This is a small step in shedding light on if not beginning to solve a huge problem. But cynical me hears this as disingenuous and a self-serving distraction at best. How does this solve—or fund—the absolutely essential role of service or enterprise journalism that's disappearing all over the US? (See https://www.usnewsdeserts.com to find a news desert near you; and stories of the fallout: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/21/reader-center/local-news-deserts.html)
How will a Substack for an enterprising local journalistic talent pay her/him to send a fleet of beat reporters out week after week to cover local officials, local policy, local hearings (endless, soul-sucking, but where the sausage is being made)? Never mind fund a Boston Globe-like "Spotlight" to slog away for years on pedophilia in the Catholic Church—this costs a fortune and may not “deliver” anything to subscribers for weeks, months, or even years. Meanwhile: office and travel expenses, press pass access, data sources, oh and rent, health insurance, etc.
A lone writer on Substack is not the same as a beat reporter (or 10) in local news deserts like Denver, Burlington, Vt. or Ferndale, Calif. with a newsroom behind them. (And don't get me started on the mortal threat of the stealth right-wing takeover of "local news" on TV & radio: see Anne Nelson, "Shadow Network: Media, Money, and the Secret Hub of the Radical Right.")
Certainly better than nothing, don't get me wrong!—and there might be a few multi-talented local experts recently out of work who could make a difference—but what’s your take?
PS The American Substack co-founder dude sounds eerily like Zuckerberg.
Thanks for this, Micah. ICYMI have a listen to the latest Recode podcast:
"Substack cofounders discuss $1 million local news plan - Vox"
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/substacks-next-target-local-news/id1080467174?i=1000517234095
This is a small step in shedding light on if not beginning to solve a huge problem. But cynical me hears this as disingenuous and a self-serving distraction at best. How does this solve—or fund—the absolutely essential role of service or enterprise journalism that's disappearing all over the US? (See https://www.usnewsdeserts.com to find a news desert near you; and stories of the fallout: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/21/reader-center/local-news-deserts.html)
How will a Substack for an enterprising local journalistic talent pay her/him to send a fleet of beat reporters out week after week to cover local officials, local policy, local hearings (endless, soul-sucking, but where the sausage is being made)? Never mind fund a Boston Globe-like "Spotlight" to slog away for years on pedophilia in the Catholic Church—this costs a fortune and may not “deliver” anything to subscribers for weeks, months, or even years. Meanwhile: office and travel expenses, press pass access, data sources, oh and rent, health insurance, etc.
A lone writer on Substack is not the same as a beat reporter (or 10) in local news deserts like Denver, Burlington, Vt. or Ferndale, Calif. with a newsroom behind them. (And don't get me started on the mortal threat of the stealth right-wing takeover of "local news" on TV & radio: see Anne Nelson, "Shadow Network: Media, Money, and the Secret Hub of the Radical Right.")
Certainly better than nothing, don't get me wrong!—and there might be a few multi-talented local experts recently out of work who could make a difference—but what’s your take?
PS The American Substack co-founder dude sounds eerily like Zuckerberg.
Micah, Don’t be so hard on Zuck... $54 billion just ain’t what it used to be.