Also: creators offering products. What's the lifecycle of a product? How frequently does it need to be updated? How many products can a creator feature at once without diluting attention or creating confusion/overwhelm for readers?
Virtually all content is contingent on and depends on its inverse for the tension it needs to be “relevant” and most creators are trapped in this paradigm--absurdity as a wholistic, self perpetuating cultural construct, thus nothing can be original, fresh, new, visionary. A creator has to know this construct and know how step outside of it; otherwise content is always at the mercy of commerce.
Other ideas - if you were starting from scratch as a new content creator in 2023, what would your strategy be? Would be interesting to ask this question of a few different creators and get their take.
I would also be very interested to know what types of publications are doing well on Substack, and where the growth is coming from. I know (from your newsletter and others) that recommendations are growing subscriptions for existing authors, but how much is the ecosystem growing and where is that growth coming from? If they are no longer running the program where they effectively sponsor big name authors (I’ve forgotten the name), are they relying on people with an existing following on other channels moving over and bringing their audience with them?
This may have been covered elsewhere, if so apologies!
It seems that last summer, web3 was being touted (in some quarters) as the answer to all the woes in the creator economy. Platforms like Audius (music), Mirror (publishing) seemingly offered new models for ownership and monetisation. Would be interesting maybe to look at where those stand now?
Fox News total daily audience is about 1% of the US population, while almost the entire US population has access to Fox News one way or another. Fox News is highly profitable because of relatively low expenses. It looks popular (OMG!!! 3 million!) but only compared with other media in an environment with a million choices. Fox News is extremely well known, so every day somewhere north of 90% of the US population decides to NOT watch Fox News that day. (They can't decide that about media they've never heard of and/or don't have access to.) If the other news media would stop giving Fox News an echo chamber every day, it would help. News media historic stance towards other news media was to ignore them and acknowledge their existence only when absolutely necessary. US media need to do this to Fox News. Fox News' audience is mostly elderly, conservative, straight white men (they're dying!) plus others who are monitoring the opposition or like watching train wrecks. It's a niche product for a declining market, and it now claims in court that it is not journalism and no reasonable person believes what it broadcasts.
I don't know if Twitter drives traffic...it seems to me that journalists used Twitter to test the interest in a story. If it gained traction, there would be 50 versions of the story flooding the TL.
I found it to be a tiresome and lazy form of journalism.
An issue that interests me is one that you briefly addressed. Fox News is almost entirely a right-wing echo chamber...why does the model work on television, but not on social media? Is it demographics, or other?
A related question is why traditional media seems unable or unwilling to effectively counter right-wing propaganda. Is it a function of the format of traditional media articles?
Things I'd love to hear about:
- college student journalists: what are their media consumption habits? What do their early career paths look like these days?
- what does that indicate as Gen Z becomes a growing share of our audiences?
- profiles of leaders of small publishing/media businesses (always interested in this!)
Also: creators offering products. What's the lifecycle of a product? How frequently does it need to be updated? How many products can a creator feature at once without diluting attention or creating confusion/overwhelm for readers?
Virtually all content is contingent on and depends on its inverse for the tension it needs to be “relevant” and most creators are trapped in this paradigm--absurdity as a wholistic, self perpetuating cultural construct, thus nothing can be original, fresh, new, visionary. A creator has to know this construct and know how step outside of it; otherwise content is always at the mercy of commerce.
Other ideas - if you were starting from scratch as a new content creator in 2023, what would your strategy be? Would be interesting to ask this question of a few different creators and get their take.
I would also be very interested to know what types of publications are doing well on Substack, and where the growth is coming from. I know (from your newsletter and others) that recommendations are growing subscriptions for existing authors, but how much is the ecosystem growing and where is that growth coming from? If they are no longer running the program where they effectively sponsor big name authors (I’ve forgotten the name), are they relying on people with an existing following on other channels moving over and bringing their audience with them?
This may have been covered elsewhere, if so apologies!
It seems that last summer, web3 was being touted (in some quarters) as the answer to all the woes in the creator economy. Platforms like Audius (music), Mirror (publishing) seemingly offered new models for ownership and monetisation. Would be interesting maybe to look at where those stand now?
Fox News total daily audience is about 1% of the US population, while almost the entire US population has access to Fox News one way or another. Fox News is highly profitable because of relatively low expenses. It looks popular (OMG!!! 3 million!) but only compared with other media in an environment with a million choices. Fox News is extremely well known, so every day somewhere north of 90% of the US population decides to NOT watch Fox News that day. (They can't decide that about media they've never heard of and/or don't have access to.) If the other news media would stop giving Fox News an echo chamber every day, it would help. News media historic stance towards other news media was to ignore them and acknowledge their existence only when absolutely necessary. US media need to do this to Fox News. Fox News' audience is mostly elderly, conservative, straight white men (they're dying!) plus others who are monitoring the opposition or like watching train wrecks. It's a niche product for a declining market, and it now claims in court that it is not journalism and no reasonable person believes what it broadcasts.
I don't know if Twitter drives traffic...it seems to me that journalists used Twitter to test the interest in a story. If it gained traction, there would be 50 versions of the story flooding the TL.
I found it to be a tiresome and lazy form of journalism.
An issue that interests me is one that you briefly addressed. Fox News is almost entirely a right-wing echo chamber...why does the model work on television, but not on social media? Is it demographics, or other?
A related question is why traditional media seems unable or unwilling to effectively counter right-wing propaganda. Is it a function of the format of traditional media articles?