Study Hall Digest 7/22/2019

By Study Hall staff writer Allegra Hobbs (@allegraehobbs)

It was only a matter of time before venture capitalists got in on the newsletter boom. Substack, and newsletters broadly, felt like a utopian project from the start — writers sending dispatches directly to readers who are choosing to receive them, engendering a business model that bypasses the decades-long tradition of selling readers’ eyeballs to the highest bidder in the form of advertising. Newsletters, as Claire Landsbaum argued in a recent Vanity Fair piece extolling the virtues of the boom, have the potential for greater intimacy, their unedited rawness and straight-to-inbox delivery system a relief in a media landscape dominated by the alienating forces of social media.

Now, new complications have been introduced into the Substack model. The platform this past week announced it had raked in $15.3 million in a Series A funding round led by VC firm Andreessen Horowitz. The deal was galvanized by Andreessen’s Andrew Chen, who tells Fortune he saw the money-making potential in Substack and wondered, “Just how big could it get?” We’re about to find out.

One problem with Substack’s utopian model has been that it is actually pretty difficult for writers to make money on the platform unless they already have name recognition and a following (which they probably accrued working at traditional media companies). There are a few writers making six figures off their newsletters, and those are the writers who get touted both by the company and in credulous articles about the immense promise of solo newsletters, but most writers on the platform aren’t making that much. Of course, this is only a problem if Substack is being presented as a solution to the media industry’s current woes, which it is, however cautiously.

If Substack is truly going to be a viable alternative for media workers let down by the traditional publication route, it has to be viable for more than a handful of writers. Part of the VC money will ostensibly go towards that end, hiring developers and “writer relations specialists”; co-founder Hamish McKenzie, recognizing the concerns around VC funding, says the funding will be used to develop tools to help writers succeed (it is worth keeping in mind this is in the best interest of Substack, since the company makes its money by taking a cut of writers’ subscriptions and is free of advertising).

But of course, the insertion of VC money shatters the perception of the utopian newsletter model a little, and raises understandable concerns about the rate at which a company like Substack can and should scale. For now, Substack’s founders are asking readers and writers to trust them. (As an aside, will this lead to the creation of more newsletters? I CANNOT SUBSCRIBE TO THEM ALL.)

***

Speaking of the newsletter boom: Graydon Carter’s new venture has taken flight and it’s just ok. The former Vanity Fair editor launched his Air Mail newsletter on Saturday, and in a world in which newsletters have to feel somewhat essential to attract subscribers (see above) this project feels…non-essential. This could have been predicted by the prelude to the launch, which was editors offering such groundbreaking recommendations as Ella Fitzgerald and Fleabag on the newsletter’s Instagram. The first issue feels like the creators were trying to replicate Monocle but with a sense of humor, but it’s not that funny? An essay by Larry David’s daughter Cazzie on the trend of sharing misery online has its moments but skips over any potential for sharp criticism, settling on the lazy thesis that millennials are attention-seeking because their parents gave them too much affirmation. People are expected to pay for this!

Air Mail has been presented, mostly through its Instagram presence, as a weekend luxury, to be indulged in alongside room service in a fancy hotel in the style of early-90s Kate Moss. But this doesn’t seem like the moment for hyper-aspirational content; there is a lot to read, to compete you need a sense of urgency. (It probably won’t help that Carter just gave an interview to the New York Times Magazine in which he denies “wheel-greasing” content for famous friends and is pretty obtuse about diversity).

***

And speaking of unnecessary vanity projects, the New York Times took a look at the phenomenon of everyone you know launching a podcast. “Anyone can start one and so anyone who thinks they can start one will do it,” Hot Pod newsletter author Nicholas Quah told the Times. “It’s like the business of me.” There’s a pretty funny spotlight on a woman who decided to launch a podcast with no effort then was alarmed to find it was hard; it also makes sense that anyone with an iota of skill (or…not) would give it a shot — there’s the lure of fame and money, and media is so precarious as it is, why not? But as with newsletters, there are so many, you need a sense of urgency to compete. Unfortunately, our meandering banter with our friends is not super interesting to everyone!!

Longread of the Week: BuzzFeed’s Joseph Bernstein tagged along with professional victim of Antifa Andy Ngo to that fateful Portland rally to document the drama, and he penned an interesting piece that takes stock of Ngo’s reputation as a grifter. His whole shtick is getting hit in the face then going on Fox News to talk about it, but his (anti-Muslim) convictions and hysteria over fake hate crimes seem to be earnest, says Bernstein. (Make sure to read our guide to covering the alt-right).

EVERYTHING ELSE

— Freelancer Wudan Yan took to Medium to chronicle her journey demanding late fees from clients who took longer than 30 days to pay her, placing them in violation of New York’s Freelance Isn’t Free Act. The companies, based in NYC, seemed pretty scandalized by the requests, and Yan found herself wondering if she was being too difficult (sound familiar?). But she makes a great case for demanding these payments, noting the late payments caused a financial burden for her, and her clients were essentially taking out a loan when they didn’t pay her on time, meaning interest accrued. Late fees are routine in other industries — why not journalism?

— Gatehouse is gearing up to buy Gannett, reports Nieman Lab. The deal has been in the works for a long time, but it’s as good as done at this point. This means the combined company will run more than one-sixth of all daily newspapers in the country. The goal of the merger is apparently to buy some time while the owners work out a transition to digital and a strategy for profitability. It’ll probably mean a continued emphasis on “regional” news in lieu of actual local news, which is…bad for local newspapers and communities.

— The reception of new G/O Media (formerly Gizmodo Media, which owns old Gawker sites like Jezebel and Deadspin) CEO Jim Spanfeller apparently is not going over well! A lengthy report in The Daily Beast details gripes staffers have with the new leader, including his desire to scan editorial content for anything that might deter advertisers and lack of diversity in hiring. Spanfeller also apparently proposed a new tagline for Jezebel, “We Champion Women,” which certainly captures the company’s rebellious spirit and critical stance towards corporate feminism.

— You know who we should ask to opine on President Trump’s racist tweets on national television? Probably NOT famed nazi and domestic abuser Richard Spencer, who was brought on Jake Tapper’s show to weigh in on how well Trump’s racism was lining up with his own white nationalist agenda. I know the question of platforming nazis is contentious but it’s really not that hard folks: Don’t give nazis a platform.

— This come amid a debate among media outlets over the use of the word “racist,” a word often ditched in favor of dumb terms like “racially infused” and “racially charged.” CJR recently argued that outlets should “just say ‘racist’,” noting the AP’s ruling on the matter in March. NPR, meanwhile, argued reporters should “ditch the labels.” Reporters should be as straightforward as possible in their word choice, I think, and something that’s racist should simply be called racist. I also don’t think deploying the word is going to sway any Trump supporters or seriously combat Trump in any way.

— First Look Media staff are rebelling against the decision to shutter Topic magazine and The Nib in favor of a pivot to video, even though apparently three-year budgets for the sites had been approved. CEO Michael Bloom has said the decisions the company made were in the interest of profitability and the issues raised by staff will be discussed at an upcoming town-hall meeting. FLM is also apparently in talks to buy Passionflix, a streaming service that adapts romance novels co-founded by Elon Musk’s sister, though the company denied the existence of any deal, so…there’s that.