Substack is facing an uprising from some of its writers after a report revealed how Nazi and white supremacist writers – including the infamous far-right leader Richard Spencer – have been making money through subscription fees on the platform.
Key Facts
Over 100 writers on Substack, including Professor Dave Karpf from George Washington University, writer Marisa Kabas, and Professor Daniel Drezner from Tufts University, are demanding to know why the publishing platform is allowed to publish and profit from the writings of Nazis and white supremacists.
Substack’s terms of service state that the platform cannot be used to “publish content or fund initiatives that incite violence based on protected categories,” which include threats against others based on race, gender, ethnicity, and religion.
However, a report in The Atlantic revealed that there are several accounts on Substack linked to Nazi and white supremacist leaders, including Unite the Right rally organizer Richard Spencer and former Identity Europa leader Patrick Casey.
Both Spencer and Casey are able to profit from their writings on the platform, with Spencer charging $9 per month from over 4,000 subscribers.
Background
While other social media sites like Twitter have faced severe criticism in recent weeks for antisemitic content, Substack has avoided similar issues this year. The media company was founded in 2017 by Chris Best, Hamish McKenzie, and Jairaj Sethi, and does not have ads embedded on its site, which largely exempts it from the kind of boycott campaigns that Musk says threaten Twitter. Instead, Substack takes a 10% commission on all subscriptions sold by writers. Substack has faced calls for boycotts in the past – in April, Smith faced heavy criticism for refusing to answer questions in a Verge podcast about regulating racist content. Substack has previously stated that it follows a “hands-off” approach to content moderation. The three founders have long defended this policy, saying that censorship would be a “last resort” on the platform. “We make decisions based on principles, not public relations,” the three founders wrote in an article. However, the signatories of the “Substack Against Nazis” letter said that Substack was willing to remove some content – if it violated rules regarding nudity or pornography or was unwanted content.
Shortly after the Atlantic report was published in November, another open letter began circulating supporting the company’s content moderation strategy. This letter, written by author Ilana Griffin, was signed by some prominent names on the platform, including former New York Times writer Bari Weiss, evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, and former NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. “If you want to find hate content on Substack, you need to look for it in fringe chat channels, because unlike other social media platforms, it won’t just show up in your feed,” Griffin wrote in the letter. Forbes was able to find Substack postings by figures like Spencer through Google searches, as they appeared in the top search results. Substack declined to comment on the “Substack Against Nazis” letter but referred to Griffin’s letter and noted that there is a “strong debate” occurring among writers.
Future Reading
For more information about Substack and the controversy surrounding it, you can read the following articles:
– “Substack shows that community ownership does not need Web 3 or tokens” by Jon Woolf.
–
“Substack Notes – Could it be a serious alternative to Twitter?” by Tim Bajarin.
– “The Rise of Substack and Beyond” by Fallon Fatemi.
This article has been rewritten by Zachary Folk and reflects the opinions of contributors to Forbes.
Leave a Reply