Thanks for this. Phones…I am using mine right now to type this, so it is the present and the future. Until something better comes along I guess.
(In the first answer, “In 2000, 70% of the NYT's business was ads. Now 70% of their advertising is subscriptions,” I’m thinking it should read “now 70% of their revenue is subscriptions”?
Honestly, I think we will eventually see rebundling of news content happen the way we are starting to see the rebundling of streaming content and sports.
The reality is that for most consumers, the substack $5-10 monthly model of single topic content isn’t viable when combined with all of the other subscriptions that people have.
I’m not saying that rebundling will be good for creators, but I think it’s inevitable except for a small percentage of true “brands” that can create a high end niche.
Interesting piece. I worry about how , in a fragmented market with tight margins, any outlet will be able to do real investigative reporting. Another problem is the stifling effect from a consumer base that rebels when an outlet publishes a story or opinion contrary to the subscribers’ views.There are regular calls for people to cancel subscriptions to The NY Times or WaPo they publish a negative story about a favored candidate. You’ve experienced pushback when you offer facts or opinions that displease certain subscribers . Many have become accustomed to narrowcasting in media and prefer to live in info bubbles.
Totally agree. MAJOR problem. The Substacks I have seen REALLY succeed (100K+ subscribers) have a totally predictable partisan view point. People subscribe to have that view (which they share) affirmed. Depressing.
This situation adds to another worry I have. In all this globalism, there is no cohesive global community. Everything is pick and choose your own. We don't talk about the same news stories, TV shows, movies, or much of anything at the "water cooler" anymore. I think all this individualized choice results in even more of a silo effect. And big news sources disappearing will exacerbate this problem in spades.
I fear the “clout-based” media like X and T-T. Substack is much more beneficial for the body politic, with its mix of true expertise and room for logical discussion. But it’s only brilliant for people with money who have the patience to dig through its riches. Example: I had to put down $7 CAD to make the following point: To grow into the behemoth we would like to see ten years from now, Substack needs a series of subscription packages, including a flexible pick-your-own. I (sort of get that at the department store (NYT) for $22 / mo.) Right now I already pay about $100 for Substack and there are more worthy entrants every day. And you can’t even upgrade to paid in the app? Chris? Anyone?
Just listened to you and Celeste Headly on Slate's Podcast, "Hear Me Out: Horse Race Journalism is Good, Actually." You were as true to her as you have been with your readers here. It was nice to hear you debate nuances. LaCheeserie!
This conversation makes me think you need to just pull the ripchord and start a podcast alongside the newsletter. Analysis and convos like this are the perfect podcast bait
Thanks for this Chris. His answer in the first question: "advertising business model that sustained media for much of the last 100 years is falling apart — or, at the very least, it's in obvious structural decline." So what do you think this means for political advertising? Where will they spend money? Will it be on places like your substack? Some of this media is so targeted, spending money with them doesn't seem to be a good use of money. Thoughts?
I know the Democrats have a TON of money right now and the Republicans are not necessarily is great shape money wise, particularly if they spend money on Trump's defense, which I think would be illegal. (But whatever.) Maybe I am trying to avoid them, so if I stream ad free that may be the only way to miss the bulk of it?
The thought of an increased TikTok-ification of our societey is like nails on a chalkboard.
I can't tell you how many kids I run into DAILY, doing some stupid TikTok dance/challenge instead of doing their assigned work or task.
A few weeks ago I said that gerrymandering was the death of the Republic. I take that back, TikTok will be the death of us....in conjunction w gerrymandering.
Thanks for this. Phones…I am using mine right now to type this, so it is the present and the future. Until something better comes along I guess.
(In the first answer, “In 2000, 70% of the NYT's business was ads. Now 70% of their advertising is subscriptions,” I’m thinking it should read “now 70% of their revenue is subscriptions”?
Absolutely. Fixed now.
Honestly, I think we will eventually see rebundling of news content happen the way we are starting to see the rebundling of streaming content and sports.
The reality is that for most consumers, the substack $5-10 monthly model of single topic content isn’t viable when combined with all of the other subscriptions that people have.
I’m not saying that rebundling will be good for creators, but I think it’s inevitable except for a small percentage of true “brands” that can create a high end niche.
Hopefully yours is one of them!
Interesting piece. I worry about how , in a fragmented market with tight margins, any outlet will be able to do real investigative reporting. Another problem is the stifling effect from a consumer base that rebels when an outlet publishes a story or opinion contrary to the subscribers’ views.There are regular calls for people to cancel subscriptions to The NY Times or WaPo they publish a negative story about a favored candidate. You’ve experienced pushback when you offer facts or opinions that displease certain subscribers . Many have become accustomed to narrowcasting in media and prefer to live in info bubbles.
Totally agree. MAJOR problem. The Substacks I have seen REALLY succeed (100K+ subscribers) have a totally predictable partisan view point. People subscribe to have that view (which they share) affirmed. Depressing.
This situation adds to another worry I have. In all this globalism, there is no cohesive global community. Everything is pick and choose your own. We don't talk about the same news stories, TV shows, movies, or much of anything at the "water cooler" anymore. I think all this individualized choice results in even more of a silo effect. And big news sources disappearing will exacerbate this problem in spades.
I fear the “clout-based” media like X and T-T. Substack is much more beneficial for the body politic, with its mix of true expertise and room for logical discussion. But it’s only brilliant for people with money who have the patience to dig through its riches. Example: I had to put down $7 CAD to make the following point: To grow into the behemoth we would like to see ten years from now, Substack needs a series of subscription packages, including a flexible pick-your-own. I (sort of get that at the department store (NYT) for $22 / mo.) Right now I already pay about $100 for Substack and there are more worthy entrants every day. And you can’t even upgrade to paid in the app? Chris? Anyone?
I really like these kinds of posts, too. You provide so much variety. Thanks, Chris!
Just listened to you and Celeste Headly on Slate's Podcast, "Hear Me Out: Horse Race Journalism is Good, Actually." You were as true to her as you have been with your readers here. It was nice to hear you debate nuances. LaCheeserie!
This conversation makes me think you need to just pull the ripchord and start a podcast alongside the newsletter. Analysis and convos like this are the perfect podcast bait
Thanks for this Chris. His answer in the first question: "advertising business model that sustained media for much of the last 100 years is falling apart — or, at the very least, it's in obvious structural decline." So what do you think this means for political advertising? Where will they spend money? Will it be on places like your substack? Some of this media is so targeted, spending money with them doesn't seem to be a good use of money. Thoughts?
That money has to be spent SOMEWHERE....but I don't know if it stays in media/journalism space. Do people pay for TikTok ads instead?
I know the Democrats have a TON of money right now and the Republicans are not necessarily is great shape money wise, particularly if they spend money on Trump's defense, which I think would be illegal. (But whatever.) Maybe I am trying to avoid them, so if I stream ad free that may be the only way to miss the bulk of it?
The thought of an increased TikTok-ification of our societey is like nails on a chalkboard.
I can't tell you how many kids I run into DAILY, doing some stupid TikTok dance/challenge instead of doing their assigned work or task.
A few weeks ago I said that gerrymandering was the death of the Republic. I take that back, TikTok will be the death of us....in conjunction w gerrymandering.