Substack has been profiting from conspiracy nuts and anti-vaxxers for many years. I feel like their stance on ”free speech” has been made clear. But it’s often the nazi angle that gets more people engaged.
I’m genuinely curious as to why Substack became such a well-respected platform when the writing was on the wall for so long.
I remember this controversy from January 2022 and Substack responded then exactly as they did now. Is it just that humans tend to forget so quickly? Obviously the fact that popular publications like Platformer approved of Substack, even after this revelation, makes people feel that it still comes recommended.
« This type of content is “so bad no one else will host it,” said Imran Ahmed, CEO of the Center for Countering Digital Hate, a nonprofit that focuses on combating misinformation and has researched Substack. By splitting subscription profits with creators, the group estimates, Substack generates at least $2.5 million a year in revenue from just five anti-vaccine leaders who have amassed tens of thousands of subscribers, each paying $50 a year.
Substack declined to comment, but shortly after The Washington Post made inquiries, CEO Chris Best and his two co-founders published a blog post saying that putting up with “the presence of writers with whom we strongly disagree” was a “necessary precondition for creating more trust in the information ecosystem as a whole.” »
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/01/27/substack-misinformation-anti-vaccine/
Just remembered how Substack CEO Chris Best responded when Nilay Patel asked him on Decoder if he would allow overt racism on Substack Notes.
https://vimeo.com/817611949/a001a450c1