1/ This is a truly bizarre, down is up, up is down, thread. Obviously I'm a biased Substack writer, but it's not a "threat" to traditional news media. It's a compliment. It works with it, and it's a strong addition to the landscape. Calling it a "threat to journalism" is absurd.
2/ Most obvious is the fact that many "traditional" media outlets are incentivized in all the wrong ways: traffic, ad revenue, clicks, and corporate sponsors. Being supported by subscribers is not a cloak - it's actual freedom.
3/ Also, imagine in this moment for media actually tweeting this:
4/ AYFKM? Thousands of journalists have been laid off in the last 5 years because people refuse to pay for quality content and because Facebook, Google and other big tech platforms have shafted newsrooms out of cash. Calling to *not pay writers* for their work right is bonkers.
5/ Regardless: Dr. Roberts appears to actually have little understanding of Substack. First, plenty of Substack writers/newsrooms have editors and similar set-ups that a traditional newsroom does.
6/ Second is that plenty of Substack writers are obviously there because they believe their traditional newsrooms failed to protect the integrity of their work. I understand people's skepticism ab some of these big names -- I share some of it. But to reject all of them?
7/ To believe every prominent writer who has moved to Substack for the stated reason of having their true work stifled or ignored or downgraded by their newsroom is lying about that? That takes actual delusion.
8/ Substack is not trying to destroy or takedown traditional media. Again, if Roberts had been paying attention she may have seen that in the writings of its founders, who have talked about it explicitly: blog.substack.com/p/a-proposed-c…
9/ Substack gives writers, journalists, thinkers, and creatives a direct line to their consumers in the format they want. That can include editors and a traditional newsroom structure. It can also not. More voices in the public square is a good thing - especially independent ones
10/ Miraculously, the model to help reporters and writers feed themselves actually appears to be working. Some are supplementing their poor salaries with a Substack. Others are working full-time. At a moment when media's business model is in crisis, Substack is working
11/ This thread basically amounts to vague threats about what happens when a writer doesn't have an editor, and then a call to literally not pay for or participate in a sustainable news model for journalists. It's actually a bit offensive, given the moment we're in!
END/ Anyway. Substack is not dangerous. Pick who you want to read. Keep supporting local newsrooms. Pay for news if you can. Enjoy having independent voices challenging the space. My Substack is the best. Go read Tangle readtangle.com/about
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This is hilarious. Rep. Eric Swalwell referred to "G-d herself" and triggered all these ridiculous, over-the-top reactions about G-d's gender... when gendering G-d is actually a totally reasonable, in-bounds debate in church and synagogue and has been for literally centuries.
He "mocks truth intentionally by misgendering G-d" like... the Hebrew Bible from 2,000 years ago? Or the Episcopal Church from 600 years ago? ncronline.org/news/theology/…
Any learned religious person would hear Swalwell say "G-d herself" and not be surprised at all given that it's actually a robust debate in pretty much every religious community. So if you see someone having a meltdown over it, just know that they are telling on themselves!
Robinhood is no longer allowing users to do anything but close out their #GME or #AMC positions. Hard to put into words how outrageous that is. This is, much more acutely, the definition of manipulating the market.
I’ve got a newsletter coming out about this moment — and about how it went from silly to deeply serious and political yesterday readtangle.com/about
48 hours ago this was funny. 24 hours ago it become a politicial dividing line, a bit more serious and very interesting. Now it's getting really ugly, and a lot of people are about to be extemely pissed off at how hypocritical the ruling class is
If you don't understand what's happening, let me explain: a bunch of idiots with internet access are fleecing billion dollar hedge fund companies that typically fleece the rest of us. And they're doing it literally by sheer force of numbers bloomberg.com/opinion/articl…#GME#AMC
They are, in no uncertain terms, upending the entire financial market and pulling off the kinda wealth redistribution you might imagine happening in some socialist dystopia. Except they're doing it by beating Wall St at their own game.
1/ I see all you tweeting at me asking about "BLM" and "antifa" and saying "this is what you get." Let me be clear: you are out of your goddamn minds. "BLM" got teargassed and cleared out for throwing water bottles in a park. I've watched NYPD crack skulls for being cursed at.
2/ This isn't happening because Joe Biden didn't condemn George Floyd protests harshly enough in the summer. That's a bullshit hot take. He DID condemn the violence, and amongst millions of participants in those protests, there were actually very few violent incidents.
3/ Despite that, BLM protesters got a violent response across the country. Tear gas, batons, rubber bullets. A freaking grandfather in Buffalo had his head cracked on the pavement cause some clown bulled him over for standing there.
Donald J. Trump has ended America's streak of a peaceful transfer of power. That's it. That's his legacy. He refused to concede, gathered a mob on the day Congress rightfully elected his successor, and then instructed that mob to march to the Capitol and raise hell.
Nothing else he's done — none of the positive or negative — even comes close to holding a candle to this. This is the whole ballgame. He's the president who ended a flawless history of our leaders peacefully transferring power, and he should be disgraced for all time bc of it.