Read on Twitter
i don't see how substack is going to radically change the problems with journalism when it's just crowdfunding again. like yeah "already be popular and ask people for money" has already been working for a lot of people but it's the "already be popular" part that's the hard part
i had this unpopular take eight years ago when all my laid-off friends had patreons. not that i was against the patreons. the total opposite. i was against the supposition that it was somehow radical for journalists to lack the protections that come with working for a larger org
no editors, no health insurance, no legal team to help you shore up wording of complex investigations, AND you have to already be wildly successful to hope to earn a decent income? it's literally just the gig economy again why are we doing this
i'm excited for journalists to realize the radical new future of founding a collective of similar-minded workers who, with their influences combined, can raise enough money to... just... make an actual company publication, again. (oh wait, that's defector. that website's cool)
my feelings on patreon/substack/etc are largely informed by my Old School opinion that journalism and criticism are a public good that must exist in a functional society, as opposed to a popularity contest among various individual lone wolf funnymen asking for a tuppence per take
i actually do think it's a problem if journalism and criticism can only succeed based on whether you're funny and charming enough to get a lot of people to pay you. just doesn't seem like a great way to, i don't know, do the work that has to happen but shakes shit up in any way?
anyway, there's no other way to do this. other than abolishing capitalism, obviously. crowdfunding is better than the alternatives. i'm just sad. i'm a sad person. that's what this thread is.
