Tag

Substack

Browsing

By Madeleine Schulz

As more and more fashion and beauty newsletters crowd our inboxes, writers are expressing frustration with the platform. What’s the way forward?

In 2025, everybody in fashion has a Substack. At least, that’s what it looks like, judging by my increasingly crowded inbox. Has it reached a saturation point?

In March, Substack hit five million paid subscriptions, up from four million four months prior and three million a year ago. Fashion and beauty is a key pillar, ranking among the top 100 topics (out of over 350,000 unique tags analysed), according to influencer marketing agency Subalytics. Over the past year, the number of publications and subscriptions in the fashion and beauty category has more than doubled, with publishers collectively earning more than $10 million annually in paid subscriptions, says Christina Loff, head of lifestyle, writer and creator partnerships at Substack.

“This upward trend suggests increasing competition in the space,” says Timofey Pletz, CEO and founder of Subalytics, which specialises in alternative platforms (namely Substack, Bluesky and Medium). Angela Galvez, writer of Letters We Send Friends, joined Substack 10 months ago. “There’s been such a change from last summer to today,” she says. “It’s definitely way more crowded.” For those on the receiving end, a sense of newsletter fatigue is brewing. One user says they have burnout; another notes that it feels like a new ‘trend’. A third is simply “overwhelmed”. One reader asks the burning question: “How do I keep up?”

Substack promised an alternative to traditional media, drawing in notable writers and editors to self-publish while owning their audiences. Newsletters like Leandra Medine Cohen’s The Cereal Aisle to Jessica Graves’s The Love List to Emilia Petrarca’s Shop Rat have become fashion must-reads. They make money from a combination of subscribers, affiliate links and brand advertisements; Graves says she’s making more on Substack than she ever did as an editor.

With money to be made and media jobs drying up — plus the inexorable rise of the influencer-turned-amateur expert — Substack has grown increasingly crowded, making it increasingly difficult to discover the best voices. Now, brands are jumping on board, creating Substacks of their own and further crowding the landscape. “There’s still concern about our ability to, and being required to, weed out the bad from the useful, the entertaining, the insightful,” says Annie Corser, senior pop culture and media analyst at consumer trends agency Stylus.

At the same time, Substack is on a major growth push — and more closely mirroring the social platforms it once stood apart from. In January, it launched live video capabilities allowing users to share these as short-form clips in-app while capitalising on TikTok’s uncertain fate in the US. (Alongside a $25,000 TikTok Liberation Prize, promising to “rescue the smart people from TikTok”.) Substack is also recruiting creators from other platforms — like the ‘Throwing Fits’ duo from Patreon — and, with them, their large audiences.

For some, the cons are beginning to outweigh the pros. Graves, who joined Substack four years ago and says she’s now reliant on it, is considering leaving. Writers regularly ask where Substack users are heading next. On a user level, how many newsletters can any one person subscribe to, pay for and read?

As more and more writers (and non-writers) join Substack, coupled with existing users’ increasing dissatisfaction with changes to the platform, will this be the year fashion Substack hits a wall — before it even gets off the ground at scale?

Image may contain Patrik Klüft Clothing Coat Person Teen Accessories Glasses Adult Advertisement and Poster

Laura Reily of Substack Magasin at Paris Fashion Week.

 Photo: Phil Oh

Growth at what cost?

Loff believes that there’s still room for growth in the fashion Substack space, propelled by the rise in creators. “It’s not a zero-sum game; there isn’t a cap on the number of people interested in fashion and beauty content here. In fact, as the space grows, it becomes more dynamic and engaging.”

But is there really no cap? Erika Veurink of Long Live says that herself and fellow creators have clocked a recent growth plateau. “The people I know who write Substacks who have paid readership are sort of like, OK, I think I’ve plateaued. I think anyone I would convert to a paid reader is converted,” she says. With the competition of so many letters, writers have to work harder to maintain the paid reader relationship now, she adds.

And with a laser focus on growth, Substack risks overlooking what its existing talent wants — and needs — to continue building out their own platforms. User growth at all cost isn’t sustainable for Substack’s wider ecosystem. One editor who publishes work on Substack likened it to Buzzfeed in 2012. “This is a platform for writers, and always has been,” Graves says. “That’s not to say that video shouldn’t be supported. But the people who have been beating the drum since the beginning are not getting the basic things that we need.” Both Graves and Veurink have experimented with live video, to few conversions.

“Our goal is to give creators the tools they need to build sustainable, subscription-based businesses — whether that’s through writing, podcasting, video, or any combination of these tools that helps them tell their stories in the most powerful way,” Loff says. “We’re not asking anyone to change what they do best. Video is simply an additional option for creators who want to connect with their audiences in another way. And while it’s not for everyone, having strong video voices on the platform can expand discovery and bring new audiences that benefit the entire ecosystem.”

The tools fashion Substackers do want range from the ability to embed code (Tumblr has this) to build out sub-pages (WordPress offers this). The personalisation of branding on a Substack site is limited to swapping out a logo and playing around with, albeit limited, existing layouts. There’s even less flexibility in-inbox. “I’ve been begging for years to allow us some design freedom, which they say is coming, but I haven’t seen yet,” Graves says. Veurink, too, always thought customisation and increased ownership would get more attention. “What’s actually gotten that attention is video content and gamifying getting paid subscribers,” she says.

A Substack representative said that the company is currently exploring more customisable templates and design capabilities through a private beta, which includes “richer design, flexible branding and tools for larger teams”. The platform declined to share further information about timing or broader availability.

Owned and affiliated

As far as brands are concerned, Substack isn’t anywhere near saturation. Many of them aren’t even on it yet.

Brand interest has grown significantly since the early days. “In the beginning, when I initially joined it was more difficult, because you were just trying to get people to understand what Substack even was. It was really hard to get people to sign up and subscribe, let alone an advertiser,” Graves says. “That was a lark. That was a pipe dream.”

Now, The Love List is making advertisers big bucks — it’s generated Net-a-Porter about $135,000 to date. The RealReal didn’t officially partner with any Substack creators until the end of 2024. Once it did, it saw strong click-through (over 6 per cent) and twofold ROAS (return on assets), says The RealReal chief creative officer Kristen Naiman. Smaller newsletters like Galvez’s Letters We Send Friends are generating brand interest too; she’s had brands reach out for features.

Feature Image Credit: Phil Oh

By Madeleine Schulz

Sourced from Vogue Business

By

The social media giant is creating its own newsletter, taking aim at Substack and Twitter’s Revue

Facebook launched its independent newsletter Bulletin on Tuesday, as competition heats up against rivals Substack and Twitter-backed Revue. Writers and creators including Malcolm Gladwell, Tan France and Erin Andrews are among its initial recruits.

In an audio livestream, CEO Mark Zuckerberg introduced Bulletin as a platform “focused on empowering independent writers, helping them reach new audiences and power their businesses.”

“The goal here across the company is to support eventually millions of people making a living doing creative work,” Zuckerberg said.

Facebook presented Bulletin as a way for writers to monetize their following, and Zuckerberg said they will not take a cut “at launch.” Writers will have full ownership of their work and subscribers and be able to publish free and paid newsletters that can be distributed across inboxes and the Facebook platform.

Facebook said it will continue to recruit other writers to cover topics from sports to medicine. With the debut it also adds high-profile recruits including writer Mitch Albom and journalists Jane Wells and Jessica Yellin.

The initiative is part of the company’s ongoing Facebook Journalism Project, and Facebook has said it will allocate at least $5 million to “support local journalists” that apply and get accepted for its newsletter product. The newsletter lives outside of the Facebook platform.

This isn’t Facebook’s first foray into cloning successful products on the market by putting its reach and money behind new projects. In January, the tech giant introduced podcasts and live audio streams in the U.S., its answer to Clubhouse and Twitter Spaces. Spotify also has its own service called Greenroom.

For writers and journalists seeking a newsletter home, it may come down to the size and scale of the social network. They may find an advantage to Facebook and Twitter’s reach, while Substack offers a fresh take with convincing growth.

Substack had 12 million readers a month and 500,000 paying subscribers as of April, according to Politico. Twitter reported 199 million daily active users, while Facebook had nearly 1.9 billion daily users. Twitter, which acquired Revue earlier this year, takes a 5% cut in subscription fees, but writers can control whether their work is free or paid. Substack reportedly offers six-figure advances to recruit high-profile writers.

By

Sourced from THE WRAP

By

A slew of famous media defectors who jumped onto the platform recently raises the question of whether Substack can address media’s woes

I started a Substack two weeks ago and it’s going better than I thought it would. Friends texted me: “Congratulations on the launch.” To which, I responded: “Heh, thanks it’s a blog.” Another pinged: “You joined the movement!” The best reaction was an encouraging tweet from fellow Substacker, Michelle Lhooq: “Let us all welcome [Sean] to the Substack stripper pole, where writers dance for our readers loose change and tell ourselves we’re the future of media hehe.”

Michelle’s sangfroid about the media hullabaloo regarding Substack makes sense to me. It’s a Faustian bargain to commodify your personality. You’re free from the limiting influences of institutions. This is of course why the most famous Substack defectors – Glenn Greenwald, Matt Taibbi, Andrew Sullivan and now Matt Yglesias – moved to the platform. Yet, input from editors is inevitably just replaced with the pressure of analytics. As teen YouTubers, who were the earliest to experiment with commodifying their personalities confess, the quantification of attention both positive and negative quickly influences our decisions. There are some sides of ourselves our subscribers want to see, others people would prefer not to … This applies doubly to controversial views.

But no matter how you feel about it: we live in a personality-based economy now. Cancel culture and platforming, the two discourses that help us navigate the dynamics of our social media ecosystem both point back to this state of affairs. When Yoni Appelbaum snarks: “PITCH: Like Substack, only with the best writers, rigorously edited, beautifully illustrated, accessible online, but also bound together and delivered directly to your door, for a small fraction of the price of subscribing to each individually” – and then tweets a link to the Atlantic’s digital subscription page, his first appeal is to the publication’s stable of writers. The Atlantic’s brand is not its 163 years of illustrious history or its institutional reputation. It’s brand is a meta-affect of the media personalities it platforms, and most importantly – those it doesn’t.

Personality is upstream from institutions in the same way culture is upstream from politics. Substack has clearly taken note of this. Consider Ezra Klein: an influential proponent of the netroots activist blogging movement in the early 2000s, his Wonkblog was essential reading for those closely following the passage of Obamacare. Originally a solo project, it was quickly acquired by the Washington Post. But by 2014, Klein had attracted the attention of venture capitalists and was installed as the editor in chief of Vox, a leader in the data journalism movement, clearly indebted to Klein’s explanatory style of journalism. Ezra Klein’s personality is lightning in a bottle. It flows from him, not the media properties he has founded.

There’s a tedium to the hamster wheel of personal brand, and as so many have noticed the causality from followers to funds is opaque at best, a con at worst. In a world where podcasters get Patreons, sex workers get OnlyFans, and influencers get brand partnerships, writers have taken note. If Substack is a stripper pole at least it’s not pro bono.

Substack is not quite the ‘revolution’ tech critic Jaron Lanier envisioned in his 2013 book, Who Owns the Future? For Lanier, our current detente wherein users receive free services and creators receive free exposure in exchange for free content, was never viable. A few monopolies control (and monetize) an inordinate amount of all the information created around the world, while the masses would be left out in the cold. He proposed users – creators in his estimation – be reimbursed with micropayments for content they contributed to the internet. Substack isn’t quite the equivalent of Twitter paying us a penny per tweet, but it seems the closest thing we will get to a fairer ecosystem in the near future.

For many people, the issues surrounding Substack strike at the heart not only of what free information has done to society – but what free information has done to the media industry in particular, which has been decimated by declining profits. In 2020, Google, Facebook and Amazon are on course to consume 62.3% of US digital ad revenue – to say nothing of Craigslist’s fait accompli on the classified ads that formerly supported local journalism … Substack is a pragmatic response to one issue plaguing an industry in crisis – a collapsing ad-based revenue model. Rather than propose more voodoo innovation, it addresses the issue head on with the straightforward transaction of a subscription, a shift that industry leaders such as the New York Times have also pursued to great effect. A new micropayments platform for newsletters won’t magically liberate public intellectuals from commercial pressures; it won’t solve the tensions between free speech and safety; and I highly doubt it will make having a career as a writer any easier. But it will create space for writing not tailored to the trending on Twitter section, encourage writers to develop a deeper relationship with their audience, and promote the sort of writing (both longform and short) that doesn’t fit neatly into the categories of legacy media.

In a few years’ time, I predict we may look back at the chaotic information ecosystem of the 2010s as a sort of social media interregnum. Seduced by the seemingly magical qualities of our new powerful technological tools, we deluded ourselves into believing clout and exposure could be a replacement for dollars and sense. The fragmentary properties of the internet remain in place. Strong-willed media personalities now have the tools to set up shop and operate independently. Legacy publications will worry less about trending in social media feeds and more about the conversion rate for subscribers. Audiences will be less global and more curated. And most important of all, the social media channels – chastened by the techlash – will return to what they were always meant to be: places for self-promotion, not self-publishing.

Feature Image Credit: ‘We may look back at the chaotic information ecosystem of the 2010s as a sort of social media interregnum.’ Photograph: Léo Corrêa/AP

By

  • Sean Monahan is a writer and trend forecaster based in Los Angeles. He co-founded K-HOLE, the trend forecasting group. He releases a weekly trends newsletter at 8ball.substack.com

Sourced from The Guardian