Any journalist or journalism platform is going to come to the attention of the Powers that Be if too many journalists start reaching too many citizens with stories that would blow up false narratives that threaten the world's real rulers.
This has already happened with Substack as we saw with that Center for Digital Hate campaign that this NGO launched against Substack. At the same time they launched this hit campaign, major news outlets like the Washington Post and the Atlantic came out with stories talking about how dangerous Substack was.
There was a petition signed by 100 Substack users, telling Substack to cease and desist whatever we writers were doing that was so terrible.
This all had to be orchestrated and coordinated.
The people who orchestrated and coordinated this campaign are still around and are still threatened by hundreds of potentially influential Substack authors.
IMO, the Powers that Be are NOT ignoring Substack. That's not their m.o.
Here's the text of an email I sent in December 2020...I didn't receive a response...
Date: Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 4:17 PM
Subject: Query re funders of the Center for Countering Digital Hate
For the attention of:
Mr Imran Ahmed, CEO, Center for Countering Digital Hate
Dear Mr Ahmed, the CCDH website notes CCDH "is a not-for-profit non governmental organisation (NGO) that is funded by philanthropic trusts and members of the public".
Mr Ahmed, can you please advise who has and is funding CCDH? It's important that funding sources are transparent, particularly when considering potential conflict of interest.
I look forward to your response on this matter.
Sincerely
Elizabeth Hart
Independent person investigating the over-use of vaccine products and conflicts of interest in vaccination policy
No reply. Par for the course. At least you tried. Who funds your work? I bet you don’t mind answering. I am funded by 280 subscribers and some ko-fi supporters and by my wife, a school teacher.
An important point. Compare and contrast to the salaried journalists (and "fact checkers") who are paid to protect the authorized narrative ... or not challenge any of these narratives.
I keep writing that the public should be more inclined to trust the "citizen journalists" - who are working for themselves; most aren't being paid hardly anything.
Someone on the Paul Offit article comments thread accused me of being an influencer and grifter etc, in insulting tones. When I persisted in asking for evidence to support the accusation, the comments seem to have disappeared.
There’s a group of key players who are the gatekeepers for vaccination - Paul Offit, Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, Art Caplan, David Gorski, ‘Reasonable Hank’, Stanley Plotkin, Heidi Larson, Anthony Fauci, and of course Bill Gates and others.
The term ‘vaccine hesitancy’ has been developed to label the questioners.
It was really dire before ‘Covid’, any questioning was quickly shut down or ignored. But now there are more people willing to challenge the status quo, after the blatant Covid scam, which should be clear to anyone with critical thinking skills…
IMO the rapidly-growing number of people who now ARE "vaccine hesitant" is a testimony to the importance of Substack.
Who was leading the movement to say people should question the Covid vaccines (and, now, increasingly, all vaccines)? It was the "Covid Contrarians" on Substack.
So the body of work on Substack IS filtering out into the mainstream.
This is why I think the Powers that Be HAVE turned more of their attention to the influence of Substack, or at least the cavalry of "resistance" that uses this platform as our beachhead.
IMO, "they" can't ignore this influence and are probably trying to suppress the reach and influence of the leading or most important contrarians.
One way to do this is to promote the writers who don't think like us.
Bonus Content. Here are some Substack subscriber or subscription numbers, according to Wikipedia:
"Substack reported 11,000 paid subscribers as of 2018, rising to 50,000 in 2019."
"... By November 2021, the platform said it had more than 500,000 paying subscribers, representing over one million subscriptions."
Note: This sentence suggests each paying subscriber had, on average, two paid subscriptions. Personally, I think most paid subscribers have, maybe 1 to 5 (or more) paid subscribers. A tiny percentage of users account for the vast majority of "paid" subscriptions.
"By November 2024, Substack had 4 million paid subscriptions."
"In March 2025, Substack announced that it had 5 million paid subscriptions."
Discussion/commentary/summary:
* Subscriptions on the platform grew from 500,000 in November 2021 to 5 million by March 2025."
* Subscriptions increased from 500,000 to 4.5 million in 3 1/2 years. Subscription growth increased at least 9-fold in 42 months.
* The largest and fastest growth occurred in the Covid years of March 2020 to the end of 2021.
However, the rate of total users (and content creators) might be even larger in recent months - especially in the 7 months since President Trump was re-elected.
For an example of the hostility met by people who question vaccination policy and practice, check out the comments on Paul Offit’s latest post: RFK Jr. Isn’t Bothered by Measles - by Paul Offit: https://pauloffit.substack.com/p/rfk-jr-isnt-bothered-by-measles
It’s a certain type of person who engages in such vitriol and ad hominem attacks, while cowardly hiding behind pseudonyms.
More re Imran Ahmed and the Center for Countering Digital Hate: They Came for Me—and for Free Speech in America. Now CCDH, Imran Ahmed, and Their U.S. Allies Will Face Justice.
It’s about TED censoring speakers who “attack political and public health leaders”.
My life’s work is about challenging “political and public health leaders” who have imposed vaccination mandates upon people living in supposed ‘free countries’, stealing personal autonomy and bodily integrity.
People need to wake up and realise we are living under tyranny…
Time for millions/billions of people to wake up and demand accountability from those who are illegitimately ruling the people without our voluntary informed consent.
Time also to pushback against censorship which has been rife for years. That’s why we’re in this disastrous situation with ‘Covid’. As I know from personal experience, people questioning vaccination policy and practice have been shut down for years. Who is responsible for this censorship of discussion? Who benefited from the silencing of debate…in our supposed ‘free countries’…?
Keep pounding home this message, Elizabeth. Everybody in the legacy media thinks exactly alike. That's really why Substack experienced spectacular growth beginning in 2020.
Due to the censorship in the mainstream media, Facebook, ‘fact checkers’ etc, the criminals who deliberately manufactured the ‘Covid’ crisis stole the freedom of the people - this is the biggest crime of all time.
As well as trillions of dollars being stolen from the people, medical interventions were mandated, ie the COVID-19 vaccine products.
Mandated medical interventions in supposed free countries, and ‘our’ captured institutions collaborated with this assault upon the people.
Politicians, bureaucrats, the medical profession, the scientific establishment, the legal system, and even the churches, all collaborated with this travesty.
But it couldn’t have been done without the participation of the mainstream and social media, which spread the fear-mongering propaganda from ‘the authorities’ and suppressed dissent. We have no authentic fourth estate to shine a light in dark corners. We have to expose and fight against the treachery ourselves.
So few are aware of the depths of vaccine censorship. If you read the fine print of what is allowed and not allowed in a TED talk, you’ll find that questioning vaccines is not allowed.
Even formerly respected science journals such as Nature magazine no longer permit questioning vaccines.
While it is not explicit about vaccines in particular, there is weasel language about only saying things "credible sciebtists" support, only using "published, peer reviewed work" (which we know is corruot garbage these days), as well as not allowing political topics (guideline #2).
The issue is that you can talk about vaccines only as safe or effective. You can’t question established science, public health narrative, etc. There are fact checkers and gate keepers that prevent this. You can’t get it approved. You can look up TEDx content guidelines for science or vaccines to find their guidelines.
You can also search high and low for any U.S. TED talks that question vaccine safety. You won’t find one.
One might argue that the contrarian audience is comfortable in their skins and that the liberals are more of a herd creature and need the security of an echo chamber.
If they have yet to make a profit, eventually they will either have to sell, or start running ads on your timeline. My guess is they are staying away from the ad selling model, because they know thats why alot of there usr base is here. The influx and pushing of corporate shill voices to me seems a strategy to inflate there user numbers so they can sell for billions and ride off into the sunset. That seems to be the model for tech, come up with a great app, then when it gets popular sell it to some corporate entity or investment fund, who in turn destroys it. I expect substack is headed to being sold off to twitter or meta and just becoming another place to dump ads ro generate revenue. I plan to stick around until that day.
I don't think Substack's current owners are going to push advertising. However, if they ever sell, I would expect the new owners to do this. And it will be all the captured companies that subsidize the "corporate shill voices."
I'm like you. Use Substack as much as you can while we can still reach a few people who have sense or critical-thinking abilities.
Bill, maybe it is time for a SubStack competitor, if they have become co-opted?
Or perhaps a parallel SubStack, like the Bee 🐝 and not the Bee. 🐝
I know I don’t like it when randomly that former Clinton cabinet member blowhard shows up in my feed, mercifully I can’t think of his name right now, has some professorship in the California State University system.
This article was emailed to 7,500 of my subscribers.
As of 11 a.m., just 13 of those readers have made comments. Most of the Reader Comments are from me.
One Reader Comment by Elizabeth Hart got 13 "likes" (one from me). Not counting my "likes," most comments get 1 to 4 "likes."
Take-away: Hardly anyone is reading the Reader Comments at my newsletter and only 1-in-577 of my subscribers make a Reader Comment.
I used to get (significantly) more comments and the people who made comments used to get more likes ... and this is when I had fewer total subscribers .... Just another "little change" I've noticed.
I think my Reader Comments might be more "dangerous" or provocative to the Powers that Be than my stories proper ... so this trend might "fit" my paranoid (?) theory that something might be happening to limit the views of Reader Comments at my newsletter.
I can use myself and this article as an example that supports my conviction that "something has changed on Substack."
If I had posted this story 20 months ago, I know (from studying my subscriber metrics) that it would have generated at least 12 new subscribers (my average back then). Articles back then would produce 3 to 50 new subscribers.
Approximately 18 hours since posting this article, this piece has not produced any subscribers (free or paid).
In April 2025, I posted 14 original stories. Seven of those articles produced zero new subscribers and only one produced more than three (free) subscribers (five).
In April, my 14 new stories produced one new paid subscriber ($6/month).
I netted about $5.40 in new paid subscriptions from maybe 200 hours of work.
Another weird trend is my articles today are reaching about the same number of readers I reached in June 2022. But I do have almost double the number of total subscribes I had 23 months ago. So more subscribers has barely increased my "audience reach," which is a key metric for writers who hope to influence society debates or highlight certain taboo subjects.
(One question I have: Are these "subscribers" I have really real people?)
In contrast, the "liberal" writers like Robert Reich, Paul Krugman and Heather Cox Richardson have added from 320,000 to 600,000 total subscribers in the past four months! I assume that 4 percent of those subscribers are "paid" so one can do the math on how much Substack revenue these authors are generating.
My main take-away: One cohort of Substack authors (almost all liberal or "Statist") is doing fantastic. My cohort ("The Covid Contrarians") ... not so much.
Another alarming personal metric/trend: My number of paid subscribers peaked at 310 on August 23, 2024. I now have 280 paid subscribers. I have lost 30 (net) paid subscribers in less than 9 months (a decrease of 9.7 percent).
Since this rate of "losing paid subscribers" is dramatically accelerating, by the end of 2025, I will probably have only 250 paid subscribers.
Also, my "paid" ratio has decreased from 4.7 percent to 3.7 percent.
I've also noted a dramatic decrease in the number of "likes" and Reader Comments my articles now generate compared to earlier periods of time. This also makes me wonder how many people are actually seeing my articles?
Bonus Content. Here are some Substack subscriber or subscription numbers, according to Wikipedia:
"Substack reported 11,000 paid subscribers as of 2018, rising to 50,000 in 2019."
"... By November 2021, the platform said it had more than 500,000 paying subscribers, representing over one million subscriptions."
Note: This sentence suggests each paying subscriber had, on average, two paid subscriptions. Personally, I think most paid subscribers have, maybe 1 to 5 paid subscribers.
"By November 2024, Substack had 4 million paid subscriptions."
"In March 2025, Substack announced that it had 5 million paid subscriptions."
Discussion/commentary/summary:
* Subscriptions on the platform grew from 500,000 in November 2021 to 5 million by March 2025."
* Subscriptions increased from 500,000 to 4.5 million in 3 1/2 years. Subscription growth increased at least 9-fold in 42 months.
* The largest and fastest growth occurred in the Covid years of March 2020 to the end of 2021.
However, the rate of total users (and content creators) might be even larger in recent months - especially in the 7 months since President Trump was re-elected.
since this is 5GW it isn't surprising that the globo homo version is doing better than the truth tellers/ truth seekers. Maybe the money supply creating the incredible subscriber counts for people like robert reich will dry up a little now that there may be some accountability and the globo homo left can't steal from the treasury for awhile at least.
They've certainly positioned the company where they could sell it for a ton of money if they wanted to. Whoever buys it is probably going to attack all the "Covid Contrarians." They might be doing that already.
It wouldn't necessarily have to be Substack. Substack depends on emails going out so what company or companies can screw with the emails or your Internet access? Also the payment processors and bank networks.
Any journalist or journalism platform is going to come to the attention of the Powers that Be if too many journalists start reaching too many citizens with stories that would blow up false narratives that threaten the world's real rulers.
This has already happened with Substack as we saw with that Center for Digital Hate campaign that this NGO launched against Substack. At the same time they launched this hit campaign, major news outlets like the Washington Post and the Atlantic came out with stories talking about how dangerous Substack was.
There was a petition signed by 100 Substack users, telling Substack to cease and desist whatever we writers were doing that was so terrible.
This all had to be orchestrated and coordinated.
The people who orchestrated and coordinated this campaign are still around and are still threatened by hundreds of potentially influential Substack authors.
IMO, the Powers that Be are NOT ignoring Substack. That's not their m.o.
Re the Center for Countering Digital Hate...
Here's the text of an email I sent in December 2020...I didn't receive a response...
Date: Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 4:17 PM
Subject: Query re funders of the Center for Countering Digital Hate
For the attention of:
Mr Imran Ahmed, CEO, Center for Countering Digital Hate
Dear Mr Ahmed, the CCDH website notes CCDH "is a not-for-profit non governmental organisation (NGO) that is funded by philanthropic trusts and members of the public".
Mr Ahmed, can you please advise who has and is funding CCDH? It's important that funding sources are transparent, particularly when considering potential conflict of interest.
I look forward to your response on this matter.
Sincerely
Elizabeth Hart
Independent person investigating the over-use of vaccine products and conflicts of interest in vaccination policy
No reply. Par for the course. At least you tried. Who funds your work? I bet you don’t mind answering. I am funded by 280 subscribers and some ko-fi supporters and by my wife, a school teacher.
My work is voluntary, I don't seek payment.
An important point. Compare and contrast to the salaried journalists (and "fact checkers") who are paid to protect the authorized narrative ... or not challenge any of these narratives.
I keep writing that the public should be more inclined to trust the "citizen journalists" - who are working for themselves; most aren't being paid hardly anything.
Someone on the Paul Offit article comments thread accused me of being an influencer and grifter etc, in insulting tones. When I persisted in asking for evidence to support the accusation, the comments seem to have disappeared.
There’s a group of key players who are the gatekeepers for vaccination - Paul Offit, Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, Art Caplan, David Gorski, ‘Reasonable Hank’, Stanley Plotkin, Heidi Larson, Anthony Fauci, and of course Bill Gates and others.
The term ‘vaccine hesitancy’ has been developed to label the questioners.
It was really dire before ‘Covid’, any questioning was quickly shut down or ignored. But now there are more people willing to challenge the status quo, after the blatant Covid scam, which should be clear to anyone with critical thinking skills…
IMO the rapidly-growing number of people who now ARE "vaccine hesitant" is a testimony to the importance of Substack.
Who was leading the movement to say people should question the Covid vaccines (and, now, increasingly, all vaccines)? It was the "Covid Contrarians" on Substack.
So the body of work on Substack IS filtering out into the mainstream.
This is why I think the Powers that Be HAVE turned more of their attention to the influence of Substack, or at least the cavalry of "resistance" that uses this platform as our beachhead.
IMO, "they" can't ignore this influence and are probably trying to suppress the reach and influence of the leading or most important contrarians.
One way to do this is to promote the writers who don't think like us.
Bonus Content. Here are some Substack subscriber or subscription numbers, according to Wikipedia:
"Substack reported 11,000 paid subscribers as of 2018, rising to 50,000 in 2019."
"... By November 2021, the platform said it had more than 500,000 paying subscribers, representing over one million subscriptions."
Note: This sentence suggests each paying subscriber had, on average, two paid subscriptions. Personally, I think most paid subscribers have, maybe 1 to 5 (or more) paid subscribers. A tiny percentage of users account for the vast majority of "paid" subscriptions.
"By November 2024, Substack had 4 million paid subscriptions."
"In March 2025, Substack announced that it had 5 million paid subscriptions."
Discussion/commentary/summary:
* Subscriptions on the platform grew from 500,000 in November 2021 to 5 million by March 2025."
* Subscriptions increased from 500,000 to 4.5 million in 3 1/2 years. Subscription growth increased at least 9-fold in 42 months.
* The largest and fastest growth occurred in the Covid years of March 2020 to the end of 2021.
However, the rate of total users (and content creators) might be even larger in recent months - especially in the 7 months since President Trump was re-elected.
For an example of the hostility met by people who question vaccination policy and practice, check out the comments on Paul Offit’s latest post: RFK Jr. Isn’t Bothered by Measles - by Paul Offit: https://pauloffit.substack.com/p/rfk-jr-isnt-bothered-by-measles
It’s a certain type of person who engages in such vitriol and ad hominem attacks, while cowardly hiding behind pseudonyms.
More re Imran Ahmed and the Center for Countering Digital Hate: They Came for Me—and for Free Speech in America. Now CCDH, Imran Ahmed, and Their U.S. Allies Will Face Justice.
https://sayerji.substack.com/p/they-came-for-meand-for-free-speech
Re the “Censorship Industrial Complex.”
See Maryanne Demasi’s @maryannedemasi article today: When ideas become too dangerous to platform: https://blog.maryannedemasi.com/p/when-ideas-become-too-dangerous-to
It’s about TED censoring speakers who “attack political and public health leaders”.
My life’s work is about challenging “political and public health leaders” who have imposed vaccination mandates upon people living in supposed ‘free countries’, stealing personal autonomy and bodily integrity.
People need to wake up and realise we are living under tyranny…
Time for millions/billions of people to wake up and demand accountability from those who are illegitimately ruling the people without our voluntary informed consent.
Time also to pushback against censorship which has been rife for years. That’s why we’re in this disastrous situation with ‘Covid’. As I know from personal experience, people questioning vaccination policy and practice have been shut down for years. Who is responsible for this censorship of discussion? Who benefited from the silencing of debate…in our supposed ‘free countries’…?
Keep pounding home this message, Elizabeth. Everybody in the legacy media thinks exactly alike. That's really why Substack experienced spectacular growth beginning in 2020.
No Covid and there might not be a Substack today.
This is extremely serious Bill.
Due to the censorship in the mainstream media, Facebook, ‘fact checkers’ etc, the criminals who deliberately manufactured the ‘Covid’ crisis stole the freedom of the people - this is the biggest crime of all time.
As well as trillions of dollars being stolen from the people, medical interventions were mandated, ie the COVID-19 vaccine products.
Mandated medical interventions in supposed free countries, and ‘our’ captured institutions collaborated with this assault upon the people.
Politicians, bureaucrats, the medical profession, the scientific establishment, the legal system, and even the churches, all collaborated with this travesty.
But it couldn’t have been done without the participation of the mainstream and social media, which spread the fear-mongering propaganda from ‘the authorities’ and suppressed dissent. We have no authentic fourth estate to shine a light in dark corners. We have to expose and fight against the treachery ourselves.
Perfectly said. Thank you.
1,000%
Right on……
So few are aware of the depths of vaccine censorship. If you read the fine print of what is allowed and not allowed in a TED talk, you’ll find that questioning vaccines is not allowed.
Even formerly respected science journals such as Nature magazine no longer permit questioning vaccines.
Re: If you read the fine print of what is allowed and not allowed in a TED talk, you’ll find that questioning vaccines is not allowed.”
Can you provide a link/reference to support that statement?
Found link to PDF with guidelines here:
https://www.ted.com/participate/organize-a-local-tedx-event/tedx-organizer-guide/speakers-program/prepare-your-speaker/tedx-content-guidelines-fact-checking-guide
While it is not explicit about vaccines in particular, there is weasel language about only saying things "credible sciebtists" support, only using "published, peer reviewed work" (which we know is corruot garbage these days), as well as not allowing political topics (guideline #2).
It’s been years so I don’t have a link.
The issue is that you can talk about vaccines only as safe or effective. You can’t question established science, public health narrative, etc. There are fact checkers and gate keepers that prevent this. You can’t get it approved. You can look up TEDx content guidelines for science or vaccines to find their guidelines.
You can also search high and low for any U.S. TED talks that question vaccine safety. You won’t find one.
One might argue that the contrarian audience is comfortable in their skins and that the liberals are more of a herd creature and need the security of an echo chamber.
FANTASTIC article! Love the view from your window. Great information. Thank you.
Hi Bill, this is fascinating history.
Excellent article. If Substack is ever purchased, bye bye conservative writers.
That is my big worry. Look at how Matt Drudge was “neutralized.”
Good and interesting article.
I look forward to the next one too
I do think that substack is showing signs of not being as aligned to the interests of its readers/small authors as it was. I wrote this last month about the problems that I see - https://ombreolivier.substack.com/p/the-enshttification-of-substack?r=7yrqz
They never were aligned with us. They were just making money and/or operating a Quarantine Trap for the alt thinkers.
Great article Bill!
If they have yet to make a profit, eventually they will either have to sell, or start running ads on your timeline. My guess is they are staying away from the ad selling model, because they know thats why alot of there usr base is here. The influx and pushing of corporate shill voices to me seems a strategy to inflate there user numbers so they can sell for billions and ride off into the sunset. That seems to be the model for tech, come up with a great app, then when it gets popular sell it to some corporate entity or investment fund, who in turn destroys it. I expect substack is headed to being sold off to twitter or meta and just becoming another place to dump ads ro generate revenue. I plan to stick around until that day.
I don't think Substack's current owners are going to push advertising. However, if they ever sell, I would expect the new owners to do this. And it will be all the captured companies that subsidize the "corporate shill voices."
I'm like you. Use Substack as much as you can while we can still reach a few people who have sense or critical-thinking abilities.
Bill, maybe it is time for a SubStack competitor, if they have become co-opted?
Or perhaps a parallel SubStack, like the Bee 🐝 and not the Bee. 🐝
I know I don’t like it when randomly that former Clinton cabinet member blowhard shows up in my feed, mercifully I can’t think of his name right now, has some professorship in the California State University system.
This article was emailed to 7,500 of my subscribers.
As of 11 a.m., just 13 of those readers have made comments. Most of the Reader Comments are from me.
One Reader Comment by Elizabeth Hart got 13 "likes" (one from me). Not counting my "likes," most comments get 1 to 4 "likes."
Take-away: Hardly anyone is reading the Reader Comments at my newsletter and only 1-in-577 of my subscribers make a Reader Comment.
I used to get (significantly) more comments and the people who made comments used to get more likes ... and this is when I had fewer total subscribers .... Just another "little change" I've noticed.
I think my Reader Comments might be more "dangerous" or provocative to the Powers that Be than my stories proper ... so this trend might "fit" my paranoid (?) theory that something might be happening to limit the views of Reader Comments at my newsletter.
I can use myself and this article as an example that supports my conviction that "something has changed on Substack."
If I had posted this story 20 months ago, I know (from studying my subscriber metrics) that it would have generated at least 12 new subscribers (my average back then). Articles back then would produce 3 to 50 new subscribers.
Approximately 18 hours since posting this article, this piece has not produced any subscribers (free or paid).
In April 2025, I posted 14 original stories. Seven of those articles produced zero new subscribers and only one produced more than three (free) subscribers (five).
In April, my 14 new stories produced one new paid subscriber ($6/month).
I netted about $5.40 in new paid subscriptions from maybe 200 hours of work.
Another weird trend is my articles today are reaching about the same number of readers I reached in June 2022. But I do have almost double the number of total subscribes I had 23 months ago. So more subscribers has barely increased my "audience reach," which is a key metric for writers who hope to influence society debates or highlight certain taboo subjects.
(One question I have: Are these "subscribers" I have really real people?)
In contrast, the "liberal" writers like Robert Reich, Paul Krugman and Heather Cox Richardson have added from 320,000 to 600,000 total subscribers in the past four months! I assume that 4 percent of those subscribers are "paid" so one can do the math on how much Substack revenue these authors are generating.
My main take-away: One cohort of Substack authors (almost all liberal or "Statist") is doing fantastic. My cohort ("The Covid Contrarians") ... not so much.
Again, "something changed on Substack."
Another alarming personal metric/trend: My number of paid subscribers peaked at 310 on August 23, 2024. I now have 280 paid subscribers. I have lost 30 (net) paid subscribers in less than 9 months (a decrease of 9.7 percent).
Since this rate of "losing paid subscribers" is dramatically accelerating, by the end of 2025, I will probably have only 250 paid subscribers.
Also, my "paid" ratio has decreased from 4.7 percent to 3.7 percent.
I've also noted a dramatic decrease in the number of "likes" and Reader Comments my articles now generate compared to earlier periods of time. This also makes me wonder how many people are actually seeing my articles?
Bonus Content. Here are some Substack subscriber or subscription numbers, according to Wikipedia:
"Substack reported 11,000 paid subscribers as of 2018, rising to 50,000 in 2019."
"... By November 2021, the platform said it had more than 500,000 paying subscribers, representing over one million subscriptions."
Note: This sentence suggests each paying subscriber had, on average, two paid subscriptions. Personally, I think most paid subscribers have, maybe 1 to 5 paid subscribers.
"By November 2024, Substack had 4 million paid subscriptions."
"In March 2025, Substack announced that it had 5 million paid subscriptions."
Discussion/commentary/summary:
* Subscriptions on the platform grew from 500,000 in November 2021 to 5 million by March 2025."
* Subscriptions increased from 500,000 to 4.5 million in 3 1/2 years. Subscription growth increased at least 9-fold in 42 months.
* The largest and fastest growth occurred in the Covid years of March 2020 to the end of 2021.
However, the rate of total users (and content creators) might be even larger in recent months - especially in the 7 months since President Trump was re-elected.
since this is 5GW it isn't surprising that the globo homo version is doing better than the truth tellers/ truth seekers. Maybe the money supply creating the incredible subscriber counts for people like robert reich will dry up a little now that there may be some accountability and the globo homo left can't steal from the treasury for awhile at least.
"a concerted strategy to re-position Substack to make the platform much more palatable to liberal thinkers"
are these guys shorting their own stock? or cashing in on what's left of actblue and arabella advisors dark money?
They've certainly positioned the company where they could sell it for a ton of money if they wanted to. Whoever buys it is probably going to attack all the "Covid Contrarians." They might be doing that already.
Bill - Substack seems to be up to some shenanigans again:
https://x.com/CatsRule2023/status/1922156243914752312
However, I just checked and Kevin’s post is back up.
Here is Kevin’s post that disappeared for a bit:
https://substack.com/inbox/post/163255744
It wouldn't necessarily have to be Substack. Substack depends on emails going out so what company or companies can screw with the emails or your Internet access? Also the payment processors and bank networks.
RFK's HHS to END COVID-19 Vaccine for Kids & Pregnant Women https://nurembergtrials.net/nuremberg-2-0/f/rfks-hhs-to-end-covid-19-vaccine-for-kids-pregnant-women KS lawsuit v Pfizer: good news! Judge rules the case may proceed in state court. https://sashalatypova.substack.com/p/ks-lawsuit-v-pfizer-good-news-judge
Thanks, Chief justice. As always, you provide a great compilation of pertinent links.