Substack should send Dr. Sarah T. Roberts a thank you note and some chocolates for writing this whiny thread about their existence because truth be told, many of us (including this editor) would never have known it exists if she hadn’t.
And the fact she calls is a threat to journalism makes us all the more interested.
Thanks doc!
Heh.
Substack is a dangerous direct threat to traditional news media. But more importantly? It is a threat to journalism.
— Dr. Sarah T. Roberts (@ubiquity75) February 28, 2021
Apparently, Substack makes it simple for a writer to start an email newsletter that makes money from subscriptions.
And she does NOT want that for some reason.
“Great!” you say! Journalism needs to be disrupted!”
But here’s the problem. Journalists make their name doing reporting. This is governed by norms and practices and by ethics. Flawed and not always achieved, true. But present and guiding what newsrooms do in every way? Yes.
— Dr. Sarah T. Roberts (@ubiquity75) February 28, 2021
Journalists haven’t made their names by doing reporting in years.
People not inside journalism or media may not know the specifics, but they often have a nebulous sense that there are norms — independence, disclosure of compromise, editorial oversight and vetting of the reporting. That’s what makes them trust enough to buy and read or watch.
— Dr. Sarah T. Roberts (@ubiquity75) February 28, 2021
You little people are too stupid to know how this all works.
Cute.
What is much less obvious to them is what it means when there is a reporter who makes her name in a newsroom — traditional paper or fully online outlet — and then leaves for Substack (or any analog). Taking that name, reputation earned from work done in the context I just stated.
— Dr. Sarah T. Roberts (@ubiquity75) February 28, 2021
Recommended
And starting an outlet in which they are both reporter and editor without oversight, and in a subscription model that puts their material under the cloak of darkness. It is the allure of skirting those norms for quicker, dirtier reports, as well as the big money, that draws them.
— Dr. Sarah T. Roberts (@ubiquity75) February 28, 2021
Because the mainstream media has been so concerned with ‘the norms’.
Not only are they earning off of the subscription model, many high-profile writers are paid directly by Substack to be exclusive – it’s the influencer model.
— Dr. Sarah T. Roberts (@ubiquity75) February 28, 2021
So?
In this way, an investigative reporter who has earned her bona fides in a newsroom and under both strict editorial AND journalistic principles, has just cashed out and turned herself into an opinion writer. She likes it because she’s finally got her independence from an editor.
— Dr. Sarah T. Roberts (@ubiquity75) February 28, 2021
Like how the reporter is a woman in her story.
AND she’s getting paid. A lot.
— Dr. Sarah T. Roberts (@ubiquity75) February 28, 2021
But she’s no longer a journalist. She is, at best, an opinion writer.
— Dr. Sarah T. Roberts (@ubiquity75) February 28, 2021
Again … so? That’s what they’re doing at outlets like CNN anyway.
So what?
So, the general public sees her name, knows her reporting history, and signs up. Not knowing the difference.
— Dr. Sarah T. Roberts (@ubiquity75) February 28, 2021
The general public is too stupid to know better and we can’t have them thinking for themselves now can we?
This is why Substack is incredibly dangerous and damaging to the fourth estate (journalism), one of the few failsafes against anti-democratic maneuvers when at their best. We really can’t afford to lose that right now.
— Dr. Sarah T. Roberts (@ubiquity75) February 28, 2021
Fourth estate.
Yikes.
Please, do not write for or pay for Substack. I have to say it. I believe it’s dangerous. Take heed. You read it here first.
— Dr. Sarah T. Roberts (@ubiquity75) February 28, 2021
So going to write for Substack … lol
BY THE WAY, I am not taking about Substack for basket weaving or 30 Rock fandom or whatever. I’m talking about stuff purporting to be serious. Opinion can be serious but I believe lines are being intentionally blurred BY SUBSTACK.
— Dr. Sarah T. Roberts (@ubiquity75) February 28, 2021
There is also a long tradition, for example, of industry-watching newsletters written for fund managers, investors and so on. Back into the mid-20th century, easily.
— Dr. Sarah T. Roberts (@ubiquity75) February 28, 2021
I feel there is a very worrisome conflation with Substack, however, that capitalizes on established norms, blurs lines and takes advantage of its readers. I don’t like that.
— Dr. Sarah T. Roberts (@ubiquity75) February 28, 2021
Also: I am making a very specific critique about journalism and tech. If you are talking about something else, I’m not going to engage anything but that. Any people trying to get me to talk about just being mad at good writers, blah blah woke, it’sa non-starter. General warning.
— Dr. Sarah T. Roberts (@ubiquity75) February 28, 2021
Oh, one more thing:
Substack is paying for its big influencers on the platform. Their choices of whom to pay and support are not value-neutral. It’s not “just a platform.” It has made editorial decisions without calling them that. Beware.
— Dr. Sarah T. Roberts (@ubiquity75) March 1, 2021
Sounds like Twitter.
And Facebook.
And most other outlets.
Aaaand one more thing: aren’t we to a point by now were we can dispense with the fantasy that Silicon Valley VC-funded services are a “countervailing force to MSM”? That might literally be the most ridiculous assertion I’ve heard yet, and yet I understand the genuine impetus.
— Dr. Sarah T. Roberts (@ubiquity75) March 1, 2021
But if you think this you’re being hoodwinked.
— Dr. Sarah T. Roberts (@ubiquity75) March 1, 2021
Everyone is guilty here. Substack isn’t going to save you.
— Dr. Sarah T. Roberts (@ubiquity75) March 1, 2021
I’m off Twitter for awhile. Hold it down for me.
— Dr. Sarah T. Roberts (@ubiquity75) March 1, 2021
Well … bye.
Lmfao get bent https://t.co/hX3YTHsPpC
— J.R. Holmsted (@JHolmsted) March 1, 2021
Any "journalist: with #BlackLivesMatter in their bio deserves to lose their job over their obvious lack of objectivity.https://t.co/cvegobRPcR
— BattleSwarm (@BattleSwarmBlog) March 1, 2021
Great! pic.twitter.com/GA48zrD5Gj
— they call me bruce (@ringtrick) March 1, 2021
Sounds like I need to figure out what this Substack is. If you "Journalists" are afraid of it, it's clearly a Good Thing.
— Michael Kahn (@MKahn84) March 1, 2021
Traditional news media has been doubling down on their lack of ethics and professionalism so long that journalist jokes are starting to outnumber lawyer jokes.
— Doc_Nova (@DocNova3) March 1, 2021
Straight into my veins. pic.twitter.com/osU97dtGR9
— Ministry of Truth Overlord (@SavannahDoc412) March 1, 2021
— Your Highness Chrispy (@candyisyummy333) March 1, 2021
"It is a threat to journalism." pic.twitter.com/lWKddggbTN
— Pope Urban VIII (@maffybarbz) March 1, 2021
She says that like it’s a bad thing.
***
Related:
‘Everyone can relax’! Ricky Gervais’ hilarious dig at the 2021 Golden Globes is just PERFECTION
Join the conversation as a VIP Member