5 ms·

> For me at least Substack presents a solid wall with very little to help discovery. Who do I subscribe to and why? The website is awful at showing me interesti

> For me at least Substack presents a solid wall with very little to help discovery. Who do I subscribe to and why? The website is awful at showing me interesting writing. This is by design, because if they did recommend "controversial" people, they'd be accused of being a [bad thing.]

meheleventyone 5y ago
That sounds quite conspiratorial. Are you saying the majority of popular content on Substack is actually just "controversial" people rather than quality journalism?
- ceilingcorner 5y ago
  No. I can't find the original post, but I do remember reading a Substack post (by the founders) saying that they deliberately don't like using content recommendation systems.
- ameister14 5y ago
  It doesn't have to be the majority of popular content. If they actively recommend anyone, they will end up recommending people that are controversial to some groups, and they will be attacked as curators and 'platformers' of these people.
  - meheleventyone 5y ago
    They're going to get that anyway for hosting people. And if you read their writing on the subject they do want to improve discovery as well as giving direct support to specific writers: https://blog.substack.com/p/substacks-view-of-content-moderation https://blog.substack.com/p/substacks-view-of-content-modera... "At the same time, while we take a hands-off approach with who may use the platform, we will continue to take an active approach in helping and promoting promising writers. We are doing this by improving discovery on the platform and building programs, such as fellowships, grants, and mentorship, to support writers. Our partnerships team will also continue to work with high-revenue and high-potential writers." So I'm not sure this claim about avoiding recommendations is actually true.
- HKH2 5y ago
  Nobody is arguing that the majority of popular content on YouTube is controversial, but there have definitely been arguments that YouTube radicalizes people. If they can say that for YouTube, why not for Substack if it implements similar discoverability?

meheleventyone 5y ago

That sounds quite conspiratorial. Are you saying the majority of popular content on Substack is actually just "controversial" people rather than quality journalism?

ceilingcorner 5y ago
No. I can't find the original post, but I do remember reading a Substack post (by the founders) saying that they deliberately don't like using content recommendation systems.
ameister14 5y ago
It doesn't have to be the majority of popular content. If they actively recommend anyone, they will end up recommending people that are controversial to some groups, and they will be attacked as curators and 'platformers' of these people.
- meheleventyone 5y ago
  They're going to get that anyway for hosting people. And if you read their writing on the subject they do want to improve discovery as well as giving direct support to specific writers: https://blog.substack.com/p/substacks-view-of-content-moderation https://blog.substack.com/p/substacks-view-of-content-modera... "At the same time, while we take a hands-off approach with who may use the platform, we will continue to take an active approach in helping and promoting promising writers. We are doing this by improving discovery on the platform and building programs, such as fellowships, grants, and mentorship, to support writers. Our partnerships team will also continue to work with high-revenue and high-potential writers." So I'm not sure this claim about avoiding recommendations is actually true.
HKH2 5y ago
Nobody is arguing that the majority of popular content on YouTube is controversial, but there have definitely been arguments that YouTube radicalizes people. If they can say that for YouTube, why not for Substack if it implements similar discoverability?