1) When I worked at a magazine ~6 years ago ads were already not the "primary business." I'm sure for some of the mags in Conde's portfolio (the glossy ones with premium ads for pricey brands) ad revenue brings in a meaningful amount of money but I think subscriptions are the name of the game (though less so than on Substack). Just don't think the distinction is *that* stark (and also, a lot of these brands make money in like... 10 different ways: ads, subs, events, consulting, etc.)
2) I think the weaknesses in Levy's argument come out when he tries to be most specific, but I assume the main thing he is articulating is the same thing Jerry Saltz was saying when he turned down a big Substack paycheck. He said:
"Substack just offered me $250,000 a year to go with them. That is more than double what I make. More money than I have ever have or dreamt of having. Yet, I said no. How come? I think it’s fishy to always be barking to your readers to subscribe. I think it is not my real work to write fir “subscribers.” My only work is to write for the reader. ... I want to reach strangers; be loved and hated by strangers; talk about art to anyone any where any how. I like being in my huge department store @/Nymag where people find me who have no idea who I am or what I do or even thought about art before."
I think this is a clearer articulation of the "general audiences" thing than Levy offers. Depending on your POV this is either snobbish or high-minded and sweet, but I think Levy (and probably Saltz) would feel a bit put-off by the idea of being lumped in with "a career advice blog for product managers at tech companies." They have a different idea of who they want to serve and for what reason. (As I type that I realize that's maybe a bit of a contrived connection but I think "serving niches," which you identify as a strength, is maybe a bit anathema to a former print journalist used to being read in conversation/sequence with other writers vetted by like-minded editors and stylists.)
Thank you. A really well-reasoned counter to the Levy piece, while acknowledging some of Levy’s valid concerns about new writer discoverability.
Being a new Substacker myself, I wonder if there’s room to borrow a little from legacy press i.e. for more Substack mini-group publications, where a subscriber pays one fee to access a thematically-related group of writers who don’t have huge subs but may have value in synergy.
Thank you. A really well-reasoned counter to the Levy piece, while acknowledging some of Levy’s valid concerns about new writer discoverability.
Being a new Substacker myself, I wonder if there’s room to borrow a little from legacy press i.e. for more Substack mini-group publications, where a subscriber pays one fee to access a thematically-related group of writers who don’t have huge subs but may have value in synergy.
First off, I had the strongest hunch that you had either journalism training, or a background in it, so thanks for confirming that! Just the way you write is informative and easy to follow. And I’m also a bit of a
Really love this analysis. You aren’t wrong about niches seeing the most success on new publishing platforms. Arguably some areas are easier to monetise than others — especially those where you can claim the sub back as an expense.
Australia always seems to be 12-18 months behind the US with new media trends. And the convos I tend to have are a little shallow or focused on big publisher moves. So pieces like this hugely help inform my thinking on where it’s all going!
Hey thanks so much for this, very insightful and uplifting in a way. Gonna go continue working on my Substack to one day hit the 2000K monthly subs 😃
Love to hear that! And just subscribed :)
Aw-shucks :) Thank you and welcome!
Good piece! A few minor quibbles:
1) When I worked at a magazine ~6 years ago ads were already not the "primary business." I'm sure for some of the mags in Conde's portfolio (the glossy ones with premium ads for pricey brands) ad revenue brings in a meaningful amount of money but I think subscriptions are the name of the game (though less so than on Substack). Just don't think the distinction is *that* stark (and also, a lot of these brands make money in like... 10 different ways: ads, subs, events, consulting, etc.)
2) I think the weaknesses in Levy's argument come out when he tries to be most specific, but I assume the main thing he is articulating is the same thing Jerry Saltz was saying when he turned down a big Substack paycheck. He said:
"Substack just offered me $250,000 a year to go with them. That is more than double what I make. More money than I have ever have or dreamt of having. Yet, I said no. How come? I think it’s fishy to always be barking to your readers to subscribe. I think it is not my real work to write fir “subscribers.” My only work is to write for the reader. ... I want to reach strangers; be loved and hated by strangers; talk about art to anyone any where any how. I like being in my huge department store @/Nymag where people find me who have no idea who I am or what I do or even thought about art before."
I think this is a clearer articulation of the "general audiences" thing than Levy offers. Depending on your POV this is either snobbish or high-minded and sweet, but I think Levy (and probably Saltz) would feel a bit put-off by the idea of being lumped in with "a career advice blog for product managers at tech companies." They have a different idea of who they want to serve and for what reason. (As I type that I realize that's maybe a bit of a contrived connection but I think "serving niches," which you identify as a strength, is maybe a bit anathema to a former print journalist used to being read in conversation/sequence with other writers vetted by like-minded editors and stylists.)
Great points. There is absolutely a seductive allure in that idea of writing purely for "the reader" versus a particular audience
Thank you. A really well-reasoned counter to the Levy piece, while acknowledging some of Levy’s valid concerns about new writer discoverability.
Being a new Substacker myself, I wonder if there’s room to borrow a little from legacy press i.e. for more Substack mini-group publications, where a subscriber pays one fee to access a thematically-related group of writers who don’t have huge subs but may have value in synergy.
I loved reading this substack defending writers of substacks.
Thank you. A really well-reasoned counter to the Levy piece, while acknowledging some of Levy’s valid concerns about new writer discoverability.
Being a new Substacker myself, I wonder if there’s room to borrow a little from legacy press i.e. for more Substack mini-group publications, where a subscriber pays one fee to access a thematically-related group of writers who don’t have huge subs but may have value in synergy.
First off, I had the strongest hunch that you had either journalism training, or a background in it, so thanks for confirming that! Just the way you write is informative and easy to follow. And I’m also a bit of a
Really love this analysis. You aren’t wrong about niches seeing the most success on new publishing platforms. Arguably some areas are easier to monetise than others — especially those where you can claim the sub back as an expense.
Australia always seems to be 12-18 months behind the US with new media trends. And the convos I tend to have are a little shallow or focused on big publisher moves. So pieces like this hugely help inform my thinking on where it’s all going!