I have always loved your writing from deadspin, in these times and on, and would love to become a paid subscriber, but I then had to think through all the other news subscriptions I'm paying for and wondered what your thoughts are on folks subscribing to individual substacks for every writer they follow rather than say pay for the one ne…
I have always loved your writing from deadspin, in these times and on, and would love to become a paid subscriber, but I then had to think through all the other news subscriptions I'm paying for and wondered what your thoughts are on folks subscribing to individual substacks for every writer they follow rather than say pay for the one newspaper or magazine subscription and get many... What impact does this model have on shrinking or expanding the number of perspectives we're able to read or are exposing ourselves to on a regular basis? That said, get paid as we all must under capitalism
I very much sympathize with not being able to pay for a subscription to every damn substack you read. Long term I would love to see a lot of individual publications coalesce into bigger publications.
Lol not unlike a magazine? Reminds me of all the "cutting the cord" and then all the channels want their own streaming services and then they start bundling together because there are too many... And so capitalism eats itself...Also I would add that in terms of the type of stuff you're writing, I like newsletter stuff I like long form stuff but isn't the point of the platform to write what you want?
I second this. I am paying for several substacks already whose writing I find as important as Hamilton's, along with several local news subscriptions (including the dying embers of our local paper) and the Post. I feel guilty for not paying yet but also don't know where to draw the line. Like Laura, I equated this to streaming-just-replaced-my-cable-bill, and have wondered if Substackers have every thought about advocating the platform to offer something akin to bundled subscriptions - like pay a higher price but get several subscriptions with it. Could increase subscribers while also increasing readership due to network effects.
I have always loved your writing from deadspin, in these times and on, and would love to become a paid subscriber, but I then had to think through all the other news subscriptions I'm paying for and wondered what your thoughts are on folks subscribing to individual substacks for every writer they follow rather than say pay for the one newspaper or magazine subscription and get many... What impact does this model have on shrinking or expanding the number of perspectives we're able to read or are exposing ourselves to on a regular basis? That said, get paid as we all must under capitalism
I very much sympathize with not being able to pay for a subscription to every damn substack you read. Long term I would love to see a lot of individual publications coalesce into bigger publications.
Lol not unlike a magazine? Reminds me of all the "cutting the cord" and then all the channels want their own streaming services and then they start bundling together because there are too many... And so capitalism eats itself...Also I would add that in terms of the type of stuff you're writing, I like newsletter stuff I like long form stuff but isn't the point of the platform to write what you want?
I second this. I am paying for several substacks already whose writing I find as important as Hamilton's, along with several local news subscriptions (including the dying embers of our local paper) and the Post. I feel guilty for not paying yet but also don't know where to draw the line. Like Laura, I equated this to streaming-just-replaced-my-cable-bill, and have wondered if Substackers have every thought about advocating the platform to offer something akin to bundled subscriptions - like pay a higher price but get several subscriptions with it. Could increase subscribers while also increasing readership due to network effects.