A lot of us know by now that Substack has a Nazi problem. It not only profits from fascist voices, it actively promotes their work and recruits them. And it’s funded by Silicon Valley anti-democracy billionaires like Marc Andreesen — the same type of people who are, right now, raiding the US government to basically cut funding for social services and scientific research, and to steal money for themselves.
Still, a lot of talented writers — including some that I subscribe to — publish on Substack. But others have moved to Ghost, an open source and non-shitty-tech-bro newsletter service. These include Casey Newton’s publication Platformer, Molly White’s newsletter Citation Needed, and plenty of others. From the beginning, 404 Media decided to publish on Ghost because, as I understand it, Substack sucks.
. . .
If you already have a Substack, Ghost has written documentation explaining how to migrate your subscribers (including paid ones) to a new Ghost newsletter. Since both Substack and Ghost use Stripe as a payment processor, your paid subscribers don’t have to do anything to continue paying you.
It’s hard to give up because some of the musicians I really like post there, and indie musicians are often struggling financially and Substack is simply a bigger platform.
I’ve seen people defend Substack saying it’s not so bad, or the bad is a necessary evil to protect free speech.
I’m gonna say it: fuck free speech, I like myself some censorship. I sincerely believe some things are too harmful to be allowed to openly proliferate, that there’s often a feasible path to reaching that conclusion, and it’s not that difficult.
We mustn’t avoid this because “it harms free speech.” Nazis love that argument, and they’re a threat to much more than just free speech. They shouldn’t get to block attempts at censoring them, and they specially shouldn’t get support to do so, because they’re one of the reasons it’s necessary in the first place.
“But not every case is clear-cut like Nazis,” people will say, “you shouldn’t support censorship, since it can be used for evil. Innocent ideas always get censored, too.” To which I’ll reply, “tell me more about those innocent ideas.” When that happens, tell me. I’ll reach out to people in charge, spread the news, get mad, help you in any way I can to fix it. We’ll do it together. Fucking tell me more.
But lo and behold, many innocent ideas turn out to be dog-whistles or worse, it’s always the same shit.
I don’t care if it’s Substack, or Ghost, or Twitter, or Reddit, or whatever. It’s one thing to platform harmful views unaware. I get it, moderation is hard. Once aware, though, if your response is “but free speech,” fuck off. It is moral and correct to censor Nazis. Same for people saying immigrants will eat your pets, or that gays want to sexualize children, change their genders, and harm women. Fuck that.
Platforms defining themselves on free speech is a red flag. “We’re popular with both extremes” isn’t a defense, it’s a self-report that you’re just a mercenary and like it that way—both sides being users means double the revenue.
Substack may not be Nazi-central, but it’s surely a product of broligarchy.
I’ve seen people defend Substack saying it’s not so bad
Surely “there are not actually any Nazis on Substack” is a fair counterargument to “Substack has a Nazi problem and no one should listen to all of these good journalists who are on it now that even the tiny minority of Nazis have been ejected” is different from “not so bad.”
, or the bad is a necessary evil to protect free speech.
Surely “there are excellent journalists saying excellent things on Substack, and no Nazis” is different from “necessary evil to protect free speech.”
You’re living in opposite world, man.
If you think my problem with Substack is “Nazis are there right now,” then you didn’t get it. I must’ve not explained myself well, and that’s on me, but you’re missing the point regardless.
Nazis are part of my explanation because it ought to be clear to any reasonable reader how they should be dealt with, but one can still be horrible without being an outright Nazi. Those people should be dealt with similarly. Substack will see something horrible and first ask, “but how would our handling of this affect free speech?” which is a disgrace and a red flag.
I’m commenting on a larger issue related to the topic. At no point do I say people shouldn’t listen to good journalists because of their platform of choice. At no point do I claim there are Nazis there. To reiterate: bad is not specifically and exclusively Nazis.
Substack may not be Nazi-central, but it’s surely a product of broligarchy.
You’re answering something else, man.
A lot of us know by now that Substack has a Nazi problem.
It is moral and correct to censor Nazis.
Nazis love that argument, and they’re a threat to much more than just free speech. They shouldn’t get to block attempts at censoring them, and they specially shouldn’t get support to do so, because they’re one of the reasons it’s necessary in the first place.
Got it.
If you think my problem with Substack is “Nazis are there right now,” then you didn’t get it.
At no point do I claim there are Nazis there. To reiterate: bad is not specifically and exclusively Nazis.
Got it.
Anyway, the core of my point is that anyone who’s talking about this type of free speech argument on Substack, particular if it’s specifically applied in the context of Nazis, is largely living in a fantasy-land.
You are commenting under an article that says “A lot of us know by now that Substack has a Nazi problem,” and then saying that you’re not talking about Nazis.
You are saying “the bad is a necessary evil to protect free speech,” and not at all addressing the fact that the “bad” doesn’t appear to exist on modern Substack. If you have seen it, where have you seen it?
Substack may not be Nazi-central, but it’s surely a product of broligarchy.
There’s a lot of this type of innuendo in the OP article and in your response. I’m dealing only with your factual arguments, sort of leaving aside things like this “many innocent ideas turn out to be dog-whistles” “it’s always the same shit” and things. If you want me to try to mount some kind of counterargument for the broligarchy claim, I can I guess. How would you define the broligarchy?
If you’re upset that I am mischaracterizing your argument as being about Nazis (because in some crazy fashion I got that idea), tell me what ideas you are in favor of removing from Substack. Where are they on Substack, right now?
I actually do agree with Substack’s original moderation stance, precisely for reasons of free speech. We can talk about that if you want, although it’s a more complex conversation and we probably won’t come to agree on it. But that whole side of things is completely moot at this point, because they caved to the pressure and removed all the Nazis, quite a while ago.
So why are you still upset at them? Wasn’t that the goal, to mount public pressure, and deplatform the Nazis?
Edit:
At no point do I say people shouldn’t listen to good journalists because of their platform of choice.
I should answer this, also. What are you saying the solution should be, if not to avoid Substack?
I don’t agree with your characterization of the “problem” with Substack, in terms of there being Nazi-adjacent content they are not moderating. But if there does turn out to be that content, what should you and I be doing about it?
You are saying “the bad is a necessary evil to protect free speech,” and not at all addressing the fact that the “bad” doesn’t appear to exist on modern Substack. If you have seen it, where have you seen it?
I literally linked an example.
tell me what ideas you are in favor of removing from Substack. Where are they on Substack, right now?
Follow the links.
So why are you still upset at them?
Link.
I actually do agree with Substack’s original moderation stance, precisely for reasons of free speech. We can talk about that if you want, although it’s a more complex conversation and we probably won’t come to agree on it.
I had a feeling, and maybe this reply isn’t outright confirmation, but it’s enough. I think you tunnel visioned so hard on defending poor Substack and free speech that you’re not even properly reading what you’re replying to. You’re going up and down this thread, finger on the trigger, and the moment you see the word Nazi you just fire.
You’re right, we probably wouldn’t agree, and if my read on you is any good, I’d rather not risk wasting time on that conversion.
You are saying “the bad is a necessary evil to protect free speech,” and not at all addressing the fact that the “bad” doesn’t appear to exist on modern Substack. If you have seen it, where have you seen it?
I literally linked an example.
Okay, so you’re in favor of removing any content which is dishonest and anti-gay from Substack. Fair enough, I get it.
I actually do agree with Substack’s original moderation stance, precisely for reasons of free speech. We can talk about that if you want, although it’s a more complex conversation and we probably won’t come to agree on it.
I had a feeling, and maybe this reply isn’t outright confirmation, but it’s enough. I think you tunnel visioned so hard on defending poor Substack and free speech that you’re not even properly reading what you’re replying to. You’re going up and down this thread, finger on the trigger, and the moment you see the word Nazi you just fire.
You’re right, we probably wouldn’t agree, and if my read on you is any good, I’d rather not waste time on that conversion.
Sounds good. What do you think should be done about Substack’s hosting of anti-gay content? Do you think it should impact me posting Tim Snyder articles from Substack? Do you think it’s accurate to summarize it as “Nazi” content?
A lot of us know by now that Substack has a Nazi problem.
What on Earth? They hosted like three Nazis, which is part of the overall commitment to letting people talk which leads them to host a ton of really good people. And then, when everyone on the internet yelled at them for it, raising a pretty reasonable counterpoint, they kicked the Nazis off. That all happened over a year ago.
It not only profits from fascist voices, it actively promotes their work and recruits them
I read the citation for this statement. What it says is very different from actively promoting the work of fascists and recruiting them. There is a whole fascinating conversation to be had about why some high-profile lefty journalists like Taibbi and Greenwald all of a sudden became Nazis, but it’s very misleading to assign 100% of the blame in this way to Substack, purely because they were working with those people before it really became completely clear to everyone that they for whatever bizarre reason had become Nazis. It’s a lot more complex situation that is being summarized in this extremely glib spin-soaked fashion.
And it’s funded by Silicon Valley anti-democracy billionaires like Marc Andreesen
Okay, fair enough. This is pretty interesting and I hadn’t known it.
On the other hand, Substack also hosts Sy Hersh, Tim Snyder, Salman Rushdie, and God knows who else. If they were planning to slant their coverage based on the fact that Andreesen’s company gave them $15 million in 2019 (which they then quickly turned around and gave big chunks of to working journalists), you’d think they would be making some kind of effort to downplay the leftist voices which they are currently hosting, outnumbering the “problematic” voices which might be there but which I have literally never run across there.
Elon Musk also, apparently, tried to buy Substack in 2023, and they told him to fuck off.
This whole article reads like a bad-faith hit piece aimed at one of the organizations that actually is trying to provide a space for good journalism including left-wing authors, and making sure that it’s sustainable and they can get paid. By trumping up some various things into much bigger deals than they need to be.
I wonder who would be interested in ginning up big bad-faith hit jobs against good news outlets, encouraging people on the left to savage and abandon them for various little misdemeanors until the only news outlets left are either bought and purchased by open fascists, or too small and scattered to make a difference?
Thank you for the additional context, I’ve heard peoples criticisms of substack but hadn’t heard any of this additional info
Ghost still seems cool though :)
Yeah, Ghost is great. I’m not trying to say any bad thing about it. I think they’re slightly different: Substack went to bat in a big way to foster a community where real journalists could do their journalism there, and get paid for it, and to a large extent it worked. That’s why there are so many high-profile lefties writing there. Ghost is trying to set up a FOSS-style platform that anyone can use. Ghost has monetization too, but they didn’t prime the pump with it nearly as much as Substack did.
They’re both great. I think it’s pretty likely that anyone who’s screaming about Nazis on Substack is just looking for reasons to scream, and the Nazis have very little to do with it except as an excuse.
That and the nature of this community lol. I think everybody reading this would prefer federated/distributed communication over centralized control.
Nazis on a server? Don’t visit that server. Nazis visit your server? You got some simple decisions to make on if your server is going to be a Nazi server.
So like I said, the whole thing is pointless, because Substack changed their minds and kicked out the Nazis about a year ago. Anyone who is attacking them for being a Nazi platform is looking for an excuse, because it isn’t true anymore.
That’s the point, right? Give public pressure to platforms so they will deplatform the Nazis? What sense does it make to fail to notice when they do, and pretend that are still hosting Nazis, and talk incessantly about it when some important non-Nazi is just trying to pursue the critically endangered act of journalism on this platform which has no Nazis?
Why would you do that?
The real problem is that there are crazy people who define anybody right of them as a Nazi.
But, we’re not ready to have that conversation yet
Views like…
Found the Nazi lol
A great example of what I’m talking about.
“Disagree? You’re a Nazi”
You’re cheapening the word and helping them become normalized.
Really glad you brought the opposite perspective to the table here 🙏 thank you!
I wonder who would be interested in ginning up big bad-faith hit jobs against good news outlets
The author of the article. It doesn’t take long to uncover their politics and they are absolutely not involved in any right wing conspiracy.
There’s nothing really wrong with substack. People just like to shit on anything that doesn’t pass whatever purity test they happen to use.
absolutely not involved in any right wing conspiracy.
How do you know that? Do you know them personally, or audited them or something?
I don’t know that they are, and looking over their resume it does seem unlikely. But, also, I would have said that same thing looking at Taibbi’s or Greenwald’s resume in 2017. I just know that in this story, they are presenting things in this absolutely wildly inaccurate fashion that would be right at home in a right-wing conspiracy. Certainly, working at The Intercept for a long time isn’t some kind of bulwark against being infected with right-wing-propaganda-ism, with Greenwald himself as one absolutely interesting counterexample clearly on offer.
Suppose it makes sense to use a cybertruck as the hero photo then
The attraction of substack for at least some writers is that substack actually pays their more popular or prestigious writers. I don’t know how many or whether there is a published list of them, but at least a few of them are getting paid rather well (6 figures/year or maybe more). If Substack is recruiting and paying Nazis, then that is of interest and concern. Most writers there aren’t getting paid by substack, though they may have readers who buy subscriptions. That is open to pretty much everyone and the fanfiction saying “don’t like, don’t read” works for me here. Saying Ghost is a more attractive platform because it has more censorship is kind of a head scratcher. And calling Taibbi and Greenwald Nazis is ridiculous. Disliking the Democrats doesn’t make someone into a Nazi.
That said, I don’t personally like substack very much and am always glad to hear about alternatives.
Can a reader user on Ghost follow multiple Ghost accounts? I haven’t used Substack but my understanding is that it is similar to Patreon and OF in that I can subscribe to multiple accounts and have them show up in a central feed. Can I do this as a subscriber on Ghost? And do multiple servers federate to allow for that?
Substack has had a Nazi problem since its inception. At first, there was a liberal backlash, but they all eventually went there anyway.
Still remember the decoder podcast where the CEO was asked, would you remove an article that says “we should deport all brown people”, and he danced around how he wouldn’t get into specifics of moderation.
Just your standard ‘Free speech absoluteism’
Has Ghost refused to host “Nazi” publications?
Yes:
One, its terms of service ban content that “is violent or threatening or promotes violence or actions that are threatening to any other person.” Ghost founder and CEO John O’Nolan committed to us that Ghost’s hosted service will remove pro-Nazi content, full stop. If nothing else, that’s further than Substack will go, and makes Ghost a better intermediate home for Platformer than our current one.
That sounds like they’d ban content promoting the eating of the rich, too.
I’m all for banning fascist content, but I don’t wanna lose the French revolution vibes.
It’s a standard terms of service and a verbal “commitment” which isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on.
I’m sure you’ll find the exact same wording on substack’s tos.
The problem is that what social media denizens call Nazi and what Ghost and substack call Nazi are all wildly different things.
How do readers access Ghost? I got sucked into a trial membership but I don’t intend to publish, just read, like I can do on substack. I don’t want to be on the problematic platform but can’t figure out how to gradually use Ghost instead, especially since hardly anyone’s over there yet.
I think i only follow Robert Evans. Have any ghost recs?
What, no Jason Pargin?
Someone needs to tell Carole Cadwallader to move her resistance headquarters out of the Nazi bar. There are a lot of people who’d subscribe to her journalism if it didn’t also involve funding the enemy.
Newsletters? Google killed RSS so we could have newsletters?
Google weirdly gets a lot of credit for killing things that are very much alive and well.
aren’t podcasts still RSS. I’m like 90% sure they are.
I’m following everyone from substack and every other resource on RSS. Nothing dead about it. Maybe someone is unhappy with their particular way of accessing it? I’ve used Feedly ever since Google ruined their own reader. Google abandoned a lot of things during that period of innovation.
RSS is the hero that saved us from Spotify (et at.) walling off podcasts behind their paywall.
I don’t think we’ve been saved just yet. Their market share is still growing and they don’t support importing RSS feeds. Nor do they support outgoing video feeds for RSS. And they continue to pay for exclusive partnerships.
I don’t think we’re completely saved forever but they tried making podcasts Spotify-exclusive. I remember a bunch of Gimlet podcast hosts being like “please come to Spotify to listen to us – it’s better than it used to be!” They ended up caving because people didn’t listen. Podcasting is built around RSS – even though people aren’t really aware of it – and people expect to get them this way.
Yes and ironically there are services like kill the newsletter that will re-RSS your tired ass newsletter.
But anyone cool that uses fulltext RSS gets an auto subscribe from me.
Substack and Ghost both support RSS. Problem is no one uses it anymore. They either don’t know or don’t care. It also doesn’t provide an option for paid subscriptions.
Is there no FOSS alternative we can promote?
Ghost is FOSS, that’s part of the whole point.
Ah my bad, I saw $9 on the site and figured it was a paid service things
Yeah, they have a paid+hosted option, or you can use the FOSS stuff it is based on and go it on your own. It’s a pretty good system I think.
I don’t think the software matters much tbh. It’s about payment aggregation, search hit aggregation, and for some “prestige” substack writers, actually getting paid by the platform.
