
How Substack is upending media: ‘It is seriously challenging the old-guard message that people won't pay for writing'
wanted to buy Substack not long after he bought Twitter in 2022. But the newsletter and podcast platform wasn't for sale. This month Substack raised a further $100 million (€85.44 million) in investment. The deal put a reported $1.1 billion valuation on the business. For now, Substack remains privately owned.
Even though it's been around for eight years, it's only in the last couple of years that Substack has become more visible and popular. Part of the reason is that several big-name writers have started using the platform.
Margaret Atwood
, George Saunders,
Miranda July
,
Salman Rushdie
, Chuck Palahniuk and many others have Substacks.
[
A Swim in a Pond in the Rain: A masterclass in how to write by George Saunders
Opens in new window
]
Maybe it's the ethos of Substack that draws writers of such renown. As the app states, 'with full editorial content and no gatekeepers, you can do the work you most believe in'. At this starry juncture of the careers of Atwood et al, it's difficult to imagine any book editor savaging new manuscripts they submit, but maybe it's the freedom to play around with random content and ideas that is the attraction.
Other well-known people on the platform are the Nobel-winning economist Paul Krugman, former Vanity Fair editor Tina Brown and singer-songwriter
Patti Smith
.
READ MORE
So how did Substack evolve? Back in the analogue day, we hand-wrote letters to each other when we had something to say. That lasted for centuries. The most exposure those letters received were overwhelmingly to an audience of one. That's unless the recipients and/or senders were famous, and had the foresight to keep their correspondence; a correspondence that some day in the future ended up being published as Collected Letters.
Then came the Internet and mobile phones for all, and the new reality of your thoughts, images and live experiences reaching huge digital audiences. On the writing side of this in the early days were blogs, usually on the platform Word Press. Plenty of ordinary people blogged about their lives, children, travels, social experiments, interests and an inexhaustible range of other subjects.
In the democracy of the online world, some blogs were good, some were terrible. They were free to read, or at least any I came across were, although, as ever, donations were welcome.
Some that became widely read went on to have another life, one example being
Julie Powell
's 2002 blog Julie & Julia, 365 days, 524 Recipes, 1 Tiny Apartment. Powell blogged for a year about cooking her way through Julia Child's Mastering the Art of French Cooking. It later became a bestselling book, then a hit movie starring Meryl Streep as Child.
After the long and enduring life of the blog came newsletters. These differed from blogs in that they were less frequrntusually once a fortnight or once a month. You could sign up to be added to the mailing list. I subscribed for a time to author Dolly Alderton's newsletter, which was, as I recall, short, newsy and funny.
Maybe it's the ethos of Substack that draws writers of such renown. Photograph: Gabby Jones/Bloomberg
Substack is essentially the 3.0 sophisticated incarnation of the blog-stroke-newsletter, its aim to secure a subscription fee for access to at least some of the writer's content.
Substack was founded in San Francisco by Hamish McKenzie, Chris Best and Jairaj Sethi. It was funded by various venture capitalist investors.
The mission statement on the app reads: 'Building a new economic engine for culture. Do your best work, supported by your subscribers. Substack lets independent writers and podcasters publish directly to their audience and get paid through subscriptions.'
There aren't any ads on Substack, and it is free to use the platform. The idea was that writers – in an era when freelance assignments have become ever rarer and ever more poorly paid – could have some autonomy over monetising their own content. Readers pay writers directly, rather than the traditional arrangement of editors commissioning copy, and organisations then waiting to pay contributors after weeks or even months.
Writers posting on Substack have an individualised website for their archive content, in addition to whatever way they wish to personalise the page. New articles on Substack get emailed to subscribers. The author owns their content and their mailing list.
Traditional media outlets frequently retained copyright over content written by writers. Writers can make their content free, or subscriber-only. Substack's business model takes a 10 per cent cut on paid subscriptions. The company doesn't release profit figures, so if it's difficult to know how much it makes. However, Substack said earlier this year that it now has five million paid subscribers. That came just four months after the company claimed four million paid subscribers, so this number appears to be advancing rapidly.
To talk about media or publishing at this moment, you have to talk about Substack or look out of touch
There is usually some free, or 'unlocked', content on a Substack, so potential subscribers can get a flavour of what's being offered. When writers are starting out, they can choose to make all their content free, while also offering a 'pledge' option. This means that if and when content becomes subscriber only, the pledge automatically transforms into a subscription.
Freelance journalist
Laura Kennedy
, a contributor to The Irish Times who is now based in Australia, has had a Substack called Peak Notions since 2022. It has 14,000 subscribers, though she prefers not to reveal how many of those pay for her content.
'For a writer or freelancer, steady income and consistent work – the reliability of it, the editorial control and ownership of your own content and platform – is legitimately life-changing,' she says.
'A small, regular income that can't be pulled from under you at no notice is more than most writers can expect.
'Substack has sort of upended media in the best sense – it is seriously challenging the old-guard message that people won't pay for writing, that it is the platform and not the writer they value, that they only want to read particular kinds of work, or that local news is not something people will fund directly.
Kennedy points out that some writers have secured book deals through their Substacks.
[
Demystifying the path to publication, for free
Opens in new window
]
In May of this year, the New Yorker
published an essay by Peter C Barker titled Is the Next Great American Novel Being Published on Substack?
As Kennedy says: 'To talk about media or publishing at this moment, you have to talk about Substack or look out of touch. That's a profound change and a good one. There is no reason writers and journalists can't be in both worlds – they enrich one another. They're the same world.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Irish Times
2 hours ago
- Irish Times
Microsoft profits soar almost 25% on boom in cloud computing revenues
Microsoft said its quarterly profits soared as revenues from its cloud computing division surged to a record level, driven by rampant demand for artificial intelligence services. Net income increased 24 per cent year on year to $27.2 billion (€23.85 billion), surpassing analysts' expectations for $25.3 billion in the three months to the end of June, according to a filing on Wednesday. Revenue rose 18 per cent to $76.4 billion in the quarter, exceeding the average $73.9 billion estimate, compiled by Visible Alpha. 'Cloud and AI is the driving force of business transformation across every industry and sector,' said chief executive Satya Nadella. READ MORE Microsoft shares jumped 7 per cent in after-hours trading. They had previously risen 22 per cent this year as the company is increasingly perceived by investors as a winner from the AI boom. Its stock market capitalisation of $3.8 trillion is second only to US chipmaker Nvidia. Microsoft for the first time disclosed revenue specifically from its Azure cloud computing division, which it said rose 34 per cent to a record $75 billion in the company's fiscal year, which ended in June. In the fiscal fourth quarter, its overall cloud business posted revenue of $46.7 billion, up from $36.9 billion in the same period a year earlier. The company released the breakdown in response to requests from investors, who have lobbied Big Tech groups to show how the vast sums they are spending on artificial intelligence are translating into higher earnings for their data centres and AI products. Capital expenditure rose to $24.2 billion in the quarter, up 27 per cent versus last year, and from $21.4 billion in the prior three months. Last week, rival Alphabet boosted its AI spending plans by $10 billion to $85 billion this calendar year after its earnings from cloud computing jumped by almost a third. – Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2025


Irish Times
2 hours ago
- Irish Times
Meta shares jump on strong results as Zuckerberg sets out ‘superintelligence' goals
Meta 's shares jumped more than 10 per cent off the back of better than expected second-quarter earnings, in a sign of Wall Street confidence as chief executive Mark Zuckerberg doubles down on his big bet on artificial intelligence . In recent months, the chief executive has embarked on an aggressive hiring spree, offering sign-on bonuses of more than $100 million to tempt AI talent from rivals such as OpenAI, Apple and Google to a new secretive 'superintelligence' lab inside the company. Strong financial results will help reassure investors concerned over whether Mr Zuckerberg's increasingly sprawling AI ambitions will eventually bear fruit and not overwhelm the otherwise healthy advertising-based business with costs. In earnings reported on Wednesday, revenues rose 22 per cent to $47.5 billion (€41.6 billion) in the three months to the end of June from the year before, well surpassing expectations of $44.8 billion, a sign of the robustness of its advertising business. READ MORE Net income increased 36 per cent to $18.3 billion, also higher than consensus estimates of just over $15.3 billion, compiled by S&P Capital IQ. In its outlook, Meta raised the lower end of its 2025 capital expenditures forecast to between $66 billion and $72 billion from its April outlook of $64 billion to $72 billion. It added that 'there are a few factors we expect will provide meaningful upward pressure on our 2026 total expense growth rate', citing the scaling up of its infrastructure and growth in employee compensation due to its AI efforts. The company also forecast its third-quarter revenues would be $47.5 billion to $50.5 billion, above consensus estimates of $46.3 billion. Shares rose about 10 per cent in after-hours trading in New York. Mr Zuckerberg's 'superintelligence' lab is tasked with developing advanced AI that he hopes will surpass the intelligence of humans but has promised can be supported by the company's well-capitalised business. Alongside the talent blitz, he has this month announced several large data centre projects, as well as new nuclear and renewable energy deals, as he builds the infrastructure needed to support his AI drive. While the exact vision, timeline and moneymaking strategy remains unclear, Mr Zuckerberg in a memo posted earlier on Wednesday said Meta was focused on building 'personal superintelligence' through which 'people will have greater agency to improve the world in the directions they choose', rather than directing the technology solely towards automation and productivity gains. 'We have the resources and the expertise to build the massive infrastructure required, and the capability and will to deliver new technology to billions of people across our products,' he wrote. – Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2025


Irish Post
5 hours ago
- Irish Post
Elon Musk's X loses high court challenge over online safety rules
X, formerly known as Twitter and owned by Elon Musk, has lost a High Court challenge against Ireland's media regulator, Coimisiún na Meán, over new online safety rules that came into force earlier this month. The court's decision marks a significant victory for the regulator and signals a strong mandate for tighter content controls on major tech platforms operating in Ireland and across the European Union. The challenge was brought by X International Unlimited Company, which operates the platform in Ireland. The company had sought to overturn the regulator's decision to adopt parts of the Online Safety Code, claiming the new rules represented 'regulatory overreach' and conflicted with European law. Specifically, X objected to provisions in the code that require video-sharing platforms to restrict or remove content deemed harmful to children, including material that promotes eating disorders, self-harm or bullying. In a ruling delivered on Tuesday, Justice Conleth Bradley dismissed the company's arguments, stating the code was in line with both the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) and the Digital Services Act (DSA), two major pieces of EU legislation governing online content. The judge rejected the claim that the Irish code imposed broader restrictions than permitted under EU law and affirmed that the AVMSD and DSA work 'in a complementary manner.' X had argued that the definition of 'restricted content' in the code was too vague and that it blurred the line between illegal content and so-called 'legal but harmful' material. The company also claimed that Coimisiún na Meán lacked the authority to impose certain requirements and that some provisions should be struck down. However, the court found that the regulator acted within its powers and that the rules were proportionate to the goal of protecting children online. The ruling follows ongoing tensions between X and the Irish regulator. Just last week, Coimisiún na Meán wrote to the company expressing concerns that it had not implemented adequate age-verification measures to prevent minors from accessing pornography. X responded by stating it had adopted such measures in Ireland, and the regulator is now reviewing whether these are sufficient to meet the code's standards. X's court loss comes as new online safety laws take hold in other jurisdictions, including Britain. Elon Musk has publicly criticised these laws, describing them as attempts to suppress free speech. Meanwhile, the introduction of age checks and content controls has prompted a spike in the use of virtual private networks (VPNs), with two VPN providers currently among the top five most downloaded utility apps in Ireland's Apple App Store. The High Court judgement will be formalised later this week, and the judge indicated he was inclined to order X to pay the commission's legal costs. It remains unclear whether X will appeal the decision. See More: Elon Musk, High Court Dublin, Online Safety Code, Twitter, X