An algorithm for quality
Searching for the better versions of ourselves
Sometimes it can feel like the online spaces you spend time in are working against you, pushing you toward things that their owners value instead of what you value—and harnessing your energy to fuel the very things you hate. Like me, you probably know the feeling of spending too much time gorging on digital junk food, wasting precious moments of your life that you can’t get back. Maybe you’ve even felt yourself becoming someone other than who you want to be. Angrier. More distracted. More distant from human connection.
In these states, it’s tempting to blame “the algorithms”—and plenty of people do. (In fact, we ourselves have at times been guilty of muddying the waters.) But algorithms in themselves are neither good nor bad. They’re just technology. The root problem lies in the master that the algorithms are serving.
Who is that master? Well, another sophisticated take you might hear about social media algorithms is that the master they are serving is the advertiser. You’re not the customer; you’re the product. But while it’s true that the legacy social platforms are funded by ads and have built huge businesses by harvesting your attention and selling slices of it as a commodity, that’s not really the whole story. After all, these platforms still have to serve their users. To capture your attention, they must win an incredibly competitive game by serving you the content that gets you to click, watch, and keep scrolling, minute after minute.
Ultimately, the big bad enemy that the legacy platforms’ algorithms are serving is … us. The algorithms have been studying us, and they know what we want. They serve our desires with ruthless intent.
The problem is that the version of us that they serve is the basest version of ourselves. They skip past our values, aspirations, and even our conscious thought, and go straight to pressing the buttons in our lizard brain. Just as with fast food, or in a casino, or taking a drag of a cigarette, we are of course still making a choice—and it can even be an enjoyable one. But if you have higher aspirations for yourself, if you want to feed your mind with something better, you probably want an algorithm that plays by different rules.
Can you imagine how your view of the world might change if you spent your time online in a place optimized for reading what you care most about, rather than just endless scrolling? What would it feel like to check a feed that’s trying to catch you up on what you deeply value rather than keeping you feeling anxious, angry, and alone?
We intend to find out.
On Substack, tens of millions of people already connect directly with writers and creators in an online universe of amazing stories and ideas that’s based on a different set of rules from legacy social media. Increasingly, people are finding new writers and creators to fall in love with in this universe, driving growth that previously had to come from elsewhere. Some of the brightest lights in our culture, both established and new, find the freedom to do the work they believe in here—and they’re starting to find each other, too.
This is rare magic, and we feel an intense responsibility to help it reach its potential. You’ll see a manifestation of these efforts very soon in a new version of the Substack app—a personal portal into the Substack universe—and in improvements we are making across the platform. You can expect these improvements to support discovery across the Substack network, while maintaining the direct relationship between readers and writers.
We’ve set up our business model so that, in order to succeed, we have to serve the best version of you. We are committed to building technologies that cater to the version of you that sits at the breakfast table on a Sunday morning and thinks carefully about what you’ll spend the next 30 minutes reading. We’ll be serving the version of you that is excited to financially support the writers you trust. We win when subscribers are happy. Our business model succeeds when you spend time with the work that you value the most; the work that helps you grow and progress; the work that helps you fall deeper in love.
This is the stuff we’re talking about when we say we’re building a new economic engine for culture. It’s not a perfect system, but it is new, and it allows a kind of work to thrive that is different and better than what wins on other platforms.
We are not against algorithms. We’ll enthusiastically use algorithms, or AI, or any other technology we can get our hands on, as long as we can use them to serve the human ends that we care about. For readers, that means letting you decide what you read as the best version of yourself—helping you take back your mind.
The real trick is that culture is not just about getting what you want. What you want is not set in stone. Culture is also about learning why you want what you want, refining your tastes, challenging your convictions, and promoting humanity and agency over the process. Systems that work against you can erode your will over time, and cause you to drop your standards ever lower. But a system that serves your aspirational self can kick-start a positive loop.
The more you read with agency and are able to curate your attention, the greater the return your mind will get from the time you’ve invested in reading every day. One morning you may even wake up to find you are no longer feeling angry or distracted but, rather, pretty confident that—when it comes to reading, at least—this is going to be a day well spent.
Keep up the good work...And...please do away with this new Substack issuance of the "influencer" checkmark. It doesn't reflect well on Substack to fall into Meta/X mimicking. Readers love and follow the writers they respect, not because of perceived "being in the special club."
I tend to agree with that. Some of us will be more widely read than others, but this just creates a class-based hierarchy that is bound to hurt the writers who are still struggling to be discovered to the benefit of those who have already been discovered.
Appreciating this thread. Thank you.
Regarding class, also: I wonder whether if the pub theme itself attracts readers with more means to attract paying readers. Just a thought.
Would agree to this thread. At some point every platform works with some kind of biases and some sort of insensitivity. Still I appreciate at least there were sensible words. I am still trying to find my footing here and badges do create discrimination.
We don't need no stinking badges!
Exactly, for many of us writers starting from scratch, the algorithm is everything. It was designed and built by the people who run the platform to do what they chose for it to do. To then act like it's just an uncontrollable but cute house pet that will do what it feels like doing is just silly.
The algorithm can be changed at any time by leadership; it can reward or discourage whatever behaviors or content they want.
Same as the choice whether or not to have badges. Another decision actively made and not just chance.
Yes 🙌🏻 amidst the positive vibes we still have a parallel AI world to tackle now 😀
That's probably true. I think people who read as a hobby tend to be more educated and more well-off. My early impression of Substack was that it was drawing writers who, 25 years ago, might have been writing for middlebrow and highbrow magazines like The Atlantic and The New York Review of Books.
Not necessarily "well off." You don't have to subscribe to be a reader of substack.
I have enjoyed the Substack community; it has a special good "feel" to it. Imagine my surprise when after unsubscribing from a really good newsletter here and receiving notifications from it that I was unsubscribed, a few days later I received a new edition of it from a different community called Beehiiv! How is that possible? I unsubscribed from that source also and have yet to hear back from them. Beehiiv seems a very different kind of host to writers and one I'm not comfortable with. Can a platform force you to stay subscribed?
Some folks publish in two places and transfer their subscribers from one to another. It's unlikely they want to force you to stay subscribed. More likely is that the authors don't sync their subscriber lists between one platform and the other. After unsubbing from Beehiv, you should be good to go.
I've tried, but they haven't replied! It looks like the writer sent a list of his subscribers to Beehiiv with my name on it, even though I had already unsubscribed from him.
Well, the person or company can alwayss send you stuff. Back in tthe day we called that "spam".
I'm not familiar with Beehiiv but this definitely sounds like Spam!
Chris speaks of imagining and I think that's great. Now let's imagine a platform that doesn't take advantage of people's tendency to be swayed by what others think.
Badges: You should like this because other people are paying for it.
Most popular post list: You should like this because other people liked it.
More than X subscribers: you should like this because... well you get the idea.
Imagine a platform that enabled you to find what you want and didn't try to sway your choices in this way. Imagine a platform that prized people making up their own mind above so-called social proof.
Weird, huh?
"Liking," points, number of comments, all create this bias. What did we have before the creation of the like button?
The "Like" button makes sense if, and only if, there is a "Dislike" button...
We had a sense, which nowadays I feel like calling The Sense, for it has become so rare as to seem of a mystical nature.
You had to actually write a reply or comment, although it could be minimal, like "This!"
This!
Well illustrated.
I actually feel like Reddit ticks a lot of these boxes. Ignoring all the issues Reddit has, the one thing I‘ve always respected about the platform is how there, the content is in focus. If you‘re interested in a certain topic you‘ll subscribe to it and get shown popular posts. Of course there you still have the „you should like this because others did too“ But I think when it comes to that kind of scale (and let‘s be honest, also quality) of content, this is inevitable. But also, this algorithm is very basic, only serving you what other‘s liked, not basing anything on your personal preferences. If you and I subscribe to the exact same Subreddits we can expect to be shown the exact same posts.
👏👏👏
Indeed, and I'm at times on the lookout for a recommendation. A tree surgeon, a carpenter, a brick layer... I go to friends and see if they know somebody because I don't want to pick out someone randomly.
Just fyi the checkmarks are to illustrate the number of paying subscribers (hollow orange for hundreds; solid orange for thousands; blue for tens of thousands), so they’re less a social credit system as on X and Facebook, but more a signal to readers that this or that publication has managed to attract a given number of paying subs. Obviously I have one, so you may think me biased, but it’s nice to have a system which automatically shows new subs that your work is of sufficient quality to merit paying for. Keeps the flywheel spinning.
Wouldn't it be helpful to also have a checkmark for those of use who are just starting to accrue paying subscribers to at least signal to readers "Hey here's some work to keep an eye on."?
Yes! I just started and have two out-of-nowhere pledges. It's mind-blowing... but if you search for me, even using my substack's exact name, I'm way down the list, with checkmarkers above me.
And this is where the bias comes into play when using algorithms. Not a big fan of their use in any app unless they are built to be equitable and not built to enhance a company's bottom line, which if we are going to be 100% honest here, that's exactly what the checkmarks are built for. By promoting Substackers with large subscriber bases it also promotes Substack's own revenue stream. I'm fine with them making money but be honest, don't use false virtue signalling by saying the checkmarks are a way of showing quality while not mentioning the strong marketing aspect behind them. Substack should be better than that.
Yeah, I know all the platforms seem to be doing away with the reverse chronological recent post search results and hashtags, but I always thought that approach was very fair. Everyone got an equal opportunity to be seen by people looking for that kind of thing.
Yep. If they aren't careful they'll start treading into the mired biased muck that is Medium.com
I still mourn what Medium could have, should have, been.
Just because a site has an orange or purple checkmark, doesn't mean you have to sign up for it. You can go there and look at it out of curiosity, but no one says you have to follow them if it's not your cup of tea.
Agreed. I was just bringing it up from a marketing psychology perspective.
Congrats! That's amazing. I turned off Pledges almost immediately because I was worried people would get confused as to what they were and think that I was asking for money.
Yeah, I was worried about that, but then I thought... you never know. I mean, clearly, two pledges, you never know. So I decided that my approach would be to not include any upgrade-subscription prompts anywhere except at the very, very bottom after I've already signed off, and I led with a "looking for more?" kind of spiel, and then I explained that "my newsletter is and always will be free (substack is supplementary to my primary writing, not my primary writing), but if you're looking for more, make a pledge and I'll see what I can do." And I wrote it in third person, which I think helped distance me from the ask, like it was substack doing it, not so much me. Anyway. Apparently it's not turning anyone off, and it's even enticing a couple people. So you might consider turning it back on. Hope this helps!
Thanks Megan, that's really great to hear.
I think part of the reason for me was also the fact that this is a side hobby (albeit one I'd love to turn serious at some stage), so it didn't feel necessary to have pledges. But, maybe you're right and maybe I will consider at some stage toggling that switch back on.
A couple of years ago, I was invited to Substack Grow. The criteria was people who had at least a 40% read rate. (There may have been other criteria, but that’s the one I remember.) There could be something like that? To signal that the people who DO subscribe like it enough to read it regularly? I’m not sure.
What I did learn from Grow is that people who write about cooking or travel or technology seem to have the “secret” on how to grow audiences. But the Grow folks didn’t feature anyone who was not already popular who grew big writing think pieces. What amuses me is there’s not even a category on this app for complicated think pieces. We don’t exist in Substack’s eyes. People are talking about checks and I’d just like a category.
Yes yes 🙌🏻
A new-comer badge, or even customisable badges might be a cool thing to have. It could be a bit of cosmetic fun if there wasn't any status attached to it.
I have 15,000 subscribers on Substack and zero ticks, checks, or whatever we're calling them. My subscribers are all interested in me and my work. I don't actively TRY to monetize them so most of my subscribers are free. I will in the next few months but I wanted to take it slow the first year on Substack and attract them to my work here before actively monetizing. But this doesn't invalidate the fact that I still have a solid subscriber base with over 75% reading each post I publish. This is where the ticks/checks don't really help ALL of us.
Congratulations. That is something to be proud of.
Maybe they should have badges for number of overall subscribers too? I suppose they already do list the number when they first visit a publication, or a profile on Notes, but it would be cool if there was also a more visual thing for overall numbers too
Mikey, understand totally ... also, putting my tiny hand up for the folk who genuinely don't want to have paying (or pledged) subscribers (just saying so for a me) - the playing field should level(ish) or at least not two escalators, one fast, one slow (rubbish analogy alert, which is one reason I won't charge for my musings!)
I think Substack do a pretty good job of keeping a level playing field overall. We all have access to the same tools. Substack Reads and getting featured on the homepage is not dependent on checkmarks (both happened to me before I got mine).
A more philosophical point - I have a strong belief that power laws are a fact of the universe, however we may feel about them, so I’m not sure there’s anything Substack, or any platform, could do to stop big winners arising from the mass of strivers. Not that all of us are even seeking to be the big winners, of course. Creating is worth doing for its own sake, regardless of following or monetary reward.
Philosophically speaking, it all depends how we measure winning ... as comparison is the thief of joy I am mightily of the hope that we all find some voices we enjoy hearing, and that we all end up being voices that find an audience of their own, whatever the size.
I would gently say, though, that as "a discovery system that attempts to maximize subscription revenue for writers" rolls out, the pitch leans a little more in favour of those in that space.
I'm very relaxed though, relishing the joy of creation.
You make a very good point, Barrie. Though I’m not sure what the alternative for Substack is, as they will need to earn money at some point. I have no idea but I doubt they’ve made a profit yet, given the Silicon Valley tech startup playbook
Of course, so true - and I guess the big hitters will end up supporting the business model and those with smaller reach (and modest ambitions).
There's an excellent recent post by Margaret Atwood which addresses the idea of taking paid subscriptions, dispersing the 10% to Substack before supporting charities with the rest. Lots of ways to flavour the recipe.
I was just thinking about this and wondering if there might be a way to collect an additional .5% (or something) to have a writers' hardship fund ... and then thought of the nightmare it might be to administer it. However, we are a community of individual writers for the most part and it would be nice to have some way of supporting needs. I was so touched by Edwin Kiptoo Ngetich's post about haranbee and how community rises to the needs of the individual ... I would like to be part of that kind of community.
This is such generosity of thinking. I need to check out Edwin's post. Thank you
I saw that post actually, and your pun in the comments! 😂 Another reason Margaret Atwood is the best
Imagine being put in pun prison on, of all places, a Margaret Atwood post! Eek!
funny also considering what you say about not charging $....im torn because i figure eventually i could write shit worth paying for but then its a damn comittment hmmmm no wonder im single heh
I appreciate that perspective, and delineating details. Fair points (and genuine congrats to you!).
Thank you. I hope you get one too very soon!
Understood and your point is well-taken. But the very fact of having checkmarks creates hierarchy, a distinction between you, who have one, and me, who does not. In the eye of a casual reader, they may not understand that nothing more is meant by it than what you say.
HELL YEAH!
Before I've reached 100 paying subs here, I wasn't getting a single new free subscriber from substack's platform, after reaching it, it started to grab people's attention— it's easy to gloss over publications such as ours 'cause like you I only have ~1000 total subs— yet pound-per-pound, we're deliving a product worth paying for, at least for the members of our audience, and that in itself can be intriguing for the potential reader.
The name Mr Potato is already pulling me in so the checkmark is the cherry on the top at this point 😂
Funny thing— here's the origin story— I was nicknamed Potato when I was 6yrs old because I had a T-shirt of Benny The Ball from Top Cat, here in Brazil his name was translated to "Batatinha" which means Small Potato in portuguese— now, 30 years later, my 18yo daughter's friends call me the equivalent to "Mr. Potato" HAHAHA
Ya! A capitalistic meritocracy, like former times. 😎
(SubStack is swimming against the tide of academia, with it's participation trophies. )
We startups must suck it up and adapt.
The problem with the “managed to attract paying subs” characterization is that, unlike you (the hardest working person on Substack) a lot of people come with a national profile of some sort, and built-in followers. Now, those people often bring new readers with them, and at least one of those previously popular writers recommended me, which boosted me for a month, for which I was grateful. (And I’ve managed to keep those new subscribers.) But I can see how when people are struggling to attract readers, the checks from the “popular club” can be disheartening. Also, most writers are not marketers. That is a needed skill to gain headway.
Well that’s very kind of you to say so, thank you. I can understand the frustration, but those people with built in followers didn’t get given those followers, they had to build them up over years too, albeit somewhere else. It takes insane patience but imho over a long enough timeline, anyone writing quality work with a consistent schedule will get there.
What if I wanted to keep all of my content free in perpetuity like the anarchist that I am? Shouldn't I get a little halo icon for that?
I agree.
We have a way to fix all of this and more. We need to make new systems that make the old ones obsolete - or in this case plug into their old systems and fix them with decentralization and transparency. Understanding this takes a little effort and it starts by using Human Swarm Intelligence to harness the Wisdom of the Crowd. For short, it is called "swarming." Scientists and medical fields looking to form decentralized systems need to be part of this. Start your journey here and stay tuned:
https://joshketry.substack.com/p/human-swarm-intelligence-the-most
Yes please.
Agree. No checkmark, please. It's time to evolve.
What I want is an algorithm that says "you haven't seen this content before, what do you think of it?"
Quality is in the eye of the beholder, and the beholder is always ME.
Show me new and different content. Show me content outside my comfort zone. Challenge me with new ideas.
I'll probably not like most of what I get shown by such an algorithm, but I will be greatly stimulated and satisfied by that algorithm.
I too notice that SubStack doesn't deliver me fresh new reads within easy reach. I have to go out and actively search for them. The Explore suggestions feel clunky, impersonal, and hard to scroll through and gauge. It's either brand new publications that are 7 days old, or the big boys, and they feel like random suggestions -- they rarely match my interests or tastes, but they're also not challenging or stimulating as you suggest.
I have to assume that this also means that our publications are not being suggested to others once we're no longer new and exciting, or a big boy.
I would take random if it was truly random and meant that more people were getting more visibility.
When the perception is other than that the curation algorithm perhaps could use some rethinking.
I feel the same way about the Explore section. It seems neglected in terms of curatorial effort.
And even the content I’ve previously said “not interested” in, I’d like to have shown again a few months or so later. After all, tastes, interests and opinions change. 🙃
Absolutely! Growth does happen! 😉
Yes! Every word of this 🤝
A human 'algorithm' ... yes, yes!
Perfect!!!
Every word that my brain resonates!
+1 to this :)
Curation is certainly one approach.
The only thing I REALLY hope happens here is that Substack could maybe pick a random newbie who IS NOT famous and announce their presence here lol. Elizabeth Gilbert didn't need an announcement...she showed up with her own million people in her pocket 😂
I just hope algorithms never put celebrities in front of me. I can find those on my own. Give me the regular folk who are writing amazing things.
Yeah my only way to get noticed right now is to write random comments like this and hope it pique's interest lol
Have you ever been a writer on Medium? I've been over there for years so I've sprinkled some links in my Medium posts.
Otherwise, commenting (like you're already doing) has worked wonders for me. I subscribe to lots of other Substacks and really engage in their comments and communities.
I'll mutually subscribe! haha.
I was deciding where to put my effort between Substack and Medium when I began my project and went with this one because it feels more vibrant with a larger community.
I will say it IS more vibrant and intimate here but Medium itself has such a high page rank that it's a great springboard for other endeavors. But if you're a newbie on Medium it's difficult to get noticed. You could always cross-post your stuff from here onto Medium and link back to here. Lots of Medium writers have moved here and do the cross-posting thing.
Yeah that's a good idea :)
I literally wrote an article about that the other day. I do miss the good old days of blogging.
https://medium.com/the-journal-of-firsts/substack-brings-back-the-small-town-feel-of-the-old-school-blogging-community-67fbd2faead2
I couldn't help sending you that link because your comment just hit me. Fingers crossed that we find here what we loved about blogging!
Agree, the Substack reads needs to highlight more unknown voices
Amen to this. Elizabeth Gilbert coming here was just a big non-event to me. I don’t know what the big deal is.
LOOOOL I think you and I are the ONLY ones who don't care. I had to "mute author" just to be able to keep up with my feed.
I didn't know her before she got here, so it was a non-event for me. I had to look her up to figure out who she was, and it's still a non-event for me.
Well, when I first posted a Note, it was to announce the debut of my blog here. Someone from Substack liked and restacked it… and no one else seemed to give a damn. Just saying….
Yeah that sounds about the same as my notes lol.
True. I’d like that as well. And though I like Elizabeth Gilbert and have enjoyed a few of her books, the focus of her substack isn’t really something I’m interested in right now so it’d be nice to find other writers who ARE writing content that I’m interested in right now.
Agreed, 100%
Yessss!!
Mouthful of truth 🔥
I’m really excited to see that there’s a new version of the app coming out. There’s so much potential here. Looking forward to seeing where it all goes! Proud to be a writer on substack, a place that seems far more in alignment with my values.
I'm also looking forward to whatever new app changes are incoming.
I wish you guys would build a better and more robust search engine for Substack and our own posts e.g. I struggle to find stocks that I know I have written about in previous posts with the current search engine...
Agree on comments regarding search engine improvement. How difficult would it be to be able to search key words with a time sort function (that would show ALL results based upon post date - not how successful that writer already is or what SS thinks one SHOULD read). No other interface/algorithm needed. People can choose to use this feature or not. People can decide on their own if they want to read or not. This really is not rocket science....shows this matter is more about control, not content, nor individual free will.
I would love to be able to search for writers by more niche categories and keywords. It would help to build community around the niche topics I write about (food allergies, Judaism, and wildlife conservation). Beyond that, I know there are many writers on Substack who write about unusual topics, and I’d be keen to have a way to find them and uncover a new potential interest.
ITS hugely annoying in my case because I always link the stock name to the IR page and ALL the tickers from major exchanges when the primary listing is not the NYSE-NASDAQ... So I have look up the tickers on Google finance, link them to the Yahoo! Finance quote, hunt for the IR page (no always easy if the stock's website is not in English and I have to use the browser translator...) etc. I hate doing work I have already done over again when I should be able to just quickly search for a previous post where the stock was mentioned and cut and paste...
Oh yea, they need to make the tag feature easier to use for old posts e.g. its easy to recategorize or retag old posts in Wordpress at the back end. Substack nictitates you to open individual posts, tag them, and resave them with a date error often happening on the first save attempt....
I am using the tag feature for some posts and its very useful. I did mention to Linda they should do a cloud or something as tags start to clutter the front page e.g. see https://emergingmarketskeptic.substack.com/ on a desktop-laptop computer for where and how I have organized the tags...
Agree! Discovery could be as easy as allowing writers to categorize their own content or search by tags. It would give readers full control while preventing all the pitfalls that come with algorithms.
"We are not against algorithms. We’ll enthusiastically use algorithms, or AI, or any other technology we can get our hands on, as long as we can use them to serve the human ends that we care about. For readers, that means letting you decide what you read as the best version of yourself—helping you take back your mind."
I am very vehemently against algorithms or any kind of "curation" I am not 100% in complete control off. I really hope I am not reading too much in between the lines here.
Algorithms inherently strip humans of their agency. That's literally their purpose. They are designed to specifically say to users, "Look at this, but not that. Think about this, but not that. This is what's popular, not that. You'll like this. Trust me."
In high school, I used to sit for hours on MySpace listening to every band that self-listed their music under all the genre categories I liked. This was before algorithms. Follower counts were an afterthought. It was all 100% organic. Finding good musicians felt like I'd won the lottery. I did the same on Livejournal. Finding good writers and artists there was like scoring the jackpot.
I found so many quality creatives back then that I'm certain today's algorithms would overlook due to their less commercial sounds or more unique worldviews. As algorithms slowly took over, many of those creatives disappeared into the digital void -- or otherwise joined the ranks of homogeny to maintain their status online. Algorithms don't like outliers. They require us to fall into line if we want to be heard or seen.
I don't know why we can't just go back to no algorithms. I'm assuming it has something to do with dollars and levels of control that aren't obvious to us from the outside.
I'm also uncomfortable with an algorithm dictating what it thinks the "best version" of me should look like. That's scary language. No technology in the world knows the best version of myself better than me.
"Algorithms don't like outliers." Wow! Exactly! You've perfectly described the essence of what I've been trying to articulate for the last hour! Thank you!
Awh yay I'm glad!! I've noticed this for years (I was even interviewed by a national photography magazine a few years ago about my opinions on the homogeny of social media -- of course it was published in print, haha, go figure!)
I honestly don't think algorithms would have boosted many of humanity's most cherished writers and musicians and artists and journalists of the past. What those people were doing and saying was far too innovative and unique to get promoted by an algorithm -- and often even subversive to the status quo of their time. An algorithm would have overlooked them, or possibly even demoted their visibility, based on the exact same qualities that humans today celebrate them for.
I agree! What's interesting to me is that all human art is a form of communication -- it expresses a particular human's experience and existence in a specific time and place. Every piece of human-made art is a piece of human history, and a testament to our collective history.
Today, AI takes all of those historical human experiences and statements, renders them meaningless, jumbles and reassembles them like some kind of artistic Frankenstein, and then pops out whatever visual qualities someone asked for on command.
I suppose that, in itself, is a testament to our current time and place -- but what a sad and empty time it is. Will the art of the future simply be a machine following orders? It's dismal to think about.
You have nailed it in the head. It is built with imitation as a foundation. In its current incarnation, there is little room for originality. The patterns from each model become more evident the more each model is used. Aesthetically the output is akin to 1996 clipart with 2023 pixel density.
I suspect the AI is trained on 1970s book covers.
I too felt uncomfortable with that choice of words. Yet that may well have been the most accurate, best worded expression of where this is really going.
That's what I'm afraid of.
Yeah, one of the issues that I have is the assumption that they can control things better than others have in the past. That it won’t just go off the rails like everything else. It’s incredibly presumptuous of them.
I am extremely skeptical about this. Not because I don't believe in the team here, but because I have also seen way too many times already where the path always ends.
Me too. Everyone who tries it assumes that they have the magic knowledge that will solve the whole problem of the internet. They all end up in a terrible place. This is why I have diversified where my Substack content is. Because I don’t want to presume that they will do everything correctly and I won’t end up in a worse place.
Me too. I think this is because I am old and prefer my own control.
I don't consider myself old but I do consider myself sick and tired of others pointing me toward what I should and should not consume. I genuinely hope that is not what will be going on here.
I agree. Medium platform does this and it is confining for me as a reader to wade through to reach and explore what I'd like to pursue on my own. They undulate me with emails to suggest "what I might like." Curation be damned.
Substack's statement triggered the PTSD from Medium's emails! I completely unsubscribed from all Medium notifications because of them.
Yes I was thinking the same.
You could read that as someone else deciding what is the best version of ourselves, which hopefully isn't the case.
Or it could be read as using our purposeful selection of reading to predict which general categories we aren't interested in, thereby preventing us from wading through large quantities of what we don't want in the explore areas. That saves time and frustration. Scrolling really changes when personal preferences, or categories of interest are completely turned off.
I actually don't mind tons of reading in varied subjects. I used to do that in the early days of social media, before algorithms, and it helped me discover a lot of creative people that I never would have discovered today with the "help" of algorithms.
One thing (of many) that I dislike about algorithms is the illusion of choice that they create. I would rather just do the hard work of reading a lot myself -- the way humans used to do back when they went to libraries and bookstores and read magazines and newspapers made of paper.
Whenever you give sex, age, and preferences on an app, you are setting algorithms.
I cleared a old smartphone and downloaded the tiktok app for an experience of a sort of pre-algorithm searching. I gave minimum to no preference, and demographic data, and the wrong (adult) age, to obtain the most un-algorithmic experience for awhile. Tiktok was like an alien world. Age is really big for algorithms. Rather than buying smart phone insurance we always used old phones for backup. I had several wrong age accounts to see how it changes such things as the news feeds and what is promoted in email.
I'm interested in just about anything, but I would like the algorithms to leave out porn, most hollywood and celebrity stuff, and long (TMI) discussions about the activities of personal hygiene. That saves scroll time.
An active search function is different, and should bring up what your words ask for, based direct relevance as much as possible. That's why I use alternative search engines to Bing, Google, Yahoo, etc.
Yes, I noticed that too! When the pandemic started, I made a Twitter account to keep up with breaking news. I didn't enter any of my demographic info because I just planned to use it like an RSS feed. Once everything got politicized, which happened shockingly fast, I made a point to follow equal numbers of people on the left and right to balance the information I was seeing.
It was insane -- what I saw was evidence that people on all sides were being fed different lies and half-truths while being led to believe their side was the right one. It was really sad, and it was even more sad that Twitter's leadership was actively leaning into it and fueling divisions, rather than fixing the algorithm and giving users access to balanced information.
I also noticed similar phenomenon to what you described with TikTok during the two hours I had an account before deleting it in total disgust, haha.
Algorithms are no joke. They can be really harmful. I'm skeptical that there's any way to make them work for humans, even under leadership that has the very best of intentions.
I have a Twitter account, but once they stuck a fork in SubStack, I'm not trying to grow the Twit presence. Why bother? Twitter banned a lot of people, including data analysts who came up with "wrong" conclusions, by merely graphing publicly accessible info. Some journalists who gazed upon "The Twitter Files" and wrote about the ties between Twitter and government are now at SubStack, in some cases after they were kicked out by prior employers. Interestingly, in July, a federal court has ordered the U.S. executive branch of government to cease and desist its activities to influence the content of social media.
I agree! And yes -- I'm so glad there are people defending public access to information using the legal system. What those lawsuits are doing is incredibly important. The outcomes of those lawsuits will reveal whether there is anything that sets America apart from authoritarian regimes.
I also think it would be wise for American lawyers to start challenging what constitutes "good faith" content moderation (as required under Section 230) -- because in my opinion, what I saw happen on Twitter during the pandemic, with the manipulation of algorithms and the stifling or amplification of different information for users of different demographics, was not done in good faith.
Yaa, the social media wants to be protected from libel and slander and legal liabilities as a public utility, but they've been acting like editors and publishers for a long time, which could have put them in a more vulnerable legal category. Then the executive branches of government stepped into the day to day functioning and their activities became painfully obvious. I think that many programmers and algorithm designers don't understand the laws that protect speech, or they don't like them, and/or it's all about short term profits.
Now it almost seems as though older info on net is being torn down at an accelerated rate. It might be due to web site owners fearing the various regulations placed on the web by governments, and not having the technical acumen or resources to change or secure their sites.
Agreed! Programmers are also humans, so there's always the chance that at least some of them really enjoy the level of power they have and potentially believe they're above the law in some respects because of how hidden their work is from public view -- kind of like what we often see with corrupt government officials or corrupt law enforcement. It takes an almost divine level of wisdom and restraint to exercise power in healthy ways that are actually good for others. Hence the need for checks and balances.
And I've actually noticed that as well, about search results. The internet is so, so weird and different from what it was when I was in high school, and not in a good way at all.
Can you say more about why you are against curation of any kind?
(Thinking: the best writing is, itself, a kind of skillful curation.)
Correct. I am specifically referring to gatekeeping by the platform under the veil of "curation" where certain authors or articles are artificially surfaced based on arbitrary metrics. Anything that comes between me and the author of the work is unnecessary.
If it were yours to do, how would you encourage discovery without using curation as a starting point?
(Are you on Tumblr, btw? The pinnacle of social media that, at least historically, has one of the least top-down curated social experiences on the planet? ;-) )
I think taking people you follow and posts you like or restack as a starting point can lead to good results. I'm just not sure why some algorithms do a good job of this and some don't. For example, Spotify pretty consistently suggests music that I like by musicians I've often never heard of, while Netflix is more like "You gave a thumbs-up to Buffy the Vampire Slayer, so we thought you might like High School Hot Tub."
ha! :)
Ohhh, yes. I agree on Spotify. I wonder how their algorithm works.
I follow my own curiosity for discovery. Depending on the topic, I like to have free rein on how shallow or how deep I want to go. But if as a hypothetical my job description required me to contaminate the pool, I would start by putting a handicap on reach to make sure the playing field is equalized and everyone gets a fair shot. Then, I would employ a community based up/down voting system to determine what stays on top.
Fascinating idea about the handicap. Wondering about the implications of that.
Two more questions :) ...
• Where do you mainly find the means to follow your curiosity?
• Have you seen a community-based up/down voting system that works and isn't heavily gamed by users who want more attention?
Yeah the handicap is key to ensure the oxygen isn't constantly sucked out of the room by the ones with the most followers. This becomes increasingly important as the platform matures and the gap between those who've been at it for a while and those who are just starting out widens.
As far as curiosity, my life mostly revolves around travel, so I usually pursue things that are informed by my interactions with others and IRL experiences. I am fascinated by exploring how others live and typically spend a lot of time talking to others. My life online is merely an extension of that.
I think Reddit though not perfect, has found a decent balance when it comes to up/down voting. The community in most subs is also very good at calling out others that are blatantly trying to horde attention.
Love that, about the travel. :)
I'm thinking on a totally practical level here: how do you discover online? For example, is it mainly through Google search, Reddit recommendations, links through publications you already enjoy... or other discovery methods?
So the up/down vote is monitored by the community, it sounds like? I'm curious if this happens at scale. (In other words, does Reddit use it to bring content upwards to a larger audience? Or does the up/down vote stay within a sub-Reddit and go no further as a form of influence? (For that matter, does the up/down vote influence discovery, or doesn't it? I'm not a Reddit user, thus am curious to hear from someone who is :)
I have not used Google for anything other than VERY basic tasks in many years. Things like directions, recipes and other similar straight forward queries I find still yield fairly good results. For topics of interest I go exclusively to UGC interest based groups where I can interact with real humans. Discord, Facebook Groups, Reddit and on some topics old school Forums are still great places to discover and have real conversations with others.
The up/down voting system on Reddit is limited to the sub for the most part, but certain subs will surface on the main page as they blow up in popularity. But most importantly, if you want to consume Reddit in it's original linear layout, you can always go to https://old.reddit.com and take it back to 2007.
Very much so. There are great authors from all walks of life here, yet there seems to be a not so subtle bias towards the low hanging fruit that can bring in the most revenue with the least amount of effort. The paragraph I quoted above just reeked of this in between the lines.
Yes. There is enough of that already out there and it is precisely what has contaminated so many other platforms to the point they are pretty much useless for anything other than dopamine hits.
I love what you are building and am grateful for a more thoughtful place to hang out online!
Me too
I mean, you say this and I want to believe you, but... even though I'm not (and don't plan to)monetize my writing here, even though my whole reason for being here is to get away from that, my "notes" feed is still filled with "how I made a zillion dollars on substack" articles that I've never clicked on and have no interest in.
I can only conclude that since substack only makes money when writers are successful at monetizing their publications, this is the algorithm priotizing the needs of the owners over what I'm here for.
So you know, there is that... (said with all affection -- I'm happy to be here, but those articles and the relentless focus on money money money is troubling and a bit of a sour note in all of it...)
Those Note’s feeds are laughable and annoying. You have to scroll for ten minutes before hitting any posts related to you by some degree. My favorite is when the feed just loops through all the same people, all with check marks, none having any association with me.
The loop is so strange. Same stuff coming back around, and yet I’ve been here for over two months and can’t get any traction in Notes for the life of me (unless I comment on any of the 10 writers showing up in my loop, lol).
LOL nobody reads my notes either. I just talk to myself in there.
Me too - I actually use Notes as notes.
haha this is the BEST example of someone who TRANSFORMED into a successfull newsletter owner! Chapeau, Kristi! I'll feature this. It's genius.
"I knew her when... "
Lol I'll send out autographs later 😁
I think it's pretty cool we've known each other since Medium days and have both made names for ourselves here though.
haha, "I knew her when" Same with Maya and David! and JR Heimbigner and many more. Jamie...
I'll use STUPID CRAZY as well... because I also wanted to use snooze on. super!!
But only a handful of writers really. YOu're one of them. Where are you now in terms of subs. My goal is to have more subs than followers. I'm almost half way through
I think the only way to be successful at Notes is to engage with others whenever you post a note, but it has to be with the right people, where your comments will be seen and responded to, i.e., talk to the popular kids. This will get your note circulating in their feeds. Still, it means nothing if those writers don't engage with what you post, and many of them won't. I find Notes very frustrating. I wish I had never wasted my time trying it, as I promised I wouldn't. I don't bother anymore.
I do believe you've nailed it. The problem with Notes is that it's all about finding writers who are good at... posting notes. That is, those who play the game which has as its #1 rule is that you must pretend it isn't a game.
I've had a few interesting exchanges on Notes, and that's great. But it seems to be way more about the popular folks sitting around patting each other on the back, and the not so popular tapping the door in the hope to be noticed.
And there you have it, as you said Corey. The inner circle expands but it's less about the person's work that yields the mutual support, and more about the social personality that one can display.
That's my take anyway. Same dynamic as writers on Twitter.
I can't vouch for Twitter. My only other social media experience is a brief stint on LinkedIn, which I think works very similar to Notes. The more you engage with others the more your notes will circulate, and the more chance you have of reaching more people. Notes seem more limited, though. I know it's a nook compared to other platforms, but to see the same ten people at the top of my feed whenever I go on is irksome. Like you said, it is a game, like any other social platform. If you really want to expand your audience using Notes and the like, you must talk to people you wouldn't normally talk to and pretend they're as awesome as they think they are.
I restack posts sometimes, mine and others, and then always wonder what I was thinking because I know nobody saw it. I don't have the time right now to spend three hours patting backs just to get some views, nor do I care to.
I thought it was just me!
This is really heartening to read! So many of us (both writers on Substack and readers) are trying to do intentional work to curate our experience and what we take in each day, yet (of course) find ourselves derailed by the inherent algorithmic realities that push us in various directions. (And some of us write a lot about it to help others!😆)
I’m really excited about this - and I think as with anything else, it’s knowing what we don’t know that gives us the agency to actually learn. This sounds like an amazing way for people to experience the shift in their own reading/algorithm experience, and then see how drastic and empowering a different way could be. Here for it! ✏️💙
The flywheel of Substack is accelerating as the quantity of quality writing takes off. In the spirit of challenging convictions and understanding the why, hosting debates between prominent authors with differing perspectives could be a huge draw for Substack. Here are a few matchups I'd love to see: https://yuribezmenov.substack.com/p/great-substack-debates-matchups
One of my favorite things to do when I was in college, twenty years ago, was to look up debates that challenged the very core of what I believed in. And I'd just lie down and listen to them, for days on end. It was so refreshing and never antagonistic—just me, the CD, and the screen. I love the idea of Substack putting that sort of constructive content that challenges one's thinking in front of us. Not to get us to rage engage, but to expand our thinking.
Love the idea Yuri! I think substack released "letters" which allows for this type of back and forth format.
Beautifully written. I am very excited for Substack and its writers’ and readers futures. Keep it up!
I just joined the Substack community, changing from a blog to Substack. I found you just as you suggest, by receiving messages that intrigue me. Thank you.
Me too. I joined Substack about a year ago because all the writers I liked best were here. This community is so much more in my zone -- writing not to sell another product but for the love of writing and sharing with others.
I love the phrase "curate your attention". So easily, our attention gets curated by others and our days just go by mindlessly.
I’ve read this 4 times and still have no idea what you’re announcing, but keep up the great work!
This is not an announcement this is my attempt to share some of the principles behind what we are doing.
We'll have an actual announcement for you soon
They’re sharing their Why.
I felt the same way. It’s a bit of feel good jargon. At the same time, I’m enjoying what Substack is doing (generally) and I have a vague sense of excitement for the thing coming that I can’t discern 😆
Dying lmfao!!!
😄😄
I love what you're building. Looking forward to a corner of the internet where the cream rises to the top.
Algorithm for quality? Really? What a horrendous thought. Turing will be turning over in his grave. It's the human intelllect that creates, not machines. Substack, turn back before it's too late!
We have met the enemy and he is us!
Still not sure what any of this means in practice, and whether or not it has any practical value to me as a Substack writer. "Quality," even though Chris tries to define it in this context, can mean whatever you decide it means. I understand what search algorithms do and that they fundamentally reflect the will of whoever created them. What continues to concern me is that Substack will be no different from other platforms in that it favors the front-runners — the creators who, frankly, don't need much help in gaining readership because they brought in a large pre-existing following — while pushing down writers who are still trying to get discovered. There is a good business case to be made for highlighting your most popular talent, and to the extent that Substack's big-gun creators have drawn readers to this platform and given it credibility, I think we can all be grateful for that. But if Substack isn't going to actively help me build a bigger following, I might as well be posting somewhere else as here.
Hey Chris, keep moving in the direction of serving humanity and resist all temptation to think technology has compassion or a unique human thought. If I wanted to have an account with Facebook or Twitter or Facebook or Discord or Instagram or Quora or Snapchat, or TickTok or WeChat, I would have done it by now. I trust you will do everything in your power to make Substack none of those. Algorithms and all.
First off, the CEOs of Substack are masters at saying very little but at the same time being incredibly vague.
Algorithms of any kind, even with the best of intentions, ruin discovery and serendipity. I can trust my own discoverability/curation/interests. We all have an internal algorithm for that, and I don't need to be fed the "things I might be interested in."
It just seems like more of the social media-ish stuff we've been trying to avoid at Substack but seems to be creeping in more and more.
https://www.bobsassone.com
Excellent observations. I have had challenges getting the people who follow me on other networks to invest time and space in the Substack app, so I am looking forward to seeing how the new version shakes out.
Hey, I've only been here a couple of months, but nobody's mentioned that Apple doesn't give a shit about the Substack app unless you've got an iphone (my spelling) or a tablet. Isn't Substack serious about its application (my word)? Some other companies can write code for the internet that can still be read by Macs.
ABSOLUTELY FOOKEN AWESOME!
Well if people want to learn about why they want what they want, I’m all about the philosophy of things. I’ve written about desires and needs and so many other things. Just saying.
But beyond that, while I appreciate that you’re willing to change your view of algorithms and own the change of perspective, I do worry that you presume that you can give people what they want without negatively impacting people. Not to point out the obvious, but not everything people want is good for them.
So to try to give people what they want can be just as bad as what you seek to avoid. You assume that what “legacy social media” is doing somehow can be avoided. This reminds me of:
“If I was in charge of the world, everything would work perfectly and no one would have any problems.”
First time I thought substack is going in the wrong direction was when I saw that the "Read in Browser" button had disappeared. Now it only says "READ IN APP".
One reason why the internet is dysfunctional is that platforms try to enclose users in apps instead of using the browser as a universal interface. To put it in a slogan: Apps are fiefdoms, browsers are interoperable.
I just started to read Doctorow's "The Internet Con: How to Seize the Means of Computation". It has a lot of good background information on how Facebook and other platforms try to lock users into apps.
One was hoping that Substack would be different.
If Substack forced us into an app (in order to make switching costs high for us later) then they would already be on their way of enshittification (one of Doctorow's apt terms describing the way all internet platforms seem to go).
I hope the new app is better than the existing one—which is terrible. Where do you go for literary fiction? Or 'upmarket fiction.' All I see is genre fiction, which is fine for those who like that sort of thing. If I search on the app for 'fiction,' I mostly see articles about fiction writing, how to, etc. Where are the good short stories, and novellas, novels? Hard to find. If I search for Salman Rushdie, for example, I get article after article about him, about his writing. His actual fiction is hidden, hard to find. Why?
Yes, there's a lot of folks who write about writing fiction, which is fine I suppose. But not what I'm looking for, either. And there's a lot of genre fiction which seems to be quite popular these days (sci-fic, fantasy, witches and such) but also not what makes me sit up and take notice.
Substack wrote about improved discovery recently. Maybe something coming soon.
Have you tried looking at this? I realize you were making a larger point but still, I thought you or someone might be interested in it.
https://substack.com/leaderboard/fiction/all
I don't know if anyone at Substack sees things this way, but the task they have cut out for themselves is to create a profitable business that supports a patronage economy. The big, team-written Substacks operate differently, but I think that for most of us, we don't want readers to think like customers. I know that once my paywall goes up, I won't offer much of a value proposition at $5/month when there is so much content online that you can read for free. Or you can pay $20 and get a great ebook by a known author, as opposed to my 4,000 words and a few photos. Realistically, I am looking for readers who will tip me on recurring basis just because they like the cut of my jib. $5 won't even buy a gallon of gas in LA these days, but throw enough tips into the jar and maybe I can devote enough time to writing so that I can keep you entertained reliably and consistently.
Therefore, Substack's core business is to play broker between writers and reader-patrons. They're part of a new patronage economy, a democratized version of the old institution of aristocratic patronage, that includes Kickstarter, Patreon, Buy Me a Coffee and Ko-fi, all of which work toward a similar goal. They will only make money doing what they do if they can convince a lot of people that supporting content creators is not the same as shopping for laundry soap.
The worst versions of ourselves also make excellent reading, Chris!
I feel like I’ve started my substacks at precipice of something novel and exciting in the writing space. It feels as if Twitter (not X thank you) is custom designed for low quality engagement baiting and farming, whilst Substack is the antithesis of that. I admit, after years of using Twitter I had dulled the dopamine receptors in my brain so much, that without the morning scroll I’d feel itchy. That’s now changing with the chance to create and add value with like minded individuals.
I’m just starting out myself, so if anyone wants to collaborate on ADHD content, let me know :)
Better than what? Who's measuring, and what are they measuring?
This is the fundamental error in the way they’ve presented things. It’s just assumed that they can measure things accurately.
Regardless, I don't come here for self-improvement. I come here because there are some writers whose work I like and I want to read it; and this is where they publish.
I love that you're the best group of people willing to build something meaningful and useful, to untether people from the toxic miasma of social. I deleted all my social accounts in 2021 for a full year and it was the best thing I ever did. (I've since jumped back into social to promote my book and substack, and I already feel like hot garbage the moment I open any of the apps.)
Thank God for Substack.
https://www.jasonchatfield.com/blog/cartoons-via-email-vs-social-media
The real question, Jason, is how are you making your logo button turn round in circles? ;-)
I made it in AfterEffects :)
Thanks ... I'll look into it. I like bright, shiny things. ;-)
If you need some guidance on how to proceed, remember, that we are in the Apocalypse... the great lifting of the veil covering the grand deception. Help us to remove the inversions by promoting Free Will and calling out the deceptions and encouragements for Evil. Evil is simply the attempt to remove a persons free choice and free thought; whether that is through murder or propaganda. How? Maybe an algorithm that seeks out and calls out coercion of any kind with a moral code based on the 10 commandments?
I’d like to see a true discovery feature which I think would help to this end. A section/category dedicated to surfacing and highlighting only new accounts vs based on popularity of article or author. Popularity only comes with reach, which most new writers on the platform don’t have.
This can be paired with an option to subscribe to be notified (monthly email) of new writers (with x article contributions) giving existing stackers the ability to check out new people and their work. This approach effectively minimizes the algorithmic efforts because we are free to easily find and subscribe to new authors based on pure discovery. The algorithms can then work more effectively in terms of providing quality that resonates with the reader because discovery becomes more organic and heavily weighted / influenced by the reader vs algorithm.
Discovery and quality don’t need complicated algorithms. It just requires two separate feature lanes; new and unpopular vs not new and popular. Let the people be part of the process.
Yeah unfortunately my best strategy so far is to be a "reply guy" and randomly comment in threads like this and hope it piques interest.
Unfortunately that is the chief strategy for most new writers. Discovery and quality is only hard because the job has been completely handed over to algorithms.
Yeah that's why any marketing 101 strategy says "don't plan on going viral" because it's way too random.
Why do you people keep doing this? This one has to be the thirstiest post yet - you're not even promoting a new feature this time.
First, let's drop the whole "best version of you" nonsense. We all know what Substack's reputation is - that you are known for hosting some of the worst conspiracy theorists and bigoted cranks in the world. You accept them because they are profitable and they apparently don't hurt your reputation in any critical way. Fine - your business, your call.
Second, let's stop pretending that you're something other than a boutique service for people with preexisting followings. I don't believe for a second that you are interested in finding "new lights," not least because of what the comment section is going to look like. I guarantee that all of the other comments are going to be from people desperately hoping that they can scrape off another subscriber by commenting here. I guarantee that because leaving cynical, content-free comments all over the place is pretty much what Substack advises.
Let me tell you something about those dreaded algorithms that everyone sneers at. In a world where the gatekeepers won't even speak to anyone with fewer than 20k Twitter followers, those systems are the only means that small creators have to find an audience. You can claim that Substack is a great place to find an audience all you want, but everyone knows that it's nonsense because you have no systems for internal discovery. Followbacks and begging bigger creators for help are not valid alternatives to a real recommendation system.
Until you can offer some tools that are going to benefit someone who hasn't been a major media figure for two decades, I really wish you'd quit spamming me with your ridiculous blue sky posts.
😂😂 I love comments that buck the system! It's refreshing to see one or two people not all rah rah on the bandwagon.
You do raise a few valid points here but the one I could argue is discoverability. Compared to how Substack used to be before the app, it WAS a dismal place for new writers with no audience. It was impossible to build a following worth sticking around for.
But my brand new pub has only been alive less than 3 weeks and I've collected nearly 60 subscribers. I didn't bring any in with me. Let's assume I can keep moving at a rate of approximately 100/month without being famous. I can live with that.
How many of your subscribers are paid subscribers if you don’t mind me asking?
I ask because I have built an audience from scratch and yet failed to build an paid subscriber base. So I’m curious what other people’s experiences are in that regard.
I haven't unleashed a paid section yet. I'd like to have a good base of engaged subscribers and an active community first. I feel like readers should know who I am and what they can expect before I ask for money.
Andrew ... I've been here for a bit over a year and I've found writers who have changed my life, writers that I read rather religiously ... most of them don't have checkmarks or more than a thousand subscribers. I currently subscribe to about 200 Substacks and what I see is a huge range of skill at using the system put in place by Substack. For instance, many writers are still using the boiler plate Substack put into the system as a place holder for the Welcome Email. Some writers dismiss it as an unimportant email that readers don't open. Not true. It is a critical piece of beginning a relationship with a new reader.
I believe Substack can aid the discovery of "new lights" but I also believe that we writers ... whether we're going for money or just trying to get our voices heard ... have to treat Substack as a craft. Knowing how to engage our readers, how to attract and hold their attention, is a skillset that has to be learned, just as thinking is a skill, and writing with clarity and creativity is a skill.
I hope Substack does a good job with their development of the app ... but we can't expect it to well by us if we're not learning how to put our best writing forward and expertly using the tools they give us.
"It [the welcome email] is a critical piece of beginning a relationship with a new reader.'
I agree. There's even been an article or two from Substack about the importance of the welcome email.
It's a shame then how much it goes to waste because it doesn't work correctly with recommendations.
When someone signs up for Pub A and accepts the recommendations that Pub A offers, they don't receive the welcome emails from the recommended pubs, only from Pub A.
That's too bad. The welcome email could be the start of a good thing, but many never receive it.
I agree ... this is a system glitch that I hope gets fixed. I think you brought this up in Office Hours ... first time I knew about it. Thanks.
Oops, I just realized (I was reading your article about Office Hours) that we talked about this earlier. :) Trying to get the word out in the hope that Substack will fix this glitch. And I see you mentioned me in your article. Thanks! I didn't know that, never received a notification. Hmmm. All the best!
On this article alone, there are plenty of people here to make a real difference — and chances are, you'll never even know it. What I have in mind takes work — time and effort to think it through. In a world where easy is all the rage, who wants to work for it? It seems we have all the time in the world to complain about problems but no time to solve any. And about that work:
Work is a journey on which you welcome challenge. Work does not instantly respond — work digs to discover and inquires to clarify. Work is difficult and demands discernment. Work wonders, pauses, listens, absorbs, and reflects. Work does not rest on who’s right and who’s wrong: Work wants to know if there’s something more to see, something to learn, something that sharpens the mind. Work never stops building on the foundation of your own work and what you learn from the work of others.
Work works its way through material that is not easy. Work recognizes complexity and the demands of in-depth explanation. Work will go on a trip to ideas that take time and effort to understand. Work knows that you can’t see your way through to a solution without understanding the different dimensions of a problem. Work does not defend before you consider. Work does not race to conclusions — work arrives at them through careful consideration. Work is willing is rethink what you think you know. Work takes integrity, courtesy, curiosity, courage, and decency.
Work comes with the willingness to be wrong. Work is not self-satisfied. Work does not sling snippets of certitude — work crafts argument on the merits. Work is an exchange where each party takes information into account. Work does not issue childish insults — work demands that you act your age.
Work respects your intelligence by using it — and shows respect to others as we work our way to mutual respect. Work won’t be pretty and might even get ugly — but work will do what it takes to work it out. And if you wanna start solving problems — work is what it’s gonna take.
Dealing on the Moment is What America Does “Best”:
https://onevoicebecametwo.life/2023/08/06/dealing-on-the-moment-is-what-america-does-best/
Chris & co.— You're perpetuating a frustratingly entrenched fallacy here, which is that a given technology is "neither good nor bad. [It's] just technology." Chellis Glendinning speaks to it well:
"All technologies are political. As social critic Jerry Mander writes in Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television, technologies are not neutral tools that can be used for good or evil depending on who uses them. They are entities that have been consciously structured to reflect and serve specific powerful interests in specific historical situations."
The saying "guns don't kill people, people kill people" comes to mind. Why, exactly, would we overlook the fact that guns are specifically designed to injure and kill things, and that people are invariably subject to these outcomes? To do so would seem obviously irresponsible.
I do appreciate that you ground your critique in the idea that mastery and manipulation—technological impulses—are often abusive. I also understand that you are wrestling with the implications and intentions of a tool/business you've created. But if you really want to do what you say with Substack—or just interrogate value and quality more responsbily—getting past the neutral tech fallacy is imperative.
We’ve all been looking for better… for a more conscious way of being, living and doing. Especially online. I’m proud to be a part of this growing community. Aren’t you? :)
Woo! Can't wait for more discovery features on here. I've gotten so discouraged trying to grow my audience and getting nowhere, that I barely publish any more. I have quite the backlog of writing I've done which maybe I can get motivated to start putting up if better discovery features are in the work. I'm eagerly awaiting what y'all have in store...
I have been enjoying the platform so far but I hope that they will be more opportunities given for new writers to be discovered.
One thing Ive noticed repeatedly on Substack is how many tools they offer, how much support they offer to help us get started and help us grow our stacks.
Id say the easiest way to grow your readership is to engage engage engage with other authors on here. It encourages restacks which often offer new subscribers.
Thanks for the sound advice DeeDee! Does posting on notes frequently help to increase our visibility as well?
The more I learn the more respect I have for the Substack platform. Time to get going on my own writing journey here.
Optimists unite - join Substack!
Can I please go back to seeing a chronological feed? I know for a fact that stuff is missing from my “To Read” list.
Ditto
What an inspiring read🙌 I spend a lot of time on X/Twitter, which is the main source for obtaining my SS audience, but I find myself spending increasingly more of my reading time in this app.
I don’t see a lot of interaction on Notes yet, but I appreciate the feature and believe if we consistently post and reply with genuine non-spammy content, we’ll gradually start to see more activity there.
The vision and fundamentals are solid here. Thanks for all of your effort.
I hear you LoneWick, I spend a lot of time on X but It hasn’t generated any SS people for me yet , not sure why, but being Canadian, twitter is my news source - Canadian News is heavily supported by taxation so it speaks governmentees
Oh interesting. I didn’t realize that about Canada. I’ve found that X limits your reach if you post an SS link. My strategy is to post the “shareable images” that are generated when you make an SS post instead. So I make a post on X with the SS image (which is really nice anyway), then say something like “find in my bio” (and keep your link in a linktree in your bio). Here’s an example: https://x.com/lonewick_/status/1702757369753772500?s=46
Thank you, I am just getting started so will study how best to do it
Is the Substack app available for people like me, who do not use the cellphone for writing, internet stuff? Can it be used on a desktop computer? I use my phone only for phone calls and text messages.
Hi Noel. Yes, the desktop version is great and allows you to see writers’ uniquely designed pages.
Ha ha - I have been doing my stuff for 16 years, and pretty much don't pay for anything. I've paid only for 2 domain names. Managing to do everything else on open source things - for free. You need to be upfront that this is a paid app. That's fine, but it's not for me.
I’m confused. I don’t pay for the app…
I went to install the app. It sent me to Google Playstore.ds to that effect. So i closed it. There it said "pay" - or words to that effect. So I closed it. Perhaps I should persist. It might have a "free" option.
Oh interesting. Yeah, it’s completely free to use all features. The only thing you pay for is if you decided to become a paid subscriber to a specific writer.
Yes! Substack.com
I want my Substack feed to be like my iTunes (Apple Music library...) varied, diverse, weird even and pushing the limits of what we call music... BUT every song in my library has a story behind it, every piece of music was DISCOVERED by me, not shoved into my ear holes without my consent. That is what algorithms get wrong, they thing they have our consent. What we want is the ability to discover something, to wander down an alley and discover something we did not know existed in the world, to be continually surprised and delighted, but it’s always our choice to collect and curate, to attach a story to... figure out how to write that algorithm and we’ll accept it.
When I leave Facebook or any other number of social media apps, I feel exhausted and depressed. When I leave the Substack app I feel refreshed, reinvigorated, and inspired. Keep up the good work, your platform is desperately needed!
Free of ads! That’s the best. You can solely focus on reading. I love it
I'm still trying to understand how Substack works. I started writing here for about a month ago. Even though I try to write consistently twice a week, only one of my subscribers came within Substack.
I write on Islamic Calligraphy and Arts, and based on the searches I've made so far, I'm pretty confident that I'm the only up to date and consistent publication in my field here. Still I have little to no traffic even though I pay attention to posting details and sections like tagging, using Notes, Chat, etc. All of these discourages new writers like me who try to spread valuable information for those who are interested.
I hope the algorithm will be more specific in the future. I still see irrelevant featured posts under certain categories.
Yasin ... patience, it takes time. Also I note that the Title of your Substack doesn't seem to have anything to do with what you say you write about. Substack's search engine relies largely on title, profile, and brief description. While your brief description "A Teacher & a classically trained Islamic Calligrapher. Shares insights from Islamic Calligraphy and Art in his newsletter." mentions calligraphy, you might get more traction with a more specific title. Plus, I would assume that your niche is rather small so it will take time to build up your audience. Best wishes on your journey.
Thanks a lot for your feedback Joyce. Sometimes it's a bit hard to explain the philosophy behind the publication title since paper and pen have a lot of history in Islamic Arts. But I agree with the specificness. I guess it'd be always better to apply a more direct approach while giving names. Let's hope publishing consistently with quality will compensate for it. Best wishes !
I liked Facebook early on when the feed was just rapid fire whateever people were posting showed up willy nilly. Then something started controlling what I saw and I couldn't get my family to show up no matter what I did. Blah blah, Twitter did the same thing, started controlling what came across in favor of showing me stuff someone/thing guessed I would like based on prior viewing, or whatever site paid the most to repeat it a lot, or something. Blah blah. Substack feeds me some things that I do like, but I am missing things I liked that Substack is no longer showing me, although it still shows up in my personal set up where I have specified things I want to see every time I log on/they post soemthing new. I understand the need to optimize somehow to justify fees or information dipping. I would happily pay some money for an utterly unfiltered feed. I guess I might be willing to pay some money/value of some sort for nudges toward my site (once I get it going!) I guess I might be interested to see what your algorithm would feed me as "quality" stuff, but only if you offer some unfiltered raw feed to compare it to...any optimizing search is going to be more and more recursive over time. Sorta like being shown the Mona Lisa as the model of Rennaissance painting and only finding out after much searching that Caravagio's paintings even exist, you know, let alone Artemisia Gentileschi? (Quick, who did "Judith Slaying Holofernes" better? Why do you suppose Artmesia's version is so much bloodier and more heartfelt than Mr. C.s? Which will climb up your 'quality' list first? Why?) Or Jackson Pollock without the counterpoint of Agnes Martin. Or, so many other examples. Change is good, change happens, you guys just be more careful that the ones that came before, please.
Maybe all true but there’s no rule saying a company can’t give the user the option to opt out of the algorithm. I’d happily do that.
My worry is that, even with the best intentions, the larger market dynamics outside Sunstack will end up sinking their teeth into what you all have created, for the worse. Plenty of businesses build themselves into success with a certain model then get swept up in that very success and change what truly got them there.
For the first time in the internet’s history, creators AND fans are being empowered. ✊🏻
Nicely said. I want my lizard brain deactivated. Glad to be an emerging writer on Substack.
I can honestly never go back to television. It's been almost a year.
It's been almost 15 years for me ... which means I get left out of a lot conversations. Oh, drat!
Oh the joy that will bring me!
In 2 months I will have reached my first year anniversary on Substack. In that time they have never stopped innovating. The latest thing I discovered when publishing this week is the option to make a little promo vid by highlighting some text and recording it as a voiceover... it worked perfectly and I love it! But... I'm not sure about this. I suspect it is only going to work to the advantage of writers who already have vast numbers of subscribers, or who bring in the most revenue. They are not the writers who need more discoverability. The aim should be to support smaller newsletters gain traction. For example, when I blogged on WP I was regularly top of google search pages in my niche because the posts were regularly trawled by search engines. Even though newsletter are simultaneously published as web pages, they do not seem to appear in google searches, which is disappointing... it would really help with discoverability. Just a thought...
Ali ... I'm starting to see my posts showing up on google. As a matter of fact, I tweaked my title a few days ago and that's showing up already. I think this will get better as we continue posting and working on our Substacks.
Hi Joyce, that's great to know! Thank you for sharing this, its very hopeful. Whatever one might think about google having the monopoly, it really is the best tool for discoverability.
Yeah. I'm angry because I can't communicate with Substack to find out how to use it better. I want to use Substack but I need some help. jayshell05@gmail.com
Jay ... there are several of us on here trying to create info for emerging writers ... Russell Nohelty at The Author Stack, Writers at Work with Sarah Fay, Claire Venus at Sparkle on Substack, and my own Substack Guide series based on aligning Substack elements and features with a proven Reader Engagement Process, available at gratitude mojo community. Reach out with questions on Notes or go to Office Hours ... lots of people are very helpful.
Thank you Joyce, PhD candidate here and new writer to this platform and have been watching on the sidelines for awhile and will look at those resources on how to get started- a bit overwhelming.
Marni ... it can be a bit overwhelming ... but you don't have to do it *right* ... just jump in and learn along the way the rest of it. Think of it as an experiment. What PhD are you working on?
Thank you Joyce, it’s in Women’s Studies- I’m in Chiang Mai, Thailand working with the Burmese refugees- thesis: Healing Collective Trauma: Emergence of the feminine design.
Wow, Marni ... I really look forward to your writings. Let's get you started ... it would be great to have a Title to go with your thesis ... that's a spark that I'm sure a lot of women will want to know more about.
Thank you and your mg first subscriber!!
honored to be it. Very interested in your project and think you might weave your newsletter into your program. Posting some of your findings and getting feedback from this community might be a positive you ... and us.
Thank you Joyce- that is the intention.
Great piece thank you. Going about this kind of living requires discipline and intention to focus on those things worthy of remembrance.
"The algorithms have been studying us, and they know what we want. They serve our desires with ruthless intent."
This is very true - and very disconcerting when we consider the algorithm is holding up a mirror to one's desires. It should be a pause for self reflection.
Well said ! Kudos !
A worthy goal indeed. So interested to see how you manage to do this! Will there be more articles on the issue? Would love to see examples of the algorithm at work. :)
Driving discovery... these words are music to my ears. Let’s see what you guys have in store!
Face to face
vs
Fingers to sweep and delete
Cheers
Build the Algorithmic Republic, Chris.
People will pay tribute to the statue of you on Mars.
yeah. everything chris said seems to be exactly what substack is.
and I along with hundreds or thousands, am grateful.
I have literally archived posts three separate times, and they keeping popping back in my “inbox”--is this the algorithm as well? It’s making it painful to read posts in the app
One time a writer with thousands of followers told me, 'No one has the right to judge an art.'
However, writing world has always been a meritocracy world, and algorithm puts what you think is superior or genius to feed the minds.
Maybe you'll say only incompetent people will be against a meritocracy system, but I just feel sometimes it's a sign of privilege for particular people and silents some genuine voice from different backgrounds telling a story without being able to access the Internet or having money to buy a thesaurus.
Literature is like Philosophy that only God-chosen people have the rights to write or talk about it and make the modern-day people feel their lives are much deeper and sacred after paying $300 for a one-hour speech.
I wonder if a pilgrim finds out the destination place is a slum in Niger, and most people live there cannot live over 30 years old.
Can he/she still maintain the faith they originally hold before embarking the journeys?
Substack is going to continue to morph for the worse by 'definition' to please the majority or masses. Speaking solely for myself, I am tapering down my time spent both reading and writing. It is just another social media platform. Like tik-tok, instantgram and ûber only for 'writers'. It's like the Rolling Stones lyric put so eloquently... 'look at me!'
Shattered.
Kindly subscribe to my Substack.
WOW - how interesting reading so many comments here - thank you All... I'm totally new here and have not yet cared much about how to get found and all these things... I'm myself writing about a niche of a niche of a niche - so as my whole life long, I do not fit a box and I'm totally fine with that... I guess I would be shocked if I would suddenly fit one, giggles.... Algorithms - well, I don't really understand that and so I "fooled Google" - some years ago, I did take all the "things" out of my Google account that I could and sometime later I got a mail from them and so I looked into it - because of my "behavior" they "judged" my gender, age and relationship status as well as interests ALL WRONG - I had a great laugh.... When it comes to the "advantage" of known writers, I think that's nothing new really - that was the case before the internet already and it took and takes time and work to reach such a task and sometimes "being the right one at the right time and space".... When it comes to the "selection of themes/category", well, yeah but for everyone in a niche it's a chance as well..... I made a post, I didn't send out to other platforms (just as a completion of theme) and there were 10 people reading or at least clicking it and I thought that pretty amazing (from my website, it took me a year to have that amount of reads constantly).... and I think, every click and every subscriber (free or paid or whatever) is a PERSON who was attracted and we even KNOW about it and that feeds our "instant gratification system" as before, on paper, we would not had known who read a magazine, paper or anything alike and nowadays we know..... Isn't that amazing!!!!!????? .... perspective and focus - so I go back to my draft.....
I suggest reading “Algorithms of Oppression” by Safiya Noble if you haven’t already.
I'm hoping the search feature will improve. I can type in an exact title of one of my posts and it won't show up in a post search. I may not have thousands of subs, but I do have hundreds. I should at least show up somewhere close to the top.
I love writers who know why they write. It all follows from there.
I've applied for my novel, East Germany, 1989 to be included in The Library's publications. Never heard back.
"Can you imagine how your view of the world might change if you spent your time online in a place optimized for reading what you care most about, rather than just endless scrolling? What would it feel like to check a feed that’s trying to catch you up on what you deeply value rather than keeping you feeling anxious, angry, and alone?
We intend to find out."
This! Google has become the evil they said not to be. I sure hope and pray Substack sticks to their values.
unless im wrong about it. the explore tab defaults to ‘for you’ , not ‘following’. i would really hope it was the other way round.
When i go to the home i want to see the posts of those i follow. then click the drop down menu to do some discovery.
having to click the drop down menu every time i get to the home tab is frustrating.
We're trusting you here. Please do right by us--readers and writers both.
Well, I have yet to use an app that I have much control over the algorithm. I want to be able to choose what I read, the order it comes to me, and the way my feed looks. So far I have liked what I’ve seen on Substack. Let’s hope the user stays in control. I haven’t found an AI platform yet that really gets me right.
As a newbie to this platform I really want to be a reader more than a contributor. I have been a blogger from 2004 as well as a Twitter bum since 2009 but have about had my fill of long-form writing. When Substack came along I realized this is the new blogger so I began touring .
Yikes! before I realized it I not only had an account but was being treated as a potential contributor. Little by little it dawned on me that I was expected to be a writer and I think I actually published one post, but my surfing kept going.
I already have more on my plate than I can handle but I have cautiously "subscribed" to a handful of accounts, thanks to the wonderful way many simply publish tickler posts for free, then solicit higher-level content paid subscribers. It's a great platform building strategy. Newspapers and magazines have done that for years. And the smart ones are now enabling paid subscribers to send them more by allowing a few "gift" links to their friends and social media contacts.
Everybody is now an influencer!
This morning, however, I encountered something that needs to be corrected -- a user-friendly way to unsubscribe or unfollow to an account. I made the mistake of linking a generic-looking "subscriptions" button and it turned out to be putting me into the subscriber ranks!. I finally figured out how to escape but I'm not sure it worked, so this comment is a way of letting someone know I want to unfollow someone whom I followed by mistake, simply because he has the same name as someone whom I have followed over a couple of decades on other platforms.
I have nothing but admiration for Substack and am an avid Heather Cox Richardson groupie. This is the new Blogger only better, and I hope this little feature can be corrected.
As a digitally exhausted millennial, I needed to hear this. I love to see us humans are first.
Thank you 💛
"We’ve set up our business model so that, in order to succeed, we have to serve the best version of you." 💌
"Our business model succeeds when you spend time with the work that you value the most; the work that helps you grow and progress; the work that helps you fall deeper in love." 🌱
I'm interested in this development as discovery has definitely been a chink in Substack's promise to help writers become independent. So far, the best way to acquire new subscribers has been to occupy real estate on the one of the other social media platforms which necessitates creating content to draw people here. This undermines the 'independence' Substack promotes so I look forward to seeing how this evolves.
This is tremendously exciting, but my worry is that when there is an algorithm, there will always be people trying to game the system. How could an algorithm be introduced to Substack without creating lower quality articles that prioritise discovery over good writing?
Nicely written.
At risk of sounding like a broken record (but again, I keep telling this to different people so I guess not many will notice the repetition), investing in localized versions of the app and in local communities would really help Substack grow. As a native speaker of Italian with a decent-sized following, I will always struggle to be seen on a platform that centers English speakers. My writing will never be picked by Substack editors to be shared more widely. It happened with Medium, too: we were headed towards localized versions, then that fell through and that killed the fledgling Italian community (and now Medium is frantically trying to get people to write again).
Don't make the same mistake. Put money in that, too.
This sounds good! Algorithms are bad when they hide the people who need the most visibility, because they’ve not been discovered yet. So I hope it won’t become a place where only the successful people get more successful. We need a place where there’s some equality of discoverability I think! Loving Substack so far, thank you!
Good dialogue, the ability to discuss ideas, to learn from other people. As an old nurse who spent almost 40 years on the job, I did the job because people continually were teaching me things. I read books, many, many books (I don’t watch TV) because it helps me to understand my world. The ability to sit around the kitchen table and chew the fat with friends and neighbours has become a lost art. If Substack can bring back meaningful dialogue, it will shine!
Using technology the right way is fundamental. It is the one that is designed to appeal to the inner life of the readers and make them better and better human beings. Content that is designed to meet spiritual needs of the readers will go along way in creating an ecosystem with the appropriate food for the soul. It appeals to the personal Values and higher purpose of the readers.
Thank you for articulating these thoughts!
I never really know what people mean when they say they want equality - are you referring to opportunity or outcome?
Nicely describes the DNA of the substack platform, thats why i use it for reading higher quality content, keep up the good work.
wow, I've never felt admiration towards a social media as I do towards the values of substack, as here portrayed. hell of an advertisement, hope you don't get bought by google or meta
What is this saying? What is the boiled-down version? Will you be using an algorithm to send writers to my inbox? Will I still see the writers to whom I've subscribed? How will you balance what you offer to the "best version" of me between my various interests and how exactly will that version be determined? And will this version of me only see those who offer paid subscriptions? Before I can fully appreciate what you are trying to do, I need to understand the nuts and bolts. Thank you.
I really like the idea of a feed that’s filled with things to catch me up on what I deeply value -- so even if I just jump in for a small morsel, I’m still getting the good nourishment my brain needs (and craves).
Humm this was quite interesting to read --your taking a big leap in pre supposing what everyone is thinking when they read - tending to sound elitist here Substack, yuk please don’t.
Thank you LoneWic. Shall give it a go.
This is probably the wrong place to make this comment, so please pass it up the chain if you can.
It seems that any link to a video in a posting does not work when viewed through the Substack app.
All I know is I’ve been writing a kick-ass substack for over a year with very little notice and would love to see more subs come flooding in :). Hoping this will help....
Be careful of copying the methods of social media companies, since you risk becoming just like them.
No algorithm is going to decide what the 'best' version of me is. That's beyond creepy. I decide that. You have given me one more reason not to engage with Notes.
Wondering how this new algorithm helps with discovery?
I push my wrestling Substack super hard. I treat my work as great insight and business like because I'd love to be financially comfortable but it hasn't happened yet. I'm planning on turning off paid subscriptions to grow more and get out of 72 readers.
About checkmarks:
I never did like the idea of the checkmarks to indicate that x-amount of subs pay for a newsletter so it must be good. Most are established in the writing spaces and write trendy topics or curate things and that's an easy following & sub giving. So how does new readers find new writers that goes behind-the-scenes in a world that once gatekeept & kayfabed?
What I would like with the new althogrium/discovery features is to not get forgotten or feel unseen when everything gets rolled out. Will these new features get added to Notes? I feel like I see the same content on loop and it's always said there's A LOT of writers and readers on Substack...but it doesn't feel like it is. Most apps are work in real time and because we know that kind of althogrium, we can feel how vast & see that there are tons of users. I want change and I want an equal playground.
Just my two cents.
Excellent post. Keep up the good work. Love to see how this just keeps getting better.
A different take from other commentators’ focus on likes and check marks, or ticks and subscription. I endorse your taking note of the anger today, even found within our honorable substacks--remember, initially FB nor T had not nearly close the anger and viciousness we have today. Anger breeds disillusionment and v.v. Distrust and cynicism closely follow both. And now we have the lowest trust in govt and others in the history of surveys and polling. Only one type of a future benefit from this cynicism. In recognizing anger and outlooks that do not foster anger, you are accomplishing more than you realize, to your credit
I love the idea and thought maybe I could just transfer one Wordpress post to try it out, but couldn’t figure out how to do it b
Brilliant
Hopeful and interested to see what the new app changes are. I'd especially like to see more tools for enhancing discovery of reads that aren't in the Top X.
Thanks for the update, Chris.
It? Take your time and avoid the logarithms. Make it your space of favorite writers.
Being slow and selective is a good thing for Stackers. Select 3-4 writers you love, and don’t subscribe to 500 people you’ve not read the last six months. Remember in Facebook, people used to “collect” hundreds of followers and brag about
I never once worried about collecting people, AND then when the COVID shenanigans hit, I ended up with thousands of followers, people who might think like I did, who might question like I did. The same is true for twitter(now X) Twitter has become my news source, literally -it has the information before the newspapers or the tv (I am Canadian and our news is heavily supported by Government taxes -it simple cant be trusted any more -if it ever could.
Understandable!
Wow! Impressive to see a thoughtful critique of media from a media platform! Bravo! 👏
A couple years ago I wrote a few pieces related to this theme:
> "In Pursuit of Reality: The Cognitive Function of Fashion Media" — https://blogs.umass.edu/derrico/2018/02/10/in-pursuit-of-reality-the-cognitive-function-of-fashion-media/
> "Social Media Critics Recognize Mental Health Issues" — https://blogs.umass.edu/derrico/2017/12/20/social-media-critics-recognize-mental-health-issues/
> "Capitalism’s Attack on Mind; Meditation as Antidote to Social Media Addiction" — https://blogs.umass.edu/derrico/2017/10/09/capitalisms-attack-on-mind-meditation-as-antidote-to-social-media-addiction/
1. I hope the subscription feed remains chronological. If it doesn’t I guess I’ll delete the app and read in my inbox again.
2. The emphasis on the app and integrating algorithm feels like the antithesis of the point of view that drew us all here (owning our lists). If our lists don’t see us because of an algorithm that will be a problem.
3. You have no idea what quality means to me and my conscious brain. Instead of an algorithm how about more curation tools. I for example would like the ability to opt out of chat altogether. Or to choose which chats I am subbed to.
NOTES won't allow me to see comments.
The worst thing about algorithms is when they show me ads for things I just bought. It makes me feel haunted, hunted and harassed. Yes to a place that makes us feel more human!
Ok I cannot find where I posted last on here to follow the thread as I got notified some replies to my comment came in. If you replied to me thank you but sadly I have no clue on the thread where this may be.
all thism talk about the substack app and its new powers but im not even sure its installed on my mac air and when i tried on samsung cell phone and click on it just sits there an icon.....im thinkin the app has more features but somehow it all works out and to be honest im just learning on laptop ie cant even create links but when on substack it sometimes does it for me
anyways all reading this are perhaps already enamored of this platform as i am and particular the networklng aspect and within a crowd of people we respect which ugh means of course we are the ELITE but this platform isnt about political organising so....or hmmmmm is it in a way? in one year things change and rapidly we will be looking beyond out notepads and desks onto another gray battlefield which i for one cannot ignore my own artistic designs seem to pale versus that coming denoument and where will this platform be? i suspect by then at peak strength like one of our subscriber history graphs just not sure how many non-creators will be attracted but ever hopeful it continues....and i agree with others keep up the good work
I was so moved by this issue that I just wrote my second Substack submission around this issue. It's in the zeitgeist! May we use the technology to better come together and to create beauty above below and within.
Look, I like substack. I think you've got a good product. Yes, social networks have bad algorithms and you don't. That's great. But this is a lot of self-serving drivel straight out of HBO's Silicon Valley.
In the process of subscription, it may be worthwhile for even established writers to keep a 'free' option...allowing perhaps one post biweekly or monthly to be available for those of. us who must be frugal with our funds and therefore can't afford to subscribe to a writer's work rather than simply to his/her fame...such an opportunity might cause more of us to choose to subscribe after being exposed to the 'work' rather than to the fame of an author.
Thank you for the update on 'discovery' on substack [push notifications done in a more meaningful (and aesthetic way) (?)] and how that will potentially increase readership for Writers with both large and small audiences.
'Would like to also hear your thoughts on the state of 'search' on substack -- both when searching within a publication and when searching across the substack network.
Secondly, article tagging: this does facilitate the ability to surface a fixed-link to the top-horizontal nav (web only, not reader app), but what are its other uses currently? What are your thoughts on giving the Writer the ability to surface a "cloud [box] of clickable tags" onto their publication?
For the LOVE of the ALGORITHM is the ROOT of all E-vil. (King James Brown Version)
I hope the "new" Substack will iron out some nagging problems with the "old" version. Will it make 'stacks more video-friendly? Will it make it possible to search an archive for prior posts? Will it smooth out thew new-fangled dashboard which is click-crazy? Will it iron out the "gallery" feature? Will it stop attenuating comments, requiring a click to go beyond just a few?
Basics are important and really should come before bells'n'whistles and a Better World.
What I like best-est is that there is only a Like button. It could be a little brain instead of heart emoji as we are on Substack.
This is going to sound ridiculous. I'm so used to them, it never occurred to me to update my notifications and unsubscribe. First laugh out loud sigh of relief today. Thank you.
Best of works. Keep making of Substack a better place for writers, creators & readers.
Eager to see the community come together and share wonderful writings!
Thank you for this newsletter and putting into perspective. I am one of the 'new' people to Substack and use it more to share my images and some inspirational quotes. I don't have many followers, but I certainly admire the people who are jumping in and writing! I am one of those who can get pulled into the 'dark alley' of the computer and I have been finding greater joy being out in nature and with people and animals around me 'in person'. It is easy to get 'lost' in our minds and the minds of others. It is a delicate balance. Hope you can keep Substack 'pure' and not about following the Silicon Valley bunny trail (I lived there and used to be a part of that circle) where it's about how much money a company can raise to show their 'worth'. Stay 'private' where values and intentions can really be created and managed within the company and not people buying and selling stocks that have no idea what the value or intention of the business is... as others have said, we don't want/need another FB, Meta, Twitter/X, Tik-Toc, Instagram, etc, etc, etc... As the saying goes, "Keep it simple, stupid". ;)
love it! been thinking about similar ideas recently, prioritizing healthy algorithms, self improving algorithms, algorithms that take long term growth and emotion into account and serve better lives and better reading. keep up the good work!
After reading this, I feel like I’ve wandered into a dystopian Stepford Wives masquerading as a Utopia for technology and progress. I have one word for you: YIKES.
Bravo! Thanks for sharing your sincere, well-articulated thoughts. I concur 💯
This would require US to take responsibility for what we read, like, comment, and share in this environment. It's the same in all the environments. Algorithms merely give us more of what we want. If we surf mindlessly and cater to our baser instincts, algorithms will do the same - this one included.
How does the algorithm tell if we're clicking for entertainment, baser instincts, or noble pursuits? More important, why are we leaving this responsibility to the algos?
Texto perfeito! Atualmente, o que sinto necessidade na plataforma é de mais opções de formatação de texto. Talvez por vícios de escrita, não sei. Ter mais opções de caracter para personalizar os textos.
Tirando isso, ainda sinto que a comunidade Substacker, no Brasil, não é tão volumosa. O que não é ruim para quem já está aqui, mas seria ótimo receber indicações de novos conteúdos ou newsletters mais prestigiadas, em solo brasileiro.
It is about time! So delighted to have this explanation- and will certainly lean my writing efforts in this direction.
Working Title: "A Time to Kill the K's:
JFK, MLK, and RFK"
Among my first priorities will be an in depth historical analysis of the period of political shifts from 'good' to 'evil' still with us in 2023 as a result, by sharing the TRUTHS of the Presidential elections from 1960, through 1974. Central characters are Richard Nixon, Lyndon Johnson, Bobby Kennedy, Martin Luther King, and J. Edgar Hoover wit supporting cast of various Cosa Nostra members, White House Plumbers, CIA trained operatives, and the like. Stay tuned, it is a REVELATION. And yes, a component of that book's prophetic nature.
It may not be total 'proof', however there is a power in TRUTH with no agenda other than it feels correct with no proof whatsoever.
That's good because Note seems dead to me and good recommandations are what is lacking by comparison with Twitter.
I might be expecting too much from Substack as it's still a young plateform.
Notes feels like a loop of the same 15-20 “cool kids.” Try as I might, I can’t gain any traction there, and I’m about to give up trying. I wonder how many others have given up on that part of Substack?
Please don't give up ... it can seem like the same "cool kids" ... which means we need your voice even more. I sometimes see new people restacking their own latest post with no note attached. Restack someone else's post that you like with a note of why you like it ... that seems to work pretty well. Plus, I think it's important to subscribe widely so you see more stuff worthy of restacking. I think Substack has to be played as a long game.
Thank you Joyce 😊. I do restack others’ posts pretty regularly. I also restack my own in between posting other types of things. Trying to “train” the app to pick me up has not really been yielding anything. And this very much feels like something that could be addressed on the back end by Substack.
For me it's more like I see one new Note every 2 days lol.
You might (if you like to read about "technical" details) be interested in the following post about CFS: https://open.substack.com/pub/leadtheway/p/chronic-fatigue-syndrome-and-long
We have a way to fix all of this and more. We need to make new systems that make the old ones obsolete - or in this case plug into their old systems and fix them with decentralization and transparency. Understanding this takes a little effort and it starts by using Human Swarm Intelligence to harness the Wisdom of the Crowd. For short, it is called "swarming." Scientists and medical fields looking to form decentralized systems need to be part of this. Start your journey here and stay tuned:
https://joshketry.substack.com/p/human-swarm-intelligence-the-most
Decentralization is a good balance to centralization. Yin Yang.
Genuine question: Have people found that tagging helps with discoverability? I have hit a wall of Substack-based subs (I'm getting some subs from other sources) and was wondering if my lack of tagging is to blame.
all i can say is, man, you people really love your oxford commas, dontcha?
Big thumbs up for your pitch for readers to wander and ponder why they have certain views.
If we explore a bit outside of our bubbles, and avoid the reflex to click and block different views, we will get smarter.
Good read. Keep making great tools for writers to build their reach creatively and Substack will have the best organic algorithm; humans.
The Polymorphisis . . .
Algorithms don't have to be all that grim . .
Sharks waiting once you're in the wrong swim. .
Actually not a WokeBlackLesbianActivist . .
but don't mind being on the list . .Kind of a pat
more than a sock in the chin . .
#But It Rhymes
Hi Chris - Great Title - "An algorithm for quality" - not only did your title catch my rare attention - it got my heart beating faster. I began to wonder if you would explore the depth of Quality like one of my top influential books I've read - "Zen And The Art of Motorcycle Maintenance." Instead you drew me in to imagine a better world - where I could craft my own better algorithm to focus on what I want in life. Perhaps the greatest power of Substack isn't in its ability to "Push" Quality - but to "PULL" out stories, perspectives, and quality from everyday people. I hope your post and others like it will inspire more readers to dare to publish and prove that the real center of value is and will be in you!
I love this -- great stuff!!!
I appreciate the commitment to building a culture that based on thoughtful interaction rather than anger and fear fueling our outrage. I hope you're successful in this!
Well, this is certainly music to my ears. I believe the intention goes beyond mere platitudes, too, but to put my money where my mouth is: I am really enjoying helping connect writers with other folks who they might enjoy. I think we can participate in making this place a lot better in our own ways, amplifying the work we find impressive, and recommending it to others.
Looking forward to it!
Bravo!
Culture is also bringing the light into the darkness of man's psyche.
I have some of my drafts, once created, when I open them to edit, the save function cycles endlessly. The only solution I have found is to recreate the post from scratch. Not every post draft behaves that way. I cannot find any infor on Substack about that technical issue, nor can I find any way to contact Substack for technical support. Can you point me in the direction of a solution, please?
"The problem is that the version of us that they serve is the basest version of ourselves. They skip past our values, aspirations, and even our conscious though.." AI and machine learning, indeed do learn from us, they are designed with the functions of a human brain's thinking. They evolve, just like us. It's better to be mindful of our thinking and the content we take in, and ask the question why is this dream of me, "this"? etc ("Culture is also about learning why you want what you want, refining your tastes, challenging your convictions, and promoting humanity and agency over the process")
Godspeed on this mission 🤝 less hollow “content”, more quality writing.
I appreciate this - thank you!
Looking forward to seeing the awesome improvements!
Thanks Chris,
This is a fascinating read, well thought out and well written.
Good luck with what you are trying to do.
Thanks!
John
marinecorpscompasspoints.substack.com
Of the tens of thousands of algorithms that singly and collectively define and arbitrage the quality of our lives, here's the one that matters most: https://open.substack.com/pub/qolrm/p/the-addiction-algorithm?r=7hc45&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
i love the idea of helping us be our best selves - in what we consume, what we share, how we react and interact.
Love the idea of optimizing for what people "want to want" as a opposed to what they pay attention to. Lots of previous work on that across companies that you can leverage. How are you planning on measuring whether you are succeeding at increasing quality?
"How are you planning on measuring whether you are succeeding at increasing quality?" is such a good question. And will those results ultimately change anything for users if they aren't satisfactory?
You are seeing the power of the Dark Side.
Good. Good.
All I can say is, Thank you!!!
There is a great deal of truth in this post. It’s been interesting to observe shifts in my own thinking about my newsletter now that I’ve switched to Substack. My primary reason for switching was that the provider I was using changed their free plan such that the number of people on my list was too high, and I could not justify paying to publish a newsletter I was giving away for free, which I have been happy to do as a form of literary citizenship.
I’ve been working in and watching this space for a long time and I’m excited about what you all are doing. Good luck to your whole team.
I have an old relevant article from 2017 in Harvard Business Review that might be interesting: https://hbr.org/2017/04/imagining-a-social-media-platform-built-around-quality-not-scale
Yes. That all seems very well. Point 1. If social media is toxic and addictive why should it not be classed in the same bucket as cocaine or phetenol or other prebscribed substance? 2. Many Anericans are very afraid of expressing their opinion on social media. I'm one, actually. Can the above representative of Substack declare that no account holder will be suspended or terminated unless their words break the law?
You Know Sam, I have been reluctant to voice my opinions on social media, in fact I really did BUT honestly the covid shenanigans changed that for me. Now I roar, for good or for bad, I roar. I have just sort of found Substack and I have decided I will write what I want to write even if nobody ever sees it. Yes, it would be good to earn a little money from it , I have earned money freelance before, but I have something to say about this insane world and I intend to say it, and if what I say today conflicts with what I say tomorrow , so be it. I am Free!
Wow. Carolyn!! Go girl! You are inspirational. So what takes up your day? Are you afraid the ultra left fascists will take away your livelihood? My contention is that they are, at heart, cowards. And any assault on them, they will run a mile, or 10. We must put our heads together.
One substack article is more empowering than 1000 facebook posts.
I wish more people read our work. We have a great group of writers!
The algorithms on legacy platforms are not just based on pure human interaction they have a steady influx of nudged human interaction. The algorithm is not adjusted to mediate for that.
⚡️Loving this new online universe...
Preview is not working. When we share articles the pictures are not shown. This is really bad.
Sorry to hear you're experiencing this. Where are you seeing this? (Where are you sharing to?)
I ide Facebook and x. Share texts is important for me as a debator
Some major problems with Substack.
1. The brand is still not well known, there needs to be broad promotion. People do not click links on what they are unfamilar with.
2. People read on the phone, not the laptop. This is one major failing of the email heavy sign-in method, it denies what devices are being used.
3. As popular newspapers give away 5 free reads per month, Substack needs to do something similar.
4. Substack must note that not everyone is interested in subscribing to individuals. The app needs a massive improvement in it's search and internal SEO, it's very poor. Readers should be able to read single essays with a simple phone based phone number with confirmation code sign up.
5. Substack should sell credits and have credits used for subscriptions and/or reading single essays. Enough with the discounting of subscriptions. Have a credit system that gives a high number of credits (need a beter word) per $1. Big branded names like Matt Taibi can price their subscription in the equivilant of $7/month in credits while smaller, growing substackers can offer lower prices.
6. People do not value what they don't pay for, so even a dollar a month will get higher readership than free. A credit system would allow this. Right now people have limited funds and Substack sets it up so the rich get richer and the poor struggle. Obviously people will tend to pay for a big name journalist who has just moved to SS rather than a new, but relatively unknown write.
I totally agree. Before I discovered Substack, I spent countless hours on Twitter trying to use it to its potential. While the dialogue is exponentially more constructive here. I still feel like I'm competing.
As a clinical social worker for 30yrs (incl the Army, which I joined at 42), it pains me to see the country struggling knowing I can help. That's why I started a blog in 2017 and podcast in 2022. But I have a full-time psychotherapy practice and don't have time to market/optimize my content (or the money to pay someone else). I was hoping the content would market itself.
Feeling really discouraged.
https://open.substack.com/pub/elainesbelsonlcswc/p/dear-america-a-psychotherapists-plea?r=2iucmn&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Wish I had the technical acumen to help out more, but am looking to the decentralized nets as the future for information flow. It is slower and has to be more basic since it runs on little nodes everywhere. But a free web is the best web. It's amazing how many developers give so much time to build these services and platforms.
Thanks for these insights. I particularly like the idea of substack intervention centered around a humane-centric approach, creating an environment for writers and readers without much distraction. IMO, there is scope for new feature rollouts in the reading experience; specifically by adding page flips, and highlighters, users can open up short dictionary meanings while reading through articles (it helps non-native English readers), etc. Thanks again for this wonderful service to the world and for creating a non-distracted environment for both readers and writers.
Its great to have better discoverable content, but is this at the expense of SEO content? Google still doesn't do too much for Substack it seems
Sir, this is a Wendy's.
💯💯