On paper, it looked appealing. Give journalists control of their voice back, rebuild a direct connection with the people reading us, and generate revenue directly. In a crisis-hit ecosystem, the Substack newsletter platform seemed to offer real liberation: an easy-to-use tool, a subscription model, and the ability to build your community. Except it doesn't work that way.
An inequitable economic model
Eight years after its launch, Substack is less an alternative than a neoliberal variation on the problem. The platform is part of a new wave of direct connection between journalists and readers, in reaction to social media fatigue and the illegibility imposed by algorithms. In this context, the idea of "taking back control" of one's distribution is appealing. But it's often a case of the snake biting its own tail. By replacing one intermediary (media outlet, social network) with another (Substack), we remain trapped in platform logic, with its opaque rules and structural biases. What, then, of independence?
We told you about it when it started, the platform works very well for those who are already doing very well: they already have strong influence and a solid community. These are star journalists, already listened to and followed voices, like Lauren Bastide, author and producer of the podcasts La Poudre and Folie Douce or Victoire Tuaillon, former author and voice of the podcast Les Couilles sur la table, at Binge Audio.
The platform doesn't create an audience: it redistributes one. Through cross-recommendations, the most visible authors amplify each other — but these mechanisms primarily benefit those who already have strong visibility. For everyone else, you must build your subscriber base from scratch. And income remains precarious: a study by the Columbia Journalism Review (2022) and cited by Cyrille Frank on Minted breaks down the math: "if you have 500 subscribers paying you $5 a month, you'll earn $2,500 a month, or rather $2,250 after Substack's commission. And you're writing at least one article a week, probably more. […] You don't really earn a decent living on Substack unless you have thousands of paying subscribers." In essence, a way of working more to earn less. Substack thus reproduces an audience capitalism, where those who have already won keep winning (and they'd be wise not to pass that up), but where everyone else rows harder in the cursed lake of precarity.
It's in this spirit that we designed Socle, an offering built on open source tools like Ghost, designed for independent editorial projects that are financially accessible.
Outsourced marketing
And then there's this: all of it requires reaching those famous 500 paying subscribers, which remains the exception rather than the rule. Because Substack doesn't do the marketing work for you. Writing alone isn't enough: you also have to segment, promote, follow up, develop your formats, optimize your email subject lines, post on social media… In short, be your own marketing department. The promise of editorial independence comes with a requirement for total self-entrepreneurship. It's a model that transfers all responsibility onto the author with no pooling of resources or support.
No social protection
Behind the rhetoric of independence, there are no paid holidays, no social protection, no collective support. It takes a 10% commission on earnings but offers neither editorial support nor security measures, and obviously guarantees no social rights. We love the story of someone who made it entirely on their own, and sure, if you want to film you just need something that films, but how far are we willing to go? The reality is one of isolation, reinforced by the mental burden of continuous production, which becomes the norm.
A proprietary infrastructure
Ultimately, Substack is more than just a tool. As Lex Roman documented in this investigation, it's a platform that controls content visibility, retains user data (payments, reading activity), and locks your audience relationship into a closed ecosystem. Substack actually owns user data: creators cannot freely export payment information or reading behavior, and subscribers are tied to the platform, not to the person writing. In short, you're free to leave, but know that your subscribers will stay on the platform.
While this criticism doesn't apply to all direct funding tools, it deserves to be refined. Substack brings together publishing, design, distribution, and monetization features within a closed ecosystem. Other tools offer more flexibility. You can publish via open source tools like Ghost, or more flexible newsletter platforms like Beehiiv, and then integrate monetization solutions into them. Some media outlets also choose to add external tools like Patreon or Tipeee to these, viewed here as simple donation boxes. Because they're hosted on proprietary platforms, these tools also raise questions of independence. The key point is that behind the illusion of independence offered by certain
… and biased
Finally, contrary to what it claims, the platform is not neutral. Substack has been criticized for its lack of moderation against transphobic content and Nazi material. It favors divisive opinions, outrage, and polarizing personal narratives. Independent journalism cannot be built on this foundation.
The engaged journalism we discuss and defend is journalism that requires time, resources, and teamwork. It rests on a vision of information as a common good, not as a commodity. It means believing in entrepreneurship, but not in the illusion of ready-made independence. Being autonomous is something you build: with appropriate tools, a clear strategy, sometimes collectively. The challenge isn't to flee platforms, but to understand what they offer and what they take away.
Substack is not a betrayal, it's a misunderstanding: about what independence is, and about what journalism requires to endure.
To go further
- Young audiences tend to abandon traditional media brands in favor of independent journalists they trust and are willing to pay. In the United States, 16- to 40-year-olds are twice as likely to pay a creator as a media outlet (American Press Institute, 2023). Journalists can thus become their own media. The challenge remains how to build an audience, monetize their work, and maintain editorial quality.
- In this article, journalist Ezra Klein explains why he chose to join the New York Times rather than sell his podcast to Spotify or launch his own Substack account.
- A newsletter can be much more than a simple promotional tool for your latest articles. You can think of it as an embodied product to speak directly to your community, theme it based on current events, or even structure it in finite cycles. All our recommendations to help you imagine a newsletter that stands out.
- Creating and distributing an effective newsletter is an art that requires careful attention to detail, from deliverability to accessibility. What are the technical and design challenges to keep in mind?
- For nearly three years now, the Médianes team has been experimenting with and using different tools for their daily work. We want to share these with you, perhaps to give you some ideas or open up the discussion!
