4 ms·

By "read in their email client" (presumably on mobile) I will assume that people view but do not read. Attention spans on mobile are atrocious (notably, the ful

By "read in their email client" (presumably on mobile) I will assume that people view but do not read. Attention spans on mobile are atrocious (notably, the fulcrum is screen size having a neurological impact on ability to pay attention - this is a biological fact) – very little real reading takes place. I can imagine Substack is more of an "aspires to read X" platform than a place for actually reading X. This argument is anecdotally supported by the sensationalism of popular pieces I see go viral, the payment system (it is always easier to quickly monetize aspiration than behavior), and its reliance on growth through virtue-signaling (eg twitter).

kevincox 5y ago
This is a huge assumption. I do almost all of my reading in my email client (mostly RSS to email that gets sorted into a Reading folder). Whenever I have some downtime I slowly read through the articles that have accumulated. I have no problem finishing long articles or anything else.
edmundsauto 5y ago
Not affiliated with Substack, but this doesn’t feel like a fair assessment. For me, email is the best way to consume curated content that I don’t get distracted. Often, like with Matt Levine, it’s a way around a paywall and obnoxious sites.
secondo 5y ago
> Attention spans on mobile are atrocious (notably, the fulcrum is screen size having a neurological impact on ability to pay attention - this is a biological fact) – very little real reading takes place. If you have any further reading on this please share. n=1 with exception for scientific papers I do essentially all my reading on my phone and I do not experience any attention difference. I also have my phone on perpetual DnD so notifications and other distractions are not a thing.
hackernewds 5y ago
> " aspires to read X platform then a place for actually reading X " This assumes this is goal for Substack founders and leadership. The null hypothesis absence of other evidence, is that the goal is active reader/subscriber growth
native_samples 5y ago
If it was aspirational reading people wouldn't pay so much for it.

kevincox 5y ago

This is a huge assumption. I do almost all of my reading in my email client (mostly RSS to email that gets sorted into a Reading folder). Whenever I have some downtime I slowly read through the articles that have accumulated. I have no problem finishing long articles or anything else.

edmundsauto 5y ago

Not affiliated with Substack, but this doesn’t feel like a fair assessment. For me, email is the best way to consume curated content that I don’t get distracted. Often, like with Matt Levine, it’s a way around a paywall and obnoxious sites.

secondo 5y ago

> Attention spans on mobile are atrocious (notably, the fulcrum is screen size having a neurological impact on ability to pay attention - this is a biological fact) – very little real reading takes place. If you have any further reading on this please share. n=1 with exception for scientific papers I do essentially all my reading on my phone and I do not experience any attention difference. I also have my phone on perpetual DnD so notifications and other distractions are not a thing.

hackernewds 5y ago

> " aspires to read X platform then a place for actually reading X " This assumes this is goal for Substack founders and leadership. The null hypothesis absence of other evidence, is that the goal is active reader/subscriber growth

native_samples 5y ago

If it was aspirational reading people wouldn't pay so much for it.