It’s not politics, but it often leans into it: Because of Substack I am not just a food writer but an activist able to weave sensible gun reform commentary into my newsletters. That would NEVER have been possible in traditional journalism. As a result, readers either leave if they disagree with me or a deeper trust is born.
The fact that she is coming from the Washington Post is a red flag, considering that WaPo is the quintessential "legacy media" outlet. You've got a good thing going at Substack. I hope she doesn't screw it up.
So long as Substack is a wide open forum for all political views, even radical ones, along any axis, then it will be valuable. Readers should have access to all views that don't actually advocate unlawful activity -- very, very broad scope for expression, nothing less. Let the readers be range fed, unsupervised adults who are responsible for their own assessment of who is factually baseless, or too crazy, or even too malicious to read. Tolerate BAD speech, and let the response be superior and correct speech that sets the record straight, not some hidden committee, no matter how well intentioned, babysitting your readers. If Substack becomes a censored and monotone venue, it will be useless. (Catherine's background at WaPo and CNN do not bode well. Those are partisan outfits, not only not trusted but reviled by tens of millions of Americans. So, trust will have to be earned, it will not be granted gratis at the outset.)
I’m new here on Substack and I’m not from the States. I’m from Jamaica, and we have a saying here that goes - “If America sneeze Jamaica catches it” - which simply means whatever happens in America affects us in Jamaica. Now, all I can say as it relates to Substack venturing into politics is that I hope our privacy remains protected here, there’s no data mining or leaks and we still have freedom of speech.
The personal is political, right? Dissent is patriotic. Both are true, IMO. I enjoy reading political and legal analysis (Jay Kuo and Joyce Vance are two whose newsletters I enjoy). BUT, I can’t stress enough how UTTERLY UNINTERESTED I would be in starting to see politicians posting in Notes. I can choose to avoid their newsletters; but turning a writers/readers safe space into a forum for people skilled at saying a whole lot of nothing would dilute the whole experience.
I am not sure about this. As an occasional poliitcal writer, and just-retired academic "of color", I worry that the businness model will, unintentionally to be sure, favor the favorites of the likes and dislikes, in effect marginalizing voices with less politcal power and "visibilty."
I'll give two examples who I did not see mentioned, both great writers, who are stars on Substack: Kareem-Abdul Jabbar and Erik Hoel. The former enjoys world-class status who brings a unique perspective as a Black activist athlete with a keen crap detector, the other, a white former academic reuroscience researcher who, while not overtly politcal--and I susoect quite non-partisan-- has gained street creds with his deep understandings of the science of "consciousness," the pitfalls, both societal and cultural, of AI, as well as the undernining of the public square on social media.
I agree about the importance of political discourse that’s not fueled by incendiary algorithms, but for me, Substack is the place to get away from all that and enjoy writing that touches on the deeper and more meaningful aspects of the human experience.
Didn't Hamish McKenzie promote that famously detestable racist as seeking "enlightened centrism"? Real hard to trust the political utility of a platform whose contours are shaped by a mind that regards that as even remotely reasonable.
I could not be more grateful to be writing on a platform that allows for thoughtful political discourse! We need all the ideas on the table, not just the ones on one side or another.
As a retired police officer and former candidate for US Senator in Nevada, I question ( no offense intended), the hiring of a writer whose background rest solely with 2 heavily-biased Liberal media outlets. I would fear that Substack would become another Democratic-leaning entity. I would prefer a candidate with a more neutral background.
It’s not politics, but it often leans into it: Because of Substack I am not just a food writer but an activist able to weave sensible gun reform commentary into my newsletters. That would NEVER have been possible in traditional journalism. As a result, readers either leave if they disagree with me or a deeper trust is born.
The fact that she is coming from the Washington Post is a red flag, considering that WaPo is the quintessential "legacy media" outlet. You've got a good thing going at Substack. I hope she doesn't screw it up.
So long as Substack is a wide open forum for all political views, even radical ones, along any axis, then it will be valuable. Readers should have access to all views that don't actually advocate unlawful activity -- very, very broad scope for expression, nothing less. Let the readers be range fed, unsupervised adults who are responsible for their own assessment of who is factually baseless, or too crazy, or even too malicious to read. Tolerate BAD speech, and let the response be superior and correct speech that sets the record straight, not some hidden committee, no matter how well intentioned, babysitting your readers. If Substack becomes a censored and monotone venue, it will be useless. (Catherine's background at WaPo and CNN do not bode well. Those are partisan outfits, not only not trusted but reviled by tens of millions of Americans. So, trust will have to be earned, it will not be granted gratis at the outset.)
Ugh...Washington Post and CNN...why legacy media? And why those two?
I’m new here on Substack and I’m not from the States. I’m from Jamaica, and we have a saying here that goes - “If America sneeze Jamaica catches it” - which simply means whatever happens in America affects us in Jamaica. Now, all I can say as it relates to Substack venturing into politics is that I hope our privacy remains protected here, there’s no data mining or leaks and we still have freedom of speech.
The personal is political, right? Dissent is patriotic. Both are true, IMO. I enjoy reading political and legal analysis (Jay Kuo and Joyce Vance are two whose newsletters I enjoy). BUT, I can’t stress enough how UTTERLY UNINTERESTED I would be in starting to see politicians posting in Notes. I can choose to avoid their newsletters; but turning a writers/readers safe space into a forum for people skilled at saying a whole lot of nothing would dilute the whole experience.
The number of people talking about Zionism, conspiracy theories, etc, in this thread is somewhat troubling...
I am not sure about this. As an occasional poliitcal writer, and just-retired academic "of color", I worry that the businness model will, unintentionally to be sure, favor the favorites of the likes and dislikes, in effect marginalizing voices with less politcal power and "visibilty."
I'll give two examples who I did not see mentioned, both great writers, who are stars on Substack: Kareem-Abdul Jabbar and Erik Hoel. The former enjoys world-class status who brings a unique perspective as a Black activist athlete with a keen crap detector, the other, a white former academic reuroscience researcher who, while not overtly politcal--and I susoect quite non-partisan-- has gained street creds with his deep understandings of the science of "consciousness," the pitfalls, both societal and cultural, of AI, as well as the undernining of the public square on social media.
Does anyone trust Dan Rather? How did he make the list?
I agree about the importance of political discourse that’s not fueled by incendiary algorithms, but for me, Substack is the place to get away from all that and enjoy writing that touches on the deeper and more meaningful aspects of the human experience.
Didn't Hamish McKenzie promote that famously detestable racist as seeking "enlightened centrism"? Real hard to trust the political utility of a platform whose contours are shaped by a mind that regards that as even remotely reasonable.
Not all substack users are interested on U.S. elections. The world is bigger.
What could go wrong?
With regards to the 2024 presidential elections, I think we should truly consider TRUE DEMOCRACY. Voting for the lesser of two evils is NOT DEMOCRACY
https://unorthodoxy.substack.com/p/why-we-need-to-stop-voting-in-presidential
I could not be more grateful to be writing on a platform that allows for thoughtful political discourse! We need all the ideas on the table, not just the ones on one side or another.
As a retired police officer and former candidate for US Senator in Nevada, I question ( no offense intended), the hiring of a writer whose background rest solely with 2 heavily-biased Liberal media outlets. I would fear that Substack would become another Democratic-leaning entity. I would prefer a candidate with a more neutral background.
Thank you,
Ron@ The McQueen Scene