friends are dumbocraps, 'cause that's all that live around here. 😢
I agree with you, I think, anyway. Berenson's easy - he's more of a well-known name than you are. Ditto Matt Taibi, Michael Shellenberger, et al. That’s definitely part of it.
I think the idea of an on-line newspaper or magazine could work - especially if it's all human-written and curated. AI is taking over - I doubt there will be many journalists left - sooner rather than later. I've already seen too much of it on youtube, though many people can’t seem to tell - same with music. Did much of humanity go deaf and blind to actual human voices and human writing?
A lot of people are seriously broke these days, though, and that’s going to be an issue.
What makes the hypothetical new place special enough to warrant 7-10$ per month? What's special about it?
Tease of my idea: You won't have to pay $7 or $10/month for one writer. You'll pay a nickel for every article you like. You'll have a buffet of a lot more great and interesting writers - writing on every topic imaginable.
My feeling for a while has been that dissident Substack writers will need to consolidate into one publication for one price. Are you familiar with Do What You're Told? It is a Substack site that aggregates dissident voices. Something along those lines.
There is a paid option but I believe the money goes to the creators of DWYT, but there is an opportunity for smaller Substack writers to band together and create for one site and distribute the payment.
There's probably a couple thousand people world-wide who would be interested in excellent articles on political astrology. We could find out. People are interested in thousands of topics - and don't get many good stories about their greatest interests.
Isn't that the Medium model? They were definitely having issues with their monetization strategy too. And their algo was all over the place mostly recommending clickbait and marketing material. We end up back with the Netflix, Youtube, etc monthly fee for access to all content model with maybe an extra tip jar and premium options. Video platforms usually make use of all of the above leaving it open to users how they wish to support their favorite performing monkeys.
Let's say I'm a reader who reads a modest list, considering, of Substacks devoted to rigorous truth-telling in the sphere of this our Plague Era and everything related to this bad-times cycle as part of the usual course of human history, and finances limit me to a bare handful of paid subscriptions.
So I've had to choose very carefully in an area where everyone is really writing about the same things, and I therefore support those I feel inclined to trust, even though they're all anonymous and who the hell knows really who any of them are? I just gotta go by instinct and by the elegant simplicity of their prose, and their wit and/or savage skewering of idiocies, or because they've managed to make me feel warmly towards them, and in each case I appreciate their honesty and willingness to go against what their generally devoted readership might sometimes want from them, if factuality or common sense demand that. I am willing to pay for their distinctive voices in a crowded, crowded realm.
So let's say, just for the heck of it, that renewal time is approaching and I know they won't miss my own little tiny contribution towards their lakeside estates. I can still read most of their stuff for free anyway and although I pay so I can read all of it, maybe someone else could use my money more.
What in your own work demonstrates to me, the ordinary reader, that you're a worthy and comparable alternative to what I pay for now? What will make me pay for you?
This is a good analysis of the thought process that must play out among Substack readers. As for why someone should pay for my content and not others, that's up to them - and could be dozens of reasons. You'd have to read a good sample of my articles and decide for yourself if these are important articles/commentaries.
I can think of a couple of topics that separate me from most Substack authors:
- My focus on the "early spread" hypothesis - and research to develop evidence of this theory.
- My focus on the importance of the "embalmers clots," which are not being investigated by authorities.
- My long-time focus on Biden's dementia not being the real scandal; the real scandal is the cover-up of this obvious condition by authorities and the MSM.
- My willingness to explore the possibility that "something has changed" at Substack (todays's article and several others).
... But I've written many more original pieces (for example, my focus on school closings pre-Covid and the antibody results among sailors on three Naval vessels).
Writing about these topics might make someone pay for my newsletter.
My free subscriber list has absolutely EXPLODED but I have declined a lot in paid subscribers and donations.
It has become very apparent that I can no longer support myself writing on Substack. Unfortunately this means that I have had to cut back on my writing.
The Substack business model only caters to:
-famous people
-writers who bring a client list with them already
-intelligence assets with fake subscribers
Substack knows this which is why it has structured its business model to cater to these people. This is deliberate, otherwise it would have introduced more options for smaller players like us (such as subscribe to 2-in-1 etc.).
Thanks, Excess Deaths AU. I wouldn't be writing pieces exploring this hypothesis if I hadn't received many similar anecdotes from other "contrarian" Substack authors.
Writing about trends on Substack is probably ... yet another taboo or dangerous topic.
Hi Bill! I am not subscribed to Alex Berensen.. I’m not sure how I found you.. but Im not subscribed to Alex. I like reading your journalism style and subject matter.. Maybe you’re attracting 76 yo retired female nurses? lol! That’s me! I’m a farmer’s wife too, Who helps manage our 600 acre crop farm in Michigan. I agree with your deductions.. there are only so many writers that I can subscribe to and fewer less to support as a paid subscriber.. which I am .. but not a paid subscriber with you yet.. 🧐 why can’t there be an annual subscriber fee like for a magazine or newspaper?? I want to be a paid subscriber to a lot of you.. but I can only realistically afford .. hmm.. about 4… Peter McCullough, Marianne Williamson, Joseph mercola, Epoch Times, ….. maybe I can support one more.. lol! 😂 Substack is the answer to what us freedom fighters are needing to stay on the same page so to speak .. so we can get the words we want repeated out there in our own little corner of the world! I absolutely love so many of the Substack writers! I would like an answer to your questions also.. I know we (readers) are collectively a force to reckoned with … but we need you freedom writers to keep leading the way with your information styles to provide us direction… take our energy to the next level for the highest good of ourselves and our country. I love you Bill! You’re asking the right questions!
Same problem. As we've talked about, Bill, I've been writing here since the summer of 2022, and my subscriber base was growing consistently (both paid and free). Then this spring, growth flatlined and now has recently started descending slowly. I'm not doing anything differently, so I don't know how to explain it. But, as of the past month, I've been going backward!
While I write mostly on our slow-rolling economic collapse, I also write from time to time about Covid as one who got fired for refusing the vaccine. I'm not aware of my counter-culture writing on economics getting censored, but I know for a fact all of my writing on Covid was getting censored. I know because Google wrote and told me so, and I know because publishers that were getting 500,000 reads off each of my Covid articles stopped carrying the articles and told me to restrict myself to other topics because Google was seriously downgrading their site in search-engine results over those popular articles!
Thanks for this compelling - and disturbing - personal intelligence, David. The Censors are NOT throttling back. It looks like they are ramping up. For a couple of years - for some reason - they largely left Substack alone. I think they are now plotting how to scuttle the reach and influence of the "dissident" class of Substack authors.
To me, it simply doesn't fit the m.o. of these people and organizations that they'd simply ignore Substack - when it has 35 million subscribers and the vast majority of the important "contrarian" writers.
Great post Bill. I think you've stepped in something and it ain't pretty. The numbers are telling us that there is funny business afoot for sure. I've been reading Substacks for years and have wanted to see how things evolve before putting my scarce time and energy into producing my content here in light of the censorship that seems to creep into everything now. Nostr is clearly the only censorship proof solution but barely anyone knows about it yet. Accepting bitcoin via Lightning is also the solution for transacting peer2peer (I know how to integrate subscription billing with lightning as well) but again very few are aware or know how to get set up. Let me know if you'd like to discuss more about how we can get 7 million+ intelligent freedom focused readers together in a truly censorship proof technology "stack" ... maybe it's called free-dem-stack.
One thought/observation. While yes I am a covid contrarian, I do not classify my self as a contrarian, anti government ( I am) covid is not my main focus. I am pro individual rights and freedom. I am against human ownership ershipby I dividuals or a group of Individuals - government. If I have to choose a label it would be I am against authoritarianism and the use of violence to implement an idea or agenda. People that want freedom IMO either pick a narrow label or are anti this or that or contrarian this or that. We cordon ourselves into a narrow alley and its easy for them to beat us about the head. With the vast majority being fully indoctrinated at the government indoctrination centers anything anti government grates against what they've been taught. 20 plus years of being deeply involved in a political party and 20plus out and just observation and talking to people of all stripes I have come to the conclusion words we use are potent.
While I see little if any use for government if I say that that way I am written off as a nut job (probably am) when I tell people I'm against authoritarianism and violence it goes down much easier. It's just hard for them to support either authoritarianism or violence or human ownership. Once i establish that I am not at least a totsl nut job and we actually agree on basics it's far easier to get them on my road to freedom. We need to paint with broad strokes to draw people into our way of thinking. Being against human ownership, authoritarianism and violence appeals to a wide audience, nearly everyone.
Our owners have done a great job with words and labels. We need to look, learn and use that against them. I feel my against those three pillars of government indoctrination does that. It plants the seed, and most common people will water and grow that seed. People like pelosi, Biden will not change however their rank and file followers can be moved. I would contend 7 million is a low number, I would bet when approached with being against authoritarianism, violence and human ownership that number grows to nearly everyone on substack. While people like Robert Reich support authoritarianism, violence and human ownership when approached this way it exposes them for what thay are and their denials mean nothing vs their blabbering about freedom etc...
I found this post from a post you made on El Gato's post and finally decided to follow one of your links. I see you posting all the time another stacks I read.
It's interesting that you talk about a set of contrarian websites that people follow. I do think it's some of that, but I follow these sites because of the intellectual honesty. Many of the contrarian websites as you call them are poking at the Democrats and there's lots to poke at. However, when the Republicans are back in power, there will be a lot to poke at there.
El Gato is amazing in his ability to step back and look at the big picture for patterns. Alex calls it like he sees it. Nellie Bowles is wittily sarcastic. Taibbi calls it like he sees it. Ditto Shellenberger and Michael Tracey. Vinay is a crystal clear voice of medical reason. Jay is a scientist who ended up having to fight censorship.
I've run out of time for this post and will think about this some more. Society needs reporters that report facts and analyze trends so figuring out how we are going to support you matters.
This is what the mainstream media did prior to 20 years ago. It wasn't perfect, but media wasn't the activism that it is today.
Substack reporting may turn out to be a similar problem like the music industry. The top musicians in the world make all the money because somehow they resonate with their audience. Really talented and amazing musicians that for some reason don't quite resonate, make very little.
The thing about the old newspaper model was there was a stable of reporters, and at any given time, one of them might see something and report on it, and then at a different time, a different reporter will see something else and report on that. But we, the subscribers, all paid the newspaper, who paid for the reporters to be on staff. I for one would be happy to pay for a pool of substackers to be on staff.
Thanks for following the link and reading the article. I enjoyed your comments. We really need more "citizen journalists" than people who graduated from journalism schools or have worked at captured news organizations for decades. We can write all of them off.
"Journalism" is not rocket science - anyone with curiosity and basic writing skills can do it. Somehow we have to provide better incentives for the people who will write the type stories that people need to see.
Alex Berenson writes popular books, and is on multiple radio shows as a guest. Maybe he is a guest in TV also, I don’t know. He promotes his Substack in these appearances and interviews.
Alex definitely has many "branding" advantages most Substack authors don't. He also had a large following on Twitter, which I've never had. Basically, I started from scratch or was an unknown commodity when I began my Substack newsletter in September 2022.
Still, two years should be enough time for someone like me to make some kind of decent-sized splash and raise my "brand awareness." The lesson from my case study is that you can work 50 hours week and promote your writing at 50 more-popular Substacks ... and you're still not going to be able to "break through" to even the AA level, much less the Big Leagues of the Writer/Pundit world.
Basically, I think I would have had double the subscribers and be a much-better known brand brand or writer if "something" hadn't have changed on Substack ... But I admit this might just be paranoia on my part ... and my "Spider Sense" could be off here.
Reminder to self: This article lists about 10 different Substack newsletters I enjoy. Still, as they say, one should never start listing names because you’re going to leave off a dozen people you really like and support and whose feeling you do not want to hurt.
Put it this way, there's dozens of great Substack authors I read on a regular basis. I want them all to do well ... as well as authors I've yet to discover and hope, one day, will reach large numbers of readers ... and make a difference.
It's hard keeping up with all the stuff you want to read, especially when you're also writing! There's far too many articles in my inbox that end up going totally unread because of the sheer volume. (And obviously not everybody is writing stuff that interests me 100% of the time)
I am overwhelmed too. I have to be fairly ruthless with what I read. I don't subscribe to the popular authors mentioned either.
But you subscribe to "Bill Rice, Jr's Newsletter!" I'm flattered, Wilson!
I think you do a good job.
👍
I no longer subscribe to Berenson or Kirsch. (Never paid.) I found they became horribly boring in the long run. I also unsubscribed from Dr. Paul Alexander, yep, he got boring, too. I only still subscribe to Malone (not paid), because he has some interesting "insider" info sometimes. Many times I just delete his articles. Meryl Nass, too. IMHO, she gets a little full of herself sometimes.
So, I find it fascinating that you want to be like them. I enjoy most of your articles, you cover many things that are way more interesting to common people than the aforementioned writers. That being said, none of this raises the amount of money I get paid, compared to my monthly bills and I'm constantly trying to come up with something I could do on my own to make extra money, with way less luck than you have had. In the last year, I have been able to make approximately an extra $90 minus expenses. Wheeeee. 😳😖
Don't tell anybody, but I like my content better than most of the content I see from those "five Substack all-stars." I just focussed on them because I had subscription data from their newsletters and they do, roughly, write about some of the same topics.
Thanks for your support and reading my stuff!
*takes that personally*
j/k
I’m not clever enough to know what your comment means. I think you are one of the authors that I intend to subscribe to. I don’t want to use a regular credit card because of theft. So one of these days I’ll get around to using a pre paid for several substacks. I do feel guilty for reading and commenting on substacks that I haven’t subscribed to.
Was just a joke! Although I obviously appreciate all paid subscriptions (since that's what I do for money these days), I don't want anybody to ever feel guilty about reading for free -- I was writing for free for over a year! :)
Of the million (not really) substack authors I "subscribe" to, you and Chris Bray are the 2 that I read everything published. Love ya both!
My articles will always be free for anyone to view even if they are not subscribers. However I restrict comments to paid subs mainly because 1. I cannot afford to support myself with my writing anymore (my free subs have exploded but paid subs have declined), and 2. if anyone threatens violence or writes something stupid I will be liable under Australian law.
I just do not have time to babysit comments sections and I am in enough trouble already.
I wonder if those people who restrict comments to "paid subscribers" ... get more paid subscribers because of this restriction. Someone needs to do a study!
Personally, I'm keeping my Comments Section open to everyone. You never know when you can get a huge news tip or fascinating tidbit from your readers. Why limit this reader content to just the 4 percent of people who pay for subscriptions?
P.S. Many Substack posters seem to be smarter and better writers than we "pros." It's also a way for those people to "influence debates" or participate in important conversations ... because they are actually reaching large numbers of people via these Reader Comment sections.
(I think that's why most mainstream sites either abolished Reader Comment sections or restricted them to paid subscribers .... and then some employee "moderates" which comments they publish. I think these companies are afraid of the smart readers who would debunk that day's article).
Interesting! I always get frustrated when I can't comment b/c I'm not a paid subscriber--but you're SO RIGHT about not having time to babysit comments OMG. Damn. Food for thought.
Good points and very understandable. Here in this part of the Anglosphere we probably aren’t that far from gubmint censoring/enforcing bad think either.
👍
As a hypothetical thought exercise, what if Facebook/Meta acquired Substack? Does ANYONE think Substack would be the same after this? Substack as we know it - and need it - would be gone. Which would leave writers like myself with what platform to reach X thousands of readers/citizens?
For those who say this could never happen, it's already happened. Think of the "case study" of The Drudge Report. For years Drudge was a "contrarian" muck-racker, publishing articles and commentary that was off-limits in the captured mainstream press. That's WHY this website became one of the biggest and most influential on the Internet.
Then, seemingly over night, Drudge's editorial bent changed 180 degrees. Even to this day, nobody knows what happened to Drudge. But "something" definitely changed with that speech platform.
The same thing could happen to Substack. It might already be happening in surreptitious increments.
Zerohedge is another case in point. It is what it is. These things get swallowed up by bigger fish. At least the comments are still entertaining.
I think I've been banned for life from ZH. They didn't like my anti-Putin comments. Apparently, people who feed Beryllium Borscht to their adversaries or send them on short walks out of high windows are the superheroes of their world. At any rate, you CAN say the wrong thing and get permanently censored. (They stopped carrying all my articles, too, after years of publishing them.) All was fine until I didn't like Putin's War. I find it it kind of funny because they are the ones endlessly complaining about getting banned/censored by Twitter and other organizations. Turns out they're no better.
The story with Zerohedge is that they used to provide fairly decent alternative commentary on economics etc. And the conversation was interesting and informative. Then something happened. I assume they were bought out. Anyway, I never got around to participating there. I was getting my early articles cross-posted on The Burning Platform and people seemed to like them. RedefiningGod.com refers to Zerohedge as Putin friendly controlled opposition. This label is becoming more common now among most of the controlled opposition gatekeeping alt-media in general and I'll admit I get confused trying to work out why these pundits appear to be following an agenda and who they really work for. I would add Infowars, Tucker Carlson, Joe Rogan, Russel Brand etc to the list of suspect operators. They all end up moving in lockstep as if someone is pulling their strings.
You've got them about right. The guy who owns ZH is Bulgarian, living in Florida, I believe, and his Bulgarian father, according to what I read, helped fund ZH as a start up and he either wrote disinformation as a journalist in Bulgaria or as a Russian agent, and had some sort of connection with Putin. So, my perception is that once the US started distancing itself from Putin, ZH focused on its original role of being a strong promotional site for Putin and became a lot more political when they had, as you say, been more economically focused.
ZH is glad for any story on the US economy that makes the US look bad and is always trying to make the US and the West look entirely like the bad guys in Putin's War on Ukraine. Why the people you mention all throw in so much with Putin who kills all his detractors and imprisons dissidents just for using the word "war" is beyond me. That certainly isn't my idea of liberty. They seem to have a lot of very deep hatred for the US, and ZH feeds it all they can.
Clearly Putin is every bit as imperial and land-grabbing as the US at its worst, and he has far less regarded for civilian slaughter.
That's a fair assessment. Yuri Bezmenov told us about the demoralization campaign that would destroy America from within and we see that playing out, but at the same time I see the rise in what I think is genuine patriotism, not only in America, but all over Europe. Maybe the goal has been to coopt this genuine movement, to stall it, to cause rifts and division, and maybe blame some major terrorist event on this group as predicted in the Tom Clancy Splinter Cell series of videogames. While the left ran their havoc campaign in the streets of America during the summer of 2020, the right have been saddled with the Jan 6 fiasco that the left can easily label as an attempt to carry out a coup. The current American govt/NATO backed propaganda here in Europe is so strong that any mention of Putin or Russians results in frothing at the mouth calls for all out attack and it's not all wrong given Soviet and KGB history, but they'll react the same way at the mention of Trump. Not so with old Joe or any left wing leaders in other countries. And if we read these pro BRICS, pro Putin type propagandists we get the complete opposite, a fairy tale where BRICS nations will save us all from the evil American empire. In my opinion, we're dealing with one or two corporate entities that like to set up these conflicts that keep everyone busy while they run off with the money and maintain their position of power. Even so, I still get caught up in the 'game' picking sides. It's difficult to be neutral. We all have biases. I guess I would like to see an American style constitution applied to entire world and for the people to make sure that corruption cannot get a foothold in that system. And for that to happen people would have to be more informed and more actively interested in that goal than they are currently. For now, it looks like we're being taken to war possibly so a savior character or organization can step in at some point to establish peace.
El Gato this week had an article on "Anonymity." In his situation he makes a good argument, plus he posts cat memes.
Tucker Carlson appeared in Australia recently and slammed an Australian mainstream (leftist) journalist.
If only 7 million read Substack, of a western English-reading population of up to a billion (not counting how many Indian educated citizens read English), then we are an ignorable fringe, deplorable cult, according to our despicable PM.
We recently had Steve Kirsch and Dr. Peter McCullough in town for a conference (picketed by the rainbow fag-flaggers at the behest of CHEK-TV!)
My point is that these Substack authors have alternate income streams and support. It would be fun to do a forensic audit on Robert Malone's income since 2019. Without public support we will remain poor and politically irrelevant. Igor Chudov has shifted his commentary to his own server/website which a certain (non-misplaced) paranoia and understanding of Edward Snowden makes reasonable.
MORE SUBSTACK QUESTIONS ...
What percentage of Substack’s subscribers are Americans?
Excluding America, what nation has the most Substack subscribers?
What is the average “paid subscriber” percentage for a Substack author (mine is 4.89 percent).
Who are the current top 10 Substack authors judged by total subscribers?
Who are the current top 10 Substack authors judged by paid subscribers?
Of Substack’s 35 million subscribers, how many subscribe to at least 20 newsletters?
What was the mean number of Substack subscriptions for a user in 2020 and 2021?
What is the mean number of Substack subscriptions for a user today?
Substack ought to provide those statistics to you and every writer, and perhaps every reader.
This might help a bit:
https://www.startpage.com/search?q=who%20are%20the%20biggest%20substack%20authors
SUBSTACK QUESTIONS - FIRST TRANCHE ...
The key Substack metrics I’ve found in my research are that this platform has/had 35 million subscribers and 17,000 newsletter authors are being paid for their content. For my research, I’d love to have answers to these questions (one of three posts):
Has the 35 million number increased in the past year or so? What is the current number?
How many new paid authors have been added to the 17,000 figure?
How many total newsletter authors (free and paid) does the platform have?
How many Substack authors have at least 300 (my figure) paid subscribers?
How many Substack authors have at least 6,000 (my figure) total subscribers?
What is the average number of paid subscribers a Substack author has?
How many Substack authors have at least 1,000 paid subscribers?
Of the 17,000 “paid” Substack authors, how many have FEWER than 100 paid subscribers?
Is the number of authors who might be labelled “Covid contrarians” or “freedom writers” growing?
Has the percentage of this sub-set of “dissident” authors remained constant, increased or decreased in recent years?
What percentage of Substack subscribers pay for at least one subscription?
What is the average number of subscriptions a Substack subscriber has?
Is this figure increasing or declining or how has it changed in the past 18 months?
How many of Substack’s 35 million subscribers do not pay for at least one subscription?
If Substack starts censoring then the readers will plateau and then that will be the end of a good idea.
Simple Bill and tis folks like you that will track this - and if and when it happens, and you can report upon it, then odds are the currency of Substack will have peaked and then start diminishing as just another "good idea gone wrong"....that is the time to jump ship if you haven't already and frankly I hope it doesn't happen, but evidence lately suggests it is in the cards.
BK
Sadly if it goes this way - Substack will enrich the original founders, but then it will be like a dead goat in the field. Worthlessly lost.
And then the original founders, while full of momentary wealth will live out their lives wondering if they were a goat or just a scape.
They'll be made an offer they can't refuse... if you know what I mean.
It's nice to think they will live that way, but if they are the type to sell out on a good idea to make money, they'll live jetting between tropical islands and ski resorts and be deliciously happy because they haven't got enough soul to care ... IF that's the choice they make.
I haven't written about this metric in great detail yet, but this change also alarms me.
For at least the first 12 months of my Substack, my "Open Rate" was about 45 percent. This is the percentage of subscribers who got an email version of my articles and actually opened and then read said article.
For the last couple of months, my Open Rate has been about 32 percent.
One might think this is a decline of 13 percent (45 - 32), but it's actually a decline of 29 percent (13 divided by 45).
That is, only about 1/3 of my "subscribers" actually read an article when this figure used to be 45 percent (almost half).
My number or "reads" among my subscribers has decreased by almost 30 percent. This affects my "reach" and influence.
I've heard from other Substack authors that they have noticed the same decline in their "Open Rates."
Same rate decline here
Thanks for the feedback, Jessica.
Just as a point of info, my open rates for posts that are mostly free (as in mostly above the paywall) has hovered consistently from 30-33%. This that go only to my paying subscribers are consistently 66%. None of those number have changed much in the past year, even though people becoming paid subscribers has fallen off a cliff.
I get email versions of most of the substack offerings I subscribe to, but I usually delete them without opening simply because I have already read them on the site.
FINAL BATCH OF QUESTIONS ...
What is the average “Open Rate” for a Substack author today?
What was the average “Open Rate” for a Substack author in 2020 and 2021?
What is the average number of “reads” for a Substack author today?
What was the average number in 2020 and 2021?
How many new subscriptions does a typical Substack article generate today?
How many new subscriptions did a typical Substack article generate in 2020 and 2021?
Of Substack authors who have been publishing for at least four years, on average how many new subscriptions did these authors generate per month in 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024?
What story generated the most “reads” in Substack history and what is this number?
What story generated the largest number of “cross-posts” in Substack history and what is this number?
What is the largest source of “new subscribers” for Substack authors?
Is my estimate that 20 percent of Substack authors are “Covid contrarians” or “freedom writers” wrong? Is this percentage perhaps higher?
Is Substack facing pressure from outside sources to censor or suppress certain content or authors?
If so, who is applying this pressure and why?
Note: Readers are invited to submit their own questions about Substack metrics.
Just to close this out in the moment - I will make an effort to answer each and every question posed. Ready" (Tis a shame Substack doesn't allow for italics in comments or ways to better communicate while they are busy with other flux bullshit versus that which would proffer better communication):
What is the average “Open Rate” for a Substack author today?
From personal experience my open rate has been diminishing.
What was the average “Open Rate” for a Substack author in 2020 and 2021?
Are you probing about the evolution of the forum with this question - who cares!
What is the average number of “reads” for a Substack author today?
Give me a break - that depends and really is not a good indicator of veracity.
What was the average number in 2020 and 2021?
Now you are splitting hairs - what is the point of that?
How many new subscriptions does a typical Substack article generate today?
What info will be gleamed from the answer to this query?
How many new subscriptions did a typical Substack article generate in 2020 and 2021?
splitting hairs further
Of Substack authors who have been publishing for at least four years, on average how many new subscriptions did these authors generate per month in 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024?
I could share my data on this, and I don't know the answer myself, but I started publishing in 2023 I think and if you want the data, then I will share - even though I am small scale in readers and views
What story generated the most “reads” in Substack history and what is this number?
I'm curious about this as well - it would be telling
What story generated the largest number of “cross-posts” in Substack history and what is this number?
See above
What is the largest source of “new subscribers” for Substack authors?
This question needs elucidation
Is my estimate that 20 percent of Substack authors are “Covid contrarians” or “freedom writers” wrong? Is this percentage perhaps higher?
How is that defined - but I think you are somewhat accurate in the current moment
Is Substack facing pressure from outside sources to censor or suppress certain content or authors?
DUH - the answer to this is yes.
If so, who is applying this pressure and why?
You know Bill - so to bad my responses couldn't be in "italics", but I have responded in good faith and better times beckon with or without SubStack I reckon.
BK
Substack has been a great blessing for me, as I get to consume a ton of content that is incredibly informative and makes me think about world events in a different way. And Bill, you are high up the list of my favorite substackers because of your journalist background and brutally honest approach.
I wish you had as many paid subscribers as some of the big names, but you are definitely making a difference with the people you have now and I, for one, thank you for your work.
Thank you very much. I'm having fun and doing what I always wanted to do.
Yes, but you need money, as does everyone else on this planet, in order to live (unless you happen to be part of an isolated indigenous community in some extremely remote rainforest that is still unknown to the "civilized" world, and God knows there are precious few human beings who are in that situation.)
👍👍
The key is growing the 7 million number with people who are starting with a 'blank' slate of 'Stacks (and can therefore subscribe to multiple). For me, this has been difficult since I'm effectively still banned on Twitter and don't use FB.
When people ask me what I do, the most common response I get is "What's Substack?"
That's for sure. Growing the "pool" of Substack readers who think like us would help all of us.
Most people I talk to don't know what Substack is either. Still, the "opinion makers" and the influencers know all about it.
FWIW, If there's a substack that I think will further the awakening of a friend, I forward it to them. I have no clue if it helps, pisses them off, or if they even read them, but I'm giving it the old college try. FYI, all my friends are dumbocraps, 'cause that's all that live around here. 😢
I do the same and feel it's important to help people see however as you imply you can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink
I agree with you, I think, anyway. Berenson's easy - he's more of a well-known name than you are. Ditto Matt Taibi, Michael Shellenberger, et al. That’s definitely part of it.
I think the idea of an on-line newspaper or magazine could work - especially if it's all human-written and curated. AI is taking over - I doubt there will be many journalists left - sooner rather than later. I've already seen too much of it on youtube, though many people can’t seem to tell - same with music. Did much of humanity go deaf and blind to actual human voices and human writing?
A lot of people are seriously broke these days, though, and that’s going to be an issue.
What makes the hypothetical new place special enough to warrant 7-10$ per month? What's special about it?
I am genuinely intrigued.
Tease of my idea: You won't have to pay $7 or $10/month for one writer. You'll pay a nickel for every article you like. You'll have a buffet of a lot more great and interesting writers - writing on every topic imaginable.
My feeling for a while has been that dissident Substack writers will need to consolidate into one publication for one price. Are you familiar with Do What You're Told? It is a Substack site that aggregates dissident voices. Something along those lines.
Not familiar with that site, but I'll do some research. I like your idea of a group of dissident writers offering one site for their content.
There is a paid option but I believe the money goes to the creators of DWYT, but there is an opportunity for smaller Substack writers to band together and create for one site and distribute the payment.
In that case I'll be happy to write a political astrology blog. I could make 10, maybe 15 cents a month! Yes!
But seriously, I'd probably do it for free. Of course, that may be the reason we're all broke...
There's probably a couple thousand people world-wide who would be interested in excellent articles on political astrology. We could find out. People are interested in thousands of topics - and don't get many good stories about their greatest interests.
Isn't that the Medium model? They were definitely having issues with their monetization strategy too. And their algo was all over the place mostly recommending clickbait and marketing material. We end up back with the Netflix, Youtube, etc monthly fee for access to all content model with maybe an extra tip jar and premium options. Video platforms usually make use of all of the above leaving it open to users how they wish to support their favorite performing monkeys.
Let's say I'm a reader who reads a modest list, considering, of Substacks devoted to rigorous truth-telling in the sphere of this our Plague Era and everything related to this bad-times cycle as part of the usual course of human history, and finances limit me to a bare handful of paid subscriptions.
So I've had to choose very carefully in an area where everyone is really writing about the same things, and I therefore support those I feel inclined to trust, even though they're all anonymous and who the hell knows really who any of them are? I just gotta go by instinct and by the elegant simplicity of their prose, and their wit and/or savage skewering of idiocies, or because they've managed to make me feel warmly towards them, and in each case I appreciate their honesty and willingness to go against what their generally devoted readership might sometimes want from them, if factuality or common sense demand that. I am willing to pay for their distinctive voices in a crowded, crowded realm.
So let's say, just for the heck of it, that renewal time is approaching and I know they won't miss my own little tiny contribution towards their lakeside estates. I can still read most of their stuff for free anyway and although I pay so I can read all of it, maybe someone else could use my money more.
What in your own work demonstrates to me, the ordinary reader, that you're a worthy and comparable alternative to what I pay for now? What will make me pay for you?
This is a good analysis of the thought process that must play out among Substack readers. As for why someone should pay for my content and not others, that's up to them - and could be dozens of reasons. You'd have to read a good sample of my articles and decide for yourself if these are important articles/commentaries.
I can think of a couple of topics that separate me from most Substack authors:
- My focus on the "early spread" hypothesis - and research to develop evidence of this theory.
- My focus on the importance of the "embalmers clots," which are not being investigated by authorities.
- My long-time focus on Biden's dementia not being the real scandal; the real scandal is the cover-up of this obvious condition by authorities and the MSM.
- My willingness to explore the possibility that "something has changed" at Substack (todays's article and several others).
... But I've written many more original pieces (for example, my focus on school closings pre-Covid and the antibody results among sailors on three Naval vessels).
Writing about these topics might make someone pay for my newsletter.
Bill, I am interested in this.
My free subscriber list has absolutely EXPLODED but I have declined a lot in paid subscribers and donations.
It has become very apparent that I can no longer support myself writing on Substack. Unfortunately this means that I have had to cut back on my writing.
The Substack business model only caters to:
-famous people
-writers who bring a client list with them already
-intelligence assets with fake subscribers
Substack knows this which is why it has structured its business model to cater to these people. This is deliberate, otherwise it would have introduced more options for smaller players like us (such as subscribe to 2-in-1 etc.).
Best wishes.
Thanks, Excess Deaths AU. I wouldn't be writing pieces exploring this hypothesis if I hadn't received many similar anecdotes from other "contrarian" Substack authors.
Writing about trends on Substack is probably ... yet another taboo or dangerous topic.
Hi Bill! I am not subscribed to Alex Berensen.. I’m not sure how I found you.. but Im not subscribed to Alex. I like reading your journalism style and subject matter.. Maybe you’re attracting 76 yo retired female nurses? lol! That’s me! I’m a farmer’s wife too, Who helps manage our 600 acre crop farm in Michigan. I agree with your deductions.. there are only so many writers that I can subscribe to and fewer less to support as a paid subscriber.. which I am .. but not a paid subscriber with you yet.. 🧐 why can’t there be an annual subscriber fee like for a magazine or newspaper?? I want to be a paid subscriber to a lot of you.. but I can only realistically afford .. hmm.. about 4… Peter McCullough, Marianne Williamson, Joseph mercola, Epoch Times, ….. maybe I can support one more.. lol! 😂 Substack is the answer to what us freedom fighters are needing to stay on the same page so to speak .. so we can get the words we want repeated out there in our own little corner of the world! I absolutely love so many of the Substack writers! I would like an answer to your questions also.. I know we (readers) are collectively a force to reckoned with … but we need you freedom writers to keep leading the way with your information styles to provide us direction… take our energy to the next level for the highest good of ourselves and our country. I love you Bill! You’re asking the right questions!
Same problem. As we've talked about, Bill, I've been writing here since the summer of 2022, and my subscriber base was growing consistently (both paid and free). Then this spring, growth flatlined and now has recently started descending slowly. I'm not doing anything differently, so I don't know how to explain it. But, as of the past month, I've been going backward!
While I write mostly on our slow-rolling economic collapse, I also write from time to time about Covid as one who got fired for refusing the vaccine. I'm not aware of my counter-culture writing on economics getting censored, but I know for a fact all of my writing on Covid was getting censored. I know because Google wrote and told me so, and I know because publishers that were getting 500,000 reads off each of my Covid articles stopped carrying the articles and told me to restrict myself to other topics because Google was seriously downgrading their site in search-engine results over those popular articles!
Thanks for this compelling - and disturbing - personal intelligence, David. The Censors are NOT throttling back. It looks like they are ramping up. For a couple of years - for some reason - they largely left Substack alone. I think they are now plotting how to scuttle the reach and influence of the "dissident" class of Substack authors.
To me, it simply doesn't fit the m.o. of these people and organizations that they'd simply ignore Substack - when it has 35 million subscribers and the vast majority of the important "contrarian" writers.
Maybe it was a honeypot all along?
Great post Bill. I think you've stepped in something and it ain't pretty. The numbers are telling us that there is funny business afoot for sure. I've been reading Substacks for years and have wanted to see how things evolve before putting my scarce time and energy into producing my content here in light of the censorship that seems to creep into everything now. Nostr is clearly the only censorship proof solution but barely anyone knows about it yet. Accepting bitcoin via Lightning is also the solution for transacting peer2peer (I know how to integrate subscription billing with lightning as well) but again very few are aware or know how to get set up. Let me know if you'd like to discuss more about how we can get 7 million+ intelligent freedom focused readers together in a truly censorship proof technology "stack" ... maybe it's called free-dem-stack.
Let's stay in touch, Tao. I might have an idea that you could help me with. Thanks for your support - Bill
One thought/observation. While yes I am a covid contrarian, I do not classify my self as a contrarian, anti government ( I am) covid is not my main focus. I am pro individual rights and freedom. I am against human ownership ershipby I dividuals or a group of Individuals - government. If I have to choose a label it would be I am against authoritarianism and the use of violence to implement an idea or agenda. People that want freedom IMO either pick a narrow label or are anti this or that or contrarian this or that. We cordon ourselves into a narrow alley and its easy for them to beat us about the head. With the vast majority being fully indoctrinated at the government indoctrination centers anything anti government grates against what they've been taught. 20 plus years of being deeply involved in a political party and 20plus out and just observation and talking to people of all stripes I have come to the conclusion words we use are potent.
While I see little if any use for government if I say that that way I am written off as a nut job (probably am) when I tell people I'm against authoritarianism and violence it goes down much easier. It's just hard for them to support either authoritarianism or violence or human ownership. Once i establish that I am not at least a totsl nut job and we actually agree on basics it's far easier to get them on my road to freedom. We need to paint with broad strokes to draw people into our way of thinking. Being against human ownership, authoritarianism and violence appeals to a wide audience, nearly everyone.
Our owners have done a great job with words and labels. We need to look, learn and use that against them. I feel my against those three pillars of government indoctrination does that. It plants the seed, and most common people will water and grow that seed. People like pelosi, Biden will not change however their rank and file followers can be moved. I would contend 7 million is a low number, I would bet when approached with being against authoritarianism, violence and human ownership that number grows to nearly everyone on substack. While people like Robert Reich support authoritarianism, violence and human ownership when approached this way it exposes them for what thay are and their denials mean nothing vs their blabbering about freedom etc...
I found this post from a post you made on El Gato's post and finally decided to follow one of your links. I see you posting all the time another stacks I read.
It's interesting that you talk about a set of contrarian websites that people follow. I do think it's some of that, but I follow these sites because of the intellectual honesty. Many of the contrarian websites as you call them are poking at the Democrats and there's lots to poke at. However, when the Republicans are back in power, there will be a lot to poke at there.
El Gato is amazing in his ability to step back and look at the big picture for patterns. Alex calls it like he sees it. Nellie Bowles is wittily sarcastic. Taibbi calls it like he sees it. Ditto Shellenberger and Michael Tracey. Vinay is a crystal clear voice of medical reason. Jay is a scientist who ended up having to fight censorship.
I've run out of time for this post and will think about this some more. Society needs reporters that report facts and analyze trends so figuring out how we are going to support you matters.
This is what the mainstream media did prior to 20 years ago. It wasn't perfect, but media wasn't the activism that it is today.
Substack reporting may turn out to be a similar problem like the music industry. The top musicians in the world make all the money because somehow they resonate with their audience. Really talented and amazing musicians that for some reason don't quite resonate, make very little.
The thing about the old newspaper model was there was a stable of reporters, and at any given time, one of them might see something and report on it, and then at a different time, a different reporter will see something else and report on that. But we, the subscribers, all paid the newspaper, who paid for the reporters to be on staff. I for one would be happy to pay for a pool of substackers to be on staff.
Thanks for following the link and reading the article. I enjoyed your comments. We really need more "citizen journalists" than people who graduated from journalism schools or have worked at captured news organizations for decades. We can write all of them off.
"Journalism" is not rocket science - anyone with curiosity and basic writing skills can do it. Somehow we have to provide better incentives for the people who will write the type stories that people need to see.
Alex Berenson writes popular books, and is on multiple radio shows as a guest. Maybe he is a guest in TV also, I don’t know. He promotes his Substack in these appearances and interviews.
Alex definitely has many "branding" advantages most Substack authors don't. He also had a large following on Twitter, which I've never had. Basically, I started from scratch or was an unknown commodity when I began my Substack newsletter in September 2022.
Still, two years should be enough time for someone like me to make some kind of decent-sized splash and raise my "brand awareness." The lesson from my case study is that you can work 50 hours week and promote your writing at 50 more-popular Substacks ... and you're still not going to be able to "break through" to even the AA level, much less the Big Leagues of the Writer/Pundit world.
Basically, I think I would have had double the subscribers and be a much-better known brand brand or writer if "something" hadn't have changed on Substack ... But I admit this might just be paranoia on my part ... and my "Spider Sense" could be off here.