4 ms·

The biggest immediate downside for writers of Substack's centralization IMO is that they've started introducing some subtle lock-in with their reader app. Subst

The biggest immediate downside for writers of Substack's centralization IMO is that they've started introducing some subtle lock-in with their reader app. Substack is quick to say that you can always export your email list and move to a different newsletter provider. But if your readers have built a habit of reading things in the Substack app instead of their email inbox, then moving your email list somewhere else means your readers will be less likely to engage with your newsletter. If Substack actually cares about preserving writers' independence, they should provide a way for writers who switch platforms to continue delivering their newsletters to the app. Switching platforms should not force behavioral changes on readers. For example, they could give app users an @inbox.substack.com (or whatever) address. Anything sent to that address will show up in the app. When you export your list of Substack subscribers, you get both their regular address and the @inbox.substack.com address, so you can continue delivering to both their email inbox and the Substack app. Until they do that, I'll continue to view their claims of putting writers in charge with a measure of wariness. I do think Substack/Substack's founders are sincere, actually. I don't think they're twirling their mustaches, thinking "How can we lock people into our platform?" They're just way too confident in the righteousness of their cause, and as a result I don't think they look inward enough in situations where the interests of Substack, writers, and readers conflict.[1] (And no, using a paid subscription model instead of ads doesn't magically make all incentive alignment problems go away.) [1] For example: https://twitter.com/bmorrissey/status/1501568928799244290 https://twitter.com/bmorrissey/status/1501568928799244290. When the app was launched, by default they stopped sending emails to people who installed the app, which would hasten the inbox->Substack app behavioral shift I discussed above, strengthening lock-in. They switched it to opt-in after backlash from writers.

pr337h4m 4y ago
Think it's wiser for writers to use ghost.org instead (can be self-hosted, extensible, open source, MIT license)
- jacobobryant 4y ago
  I'm a big fan of ghost (especially for anyone into self-hosting!), but the lack of a free plan makes it harder to use as my default recommendation. (Also the lack of single opt-in signup is a deal breaker for me personally, though I understand many people don't care/prefer double opt-in anyway.) I think https://beehiiv.com https://beehiiv.com is another good alternative, though the styling isn't as nice as on ghost, and I personally found the editor to be glitchy and infuriating to use. Maybe it's just a problem on Firefox. I'd probably use that as my own recommendation for anyone looking for a newsletter platform and cross my fingers that they have better luck with the editor :).
rpgbr 4y ago
It's a tricky problem indeed, this one regarding their app, although not a surprising one. Last month, Hamish McKenzie (cofounder) wrote[1] that “the trend that Substack is part of is not a newsletter trend, or even the much-hyped creator economy”. So, an app that distance subscribers from e-mail was expected. Btw, giving a special address would increase the lock-in, IMHO. The newsletter owner would be dependent of Substacks benevolence forever. As I wrote, I recognize Substack as a force for good, but there are cracks in their promise and considering it's a VC-backed startup, things only tend to get worse in the long run. [1] https://on.substack.com/p/please-stop-calling-it-the-newsletter https://on.substack.com/p/please-stop-calling-it-the-newslet...
- jacobobryant 4y ago
  > Btw, giving a special address would increase the lock-in, IMHO. The newsletter owner would be dependent of Substacks benevolence forever. It is possible, but at least writers would have the option of importing those addresses or not. Those who are suspicious that Substack will lock down the app more down the road can always opt to "rip the band-aid off" and not import the Substack app addresses. Perhaps my main argument is "If Substack doesn't let writers migrate without forcing a behavioral change on their readers, then it is solid evidence that Substack doesn't actually care that much about reducing lock-in." The inverse is not necessarily true, and certainly I'd advise anyone who's already convinced of the consequent to not write on Substack :).

pr337h4m 4y ago

Think it's wiser for writers to use ghost.org instead (can be self-hosted, extensible, open source, MIT license)

jacobobryant 4y ago
I'm a big fan of ghost (especially for anyone into self-hosting!), but the lack of a free plan makes it harder to use as my default recommendation. (Also the lack of single opt-in signup is a deal breaker for me personally, though I understand many people don't care/prefer double opt-in anyway.) I think https://beehiiv.com https://beehiiv.com is another good alternative, though the styling isn't as nice as on ghost, and I personally found the editor to be glitchy and infuriating to use. Maybe it's just a problem on Firefox. I'd probably use that as my own recommendation for anyone looking for a newsletter platform and cross my fingers that they have better luck with the editor :).

rpgbr 4y ago

It's a tricky problem indeed, this one regarding their app, although not a surprising one. Last month, Hamish McKenzie (cofounder) wrote[1] that “the trend that Substack is part of is not a newsletter trend, or even the much-hyped creator economy”. So, an app that distance subscribers from e-mail was expected. Btw, giving a special address would increase the lock-in, IMHO. The newsletter owner would be dependent of Substacks benevolence forever. As I wrote, I recognize Substack as a force for good, but there are cracks in their promise and considering it's a VC-backed startup, things only tend to get worse in the long run. [1] https://on.substack.com/p/please-stop-calling-it-the-newsletter https://on.substack.com/p/please-stop-calling-it-the-newslet...

jacobobryant 4y ago
> Btw, giving a special address would increase the lock-in, IMHO. The newsletter owner would be dependent of Substacks benevolence forever. It is possible, but at least writers would have the option of importing those addresses or not. Those who are suspicious that Substack will lock down the app more down the road can always opt to "rip the band-aid off" and not import the Substack app addresses. Perhaps my main argument is "If Substack doesn't let writers migrate without forcing a behavioral change on their readers, then it is solid evidence that Substack doesn't actually care that much about reducing lock-in." The inverse is not necessarily true, and certainly I'd advise anyone who's already convinced of the consequent to not write on Substack :).