Are You A SubStack Hypocrite?

Exploring the Ethics of Content Creation and Consumption on SubStack

In 2017, SubStack has emerged as a revolutionary platform for writers and podcasters, offering a unique space where creators can share their thoughts, ideas, and stories with a global audience. As an avid user, I've found SubStack to be the highlight of my year, a place where I can freely express myself through daily articles and podcasts.

Like many others, I've chosen to make my content available for free on SubStack, with the option for readers to support my work through a $5 monthly subscription. This model seems straightforward, but it raises an important question about the dynamics of content creation and consumption, particularly regarding the integrity of creators who ask for paid subscriptions.

Here's where the potential hypocrisy comes into play: if you are a writer or podcaster on SubStack, requesting paid subscriptions from your audience, but haven't subscribed to other creators (free or paid), what does that say about your integrity and the authenticity of your request for support? This might be an uncomfortable question to confront, but it's crucial in understanding the ethics of digital content creation.

This situation is akin to a small business owner who asks the community to shop locally but exclusively patronizes big-box retailers. There's an unspoken rule in the creative community about supporting each other, which goes beyond mere financial transactions. It's about acknowledging the value of creative work, understanding the effort that goes into it, and fostering a supportive ecosystem.

SubStack's app highlights this issue more starkly. When you click on a creator's profile, you can see what they're reading and, importantly, whether they're financially supporting other creators. Discovering that a fellow creator contributes "ZERO" to others can be disheartening. It raises questions about the sincerity of their participation in the community and their commitment to the ethos of mutual support that platforms like SubStack are built upon.

The integrity of this situation is multifaceted. On one hand, financial constraints are real, and not everyone can afford to subscribe to other creators, even if they wish to. However, when creators who solicit paid subscriptions don't reciprocate in any form, it can seem hypocritical. It suggests a one-way relationship where they are willing to receive support but not extend it to their peers.

So, what does this mean for you as a creator or a subscriber on SubStack? Firstly, it calls for introspection. If you're a creator asking for subscriptions, consider whether you are also supporting your fellow creators in some way. This support doesn't always have to be financial; it can be through engagement, sharing their work, or providing feedback.

Secondly, as a subscriber, this insight might influence whom you choose to support. You might prefer creators who not only produce content you enjoy but also demonstrate a commitment to the broader community of creators.

In conclusion, the question of being a "SubStack Hypocrite" is not just about pointing fingers but about reflecting on the values we promote in the digital content creation space. It's about understanding that a thriving community on platforms like SubStack relies on mutual support and respect. Whether you're a creator or a consumer, your actions contribute to the culture of this community. Let's strive to make it a supportive, reciprocal, and thriving environment.