Substack emerges as solidly progressive platform with ‘liberal thought leaders' flocking, researcher says
The growing media platform Substack is solidly liberal, with 81 of the 100 top-selling titles in the U.S. Politics category being "left-leaning or progressive," according to researcher Kyle Tharp.
Tharp, who pens the "Chaotic Era" newsletter, explained that Twitter used to be "the go-to arena for Democratic strategists, elected officials, and a new class of liberal take-makers," but Elon Musk's takeover of the platform has pushed "liberal thought leaders" away.
Lefty influencers have searched for a new home and some have migrated to Bluesky or Threads, but Tharp believes "a winner appears to have emerged" in recent months.
"Newsletter platform Substack is having a moment, fueled largely by an influx of liberal-leaning political and media figures eager to share their takes. Online pundits and anti-Trump resistance leaders like Heather Cox Richardson, Dan Pfeiffer, Simon Rosenberg, Norm Eisen, Steve Schmidt, and Mary Trump have built sizable audiences by weighing in on the news of the day," Tharp wrote.
"Democratic elected officials—including Gavin Newsom, Pete Buttigieg, and Chris Murphy—have launched their own publications on the platform, aiming to grow dedicated followings ahead of potential presidential bids," he continued.
"Perhaps most notably for the media industry, mainstream journalists who have left legacy outlets are finding new freedom to share their political opinions more openly on Substack. Among them: Taylor Lorenz, Mehdi Hasan, Tara Palmeri, Jennifer Rubin, Don Lemon, Jim Acosta, Terry Moran, and Dan Rather," Tharp added.
Moran, who was axed from ABC News this month after posting an anti-Trump rant on X, quickly joined Substack and used the platform to double down on his social media post that called Trump and White House aide Stephen Miller "world-class haters."
"This, while very hot, is an observation, a description that is accurate and true," Moran said.
He added later, "It was something that was in my heart and mind. And I would say I used very strong language, deliberately, because he, I felt [was]… spitting venom and lies into our debate, degrading our public discourse, debasing it and using the power of the White House and what he's been given to grind us down in that bile. And, that's very disturbing to me."
Tharp noted that "They're building a new echo chamber of left-leaning or anti-Trump commentary" one newsletter at a time. He included a graphic of the Top 50 "bestsellers" in the U.S. Politics category, which reveals the overwhelming majority of political content being consumed on Substack is of the liberal variety.
The company appears to be embracing the liberal audience, as Tharp noted that anti-Trump figures Michael Cohen, Joe Walsh and Don Lemon are being used in the company's latest advertising campaign. He's unsure if the platform will continue the momentum "or if it's simply the latest stopover for Twitter refugees in search of an audience."
"For now, Substack stands as a key town square for a certain segment of the left, reshaping how political narratives are distributed, debated, and consumed," Tharp wrote.
While Substack does feature a handful of prominent non-liberals, such as Bari Weiss, it bills itself as "a new media app that connects you with the creators, ideas, and communities you care about most."
"Here, you can discover world-class video, podcasts, and writing from a diverse set of creators who cover politics, pop culture, food, philosophy, tech, travel, and so much more," Substack's website states.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
14 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Trump officials to give first classified briefing to Congress on Iran strikes
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth are expected to brief the senators on Thursday. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard was scheduled to be at the Tuesday briefing, but will not be attending, according to a person familiar with the schedule. Advertisement The briefing could be contentious as questions have swirled around Trump's decision to strike Iran and whether the attacks were successful. A preliminary U.S. intelligence report found this week that Iran's nuclear program had been set back only a few months, contradicting statements from Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu about the status of Iran's nuclear facilities, according to two people familiar with the report. The people were not authorized to address the matter publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity. Advertisement On Wednesday, Gabbard and Ratcliffe sent out statements backing Trump's claims that the facilities were 'completely and fully obliterated.' Gabbard posted on social media that 'new intelligence confirms what @POTUS has stated numerous times: Iran's nuclear facilities have been destroyed.' She said that if the Iranians choose to rebuild the three facilities, it would 'likely take years to do.' Ratcliffe said in a statement from the CIA that Iran's nuclear program has been 'severely damaged' and cited new intelligence 'from a historically reliable and accurate source/method that several key Iranian nuclear facilities were destroyed and would have to be rebuilt over the course of years.' Most Republicans have staunchly defended Trump and hailed the tentative ceasefire he brokered in the Israel-Iran war. House Speaker Mike Johnson even went as far as to question the constitutionality of the War Powers Act, which is intended to give Congress a say in military action. 'The bottom line is the commander in chief is the president, the military reports to the president, and the person empowered to act on the nation's behalf is the president,' Johnson told reporters. But some Republicans — including some of Trump's staunchest supporters — are uncomfortable with the strikes and the potential for U.S. involvement in an extended Middle East conflict. 'I think the speaker needs to review the Constitution,' said Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. 'And I think there's a lot of evidence that our Founding Fathers did not want presidents to unilaterally go to war.' Advertisement Paul would not say if he is voting for the resolution by Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., that would require congressional approval for specific military action in Iran. The resolution is likely to fail as 60 votes would be needed to pass it and Republicans have a 53-47 majority. But Kaine says it's important to put the Senate on the record. 'You have a debate like this so that the entire American public, whose sons and daughters are in the military and whose lives will be at risk in war, get to see the debate and reach their own conclusion together with the elected officials about whether the mission is worth it or not,' Kaine said. While he did not seek approval, Trump sent congressional leaders a short letter Monday serving as his official notice of the strikes, two days after the bombs fell. The letter said that the strike was taken 'to advance vital United States national interests, and in collective self-defense of our ally, Israel, by eliminating Iran's nuclear program.'
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
White House plans to limit classified info it shares with Congress on Iran attack
The Trump administration is planning to limit classified information shared with Congress, sources familiar with the matter told ABC News. The move comes after a classified initial intelligence assessment showed that U.S. military strikes President Donald Trump ordered on Iran's nuclear facilities last weekend did not completely destroy the country's nuclear program but likely set it back a few months, according to sources familiar with the early findings. The administration is planning to limit classified information it shares on CAPNET, the classified information sharing system used by both the House and Senate, the sources said. MORE: Some senators see initial Iran strike assessment, but won't share details It was not immediately clear how much information the administration plans to limit moving forward. The administration has not publicly alleged that CAPNET was the source of the information about the initial assessment. The administration has said that the FBI is investigating the leak. The news of the White House's plans was first reported by Axios. The House and Senate were originally scheduled to receive classified briefings on the strikes in Iran on Tuesday before those briefings were delayed. The Senate will now receive a briefing Thursday and the House is expected to be briefed on Friday.
Boston Globe
14 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Trump's latest rejection of intelligence assessments reflects a long distrust of spy agencies
Advertisement 'Intelligence people strive to live in a world as it is, describe the world as it is, where politicians are all about describing the world as they want it to be,' said Larry Pfeiffer, a 32-year intelligence veteran who held positions including CIA chief of staff and senior director of the White House Situation Room. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Though it's hardly unheard of for presidents to bristle at what they perceive as bad news from the intelligence community, it's rare for the conflict to spill into public view as it did this week. 'I don't think we've seen another president push back as strong as this guy has,' Pfeiffer said. Trump has a history of distrusting spy services Trump's suspicion of the intelligence community, particularly when its assessments do not align with his worldview, dates back to even before his first term. Advertisement His 2016 campaign was shadowed by an investigation into whether his team had coordinated with Russia to sway the outcome of the election. He was so infuriated by the scrutiny over a dossier of unverified and salacious claims connecting him to Russia that, one week before he was sworn in, he tweeted: 'Intelligence agencies should never have allowed this fake news to 'leak' into the public. One last shot at me. Are we living in Nazi Germany?' Trump disputed the assessment that Russia had interfered in the election on his behalf, decrying as a 'hoax' and a 'witch hunt' an investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller, which ultimately concluded the Trump campaign had welcomed Moscow's help but did not find sufficient evidence of a criminal conspiracy. Trump also openly challenged the judgment of his intelligence agencies alongside Russian President Vladimir Putin at a Helsinki summit in 2018. 'I have great confidence in my intelligence people, but I will tell you that President Putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today,' Trump said. 'He just said it's not Russia. I will say this: I don't see any reason why it would be.' Such public protestation takes its toll on an intelligence community that historically has endeavored to produce data-driven and apolitical judgments, said Frank Montoya Jr., a former FBI supervisor who served as director of the National Counterintelligence and Security Center. 'It's really demoralizing because nobody is looking at this stuff from a political perspective. They're looking at the data and they're analyzing the data,' he said. 'When you get this kind of unfounded criticism, especially from the policymaker in chief, it just destroys morale.' Advertisement Tensions with the intelligence community persist Trump tapped loyalists to lead America's intelligence services in his second term — Tulsi Gabbard as director of national intelligence and John Ratcliffe as CIA director. They promised to end what they said was the weaponization of intelligence and root out disloyal officers. But there have already been conflicts. Last month, the National Intelligence Council declassified a memo in response to an open records request that said American spy agencies found no coordination between the Venezuelan government and the Tren de Aragua gang, contradicting statements the Trump administration used to justify invoking the Alien Enemies Act and deporting Venezuelan immigrants. Gabbard later fired the two veteran intelligence officers who led the council because of their perceived opposition to Trump. More trouble came after the war between Israel and Iran began nearly two weeks ago. Trump dismissed Gabbard's testimony to Congress in March that U.S. spy agencies did not believe Iran was actively pursuing a nuclear weapon. Trump insisted Iran was very close. 'I don't care what she said,' he told reporters last week. Gabbard later accused the news media of mischaracterizing her testimony, noting that she had mentioned Iran's large stockpile of enriched uranium that goes beyond levels needed for civilian uses. Iran maintains that its nuclear program was peaceful, though the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency has repeatedly warned that Tehran has enough highly enriched uranium to make several nuclear bombs if it chooses. A preliminary report from the Defense Intelligence Agency that emerged this week said that while the U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities did significant damage, the facilities were not totally destroyed and the program was only set back by a few months. Advertisement The White House called the assessment 'flat-out wrong.' The DIA said the initial findings will be refined as new information becomes available. Given Trump's skeptical view of intelligence officials, Pfeiffer said, 'his initial instinct is to assume that if the intelligence community is telling him something different than he would like it to be, that it's because they're trying to undermine him.' Trump team says there's no conflict Gabbard and Ratcliffe have sought to brush off any perceived conflict between their agencies and Trump. Ratcliffe said Wednesday that new intelligence from a 'historically reliable and accurate' source reveals that U.S. strikes 'destroyed' several of Iran's nuclear facilities that would require years to be rebuilt. 'CIA continues to collect additional reliably sourced information to keep appropriate decision-makers and oversight bodies fully informed,' Ratcliffe said in a statement. 'When possible, we will also provide updates and information to the American public, given the national importance of this matter and in every attempt to provide transparency.' Gabbard noted the DIA assessment was of 'low confidence,' an acknowledgment by its authors that their conclusions could be mistaken. 'The propaganda media has deployed their usual tactic: selectively release portions of illegally leaked classified intelligence assessments,' she wrote on X. Trump narrated his own intelligence assessment while attending the NATO summit in the Netherlands. He mentioned satellite images showing the area around nuclear facilities 'burned black' and said the underground tunnels had 'all collapsed.' He also suggested Israel had sources on the ground in Iran: 'They have guys that go in there after the hit' to evaluate the damage. The White House pointed to an Israel Atomic Energy Commission assessment that the U.S. and Israeli strikes have 'set back Iran's ability to develop nuclear weapons by many years.' Advertisement Assessing the US strike will take time Intelligence officers routinely craft assessments about global threats and specific incidents — information vital to the decision-making of national security officials and lawmakers. Assessments are regularly updated as new intelligence is produced from sources including field agents, informants, open source material and secret surveillance. The work is secretive to protect the methods and sources of intelligence agencies and to avoid becoming a political football. Former intelligence officials said it's likely to take days, weeks, or even months to form a full picture of the impact of the U.S. strikes on Iran's nuclear capabilities. 'I would call for patience,' said John Negroponte, a former ambassador who served as the first director of national intelligence under President George W. Bush. 'Avoid the temptation to rush to judgment.' Associated Press writer Aamer Madhani contributed to this report.
