Emily Gould, Graham Linnehan, Michele Bachmann discussed on WNYC Programming
It has been a very lucrative deal for the long tail of contributors, however, not so much and now on the subject of objectionable content controversy has broken out. Some sub stacked writers are abandoning the platform for hosting certain high profile writers. Whose world views they cannot abide. Among the most prominent critiques and or departures have come from box critic at large. Emily Vander Worth writer Emily Gould, journalist and science fiction writer, and Aly knew its and writer Jude Ellison Doyle. Trans writer named Jud Doyle wrote in a post that they were upset the whole syriza of men that you Doyle considered anti trans were on the platform. Their argument was that revenue from their subscribers was being used to subsidize the likes of Glenn Greenwald at all. Peter Kafka is a senior correspondent at Recode, some quoting from Jude Doyle's Block post here. They are upset that authors, they say, are quote people who actively hate trans people and women. Comma argue ceaselessly against her civil rights and in many cases have a public history of directly viciously abusing trans people and or CIS women in their industry. And then goes on to list several people, including Glenn Greenwald Matic places. Graham Linnehan, British TV writer who's been kicked off Twitter last year for quote repeated violations of Twitter's rules against hateful conduct and platform manipulation. To be clear. I'm quoting Jude Doyle here And as we say on Twitter, not all Retweets are endorsements. Ah, lot of folks would take issue with some of the names on that list of people. Jude Doyle doesn't like and say there's a difference between not liking what someone writes and saying that so and so is deliberately attacking trans people. Now there's another issue, which is distinct but nonetheless in twined with anger over, you know who's some writers air sharing a platform with and it's a thing called the Sub Stack Pro program. Which is, as I understand it, a come on for big name writers meant to lure them away from their W two jobs and media companies by offering them a big fat paycheck in the first year. The number that's been banded about his 30 writers who are sub stacked pros. Yeah, I mean, some stack has been playing around with the versions of this. In some cases, it gave them relatively small fee just to get them up and running. In some cases, it's offered other writers. Other incentives. This subject pro program was formerly christened in the last week or so, and I think that's what generated a lot of attention. When you signed a book deal, the chances are pretty high that your publisher will also be platform ng lot of authors whom you don't like I myself have shared a publisher. With Michele Bachmann and loads them as I find her. I had no impulse to walk away from my deal. Is that a legitimate analogy? The difference is that you're well aware that when you signed with your publisher, the publisher also was working with Michele Bachmann. On sub stack at least up Until now. There's no way of knowing what kind of writers have sub stacked pro deals and what kind of writers are just people who showed up on sub stack and started publishing. Sub Stack has said that they're not in a position to disclose that because they didn't make that a condition of the deal. They don't want to go back on that The writers who have those deals are free to tell people about them. And that in the future, they might figure out some former disclosure for people who get these deals. Generally, when you do business with a traditional book publisher, you've got a pretty good idea who also working with but not necessarily what they're advances are. You don't have any idea what their advances aren't Returning to the Grand Linnehan anti trends question. Substance content guidelines do pretty clearly band content that quote Calls for exclusion based on protected classes and justice in the side. They on their list leave out gender identity, though the Supreme Court affirmed last year that it is in fact protected under the Civil Rights Act. Chris Best CEO has been quoted as saying. No, sub stacked has a great content Moderation system, and it's called the unsubscribe button doesn't really mean that someone seeking to report let's just say a doc sing in progress. Would it have to What email a sub stacked co founder? Probably. I don't think this is something that the sub stacked guys and they are guys had thought through. When they started this begin. It's kind of a problem. They would be lucky to have because it mean there's enough people using a platform for someone to get upset. It's also kind of a model we have seen many times before. In Silicon Valley. There's a reason that you have venture capitalist subsidizing sub stack when they're loath to do a traditional media companies. They don't want to be directly employing people who make media. They want to fund the platform that allows media creators to sort of make the stuff and then find an audience and then they take a cut in the middle. But you've seen this over the years with everything from My space to Facebook to YouTube toe Airbnb to uber, which considers itself a platform. They say Look, we're just connecting someone who has something to sell with someone who wants to buy it. And then inevitably, you have bad actors, and inevitably, they have to scale up systems that are meant to sort of police that stuff belatedly, But it's always sort of chasing after the latest problem they've had, and by the way, this is ongoing right now, you know, that's the of the CEOs of Twitter and Google. And Facebook, all testifying again in Congress this week about disinformation on their platforms, and it's kind of an endless welcome. All game subject is much, much much, much smaller than all these platforms. So you could imagine that sort of spinning up platform policing business is way down on their list. I'm going to get back to Taylor Larenz because in an online content world how can you not get back to test our tolerance and in a sub stack world She's clearly right about the necessity for journalists to build their following. But once again that Clickbait problem in the Columbia journalism Review, Cleo Chang reported that sub stack Ranks potential recruits by numbers of fire Emojis based on how much Twitter engagement they got. Is that not a prescription for generating heat instead of illumination? It certainly is. It's also a reasonable proxy when you're starting up when you're trying to find people that have audiences and have engaged audiences. All of that said, Remember that the patron saint of sub Stack is a guy named Ben Thompson, who writes a tech and business newsletter out of Taiwan who is provocative but is not a bomb thrower. He's got a very long essay out today about CEO of Intel in his new plan of attack. It's quite stultifying. I think there's other folks doing environmental coverage..