- Substack's founder says it will not remove white supremacist and Nazi blogs from the platform.
- Some of these blogs have paying subscribers, which means Substack likely profits.
Earlier this month, The Atlantic published a report that Substack was hosting blogs with overt Nazi symbols like the swastika in their logos and others with taglines like "Your pro-White policy destination."
On Thursday, Substack founder Hamish McKenzie posted a response to the criticism, and reaffirmed the decision not to remove or demonetize those blogs.
I just want to make it clear that we don't like Nazis either — we wish no-one held those views. But some people do hold those and other extreme views. Given that, we don't think that censorship (including through demonetizing publications) makes the problem go away — in fact, it makes it worse.
A group of Substack writers, some of them among the most prominent and popular on the platform, also signed a letter saying that they stand by Substack's decision. It is simply freedom of speech, they said. Substack didn't respond to my request for comment.
Here's what this all seems to be omitting: the money.
Instead of a debate about free expression, this is more about whether customers feel good about a company that is profiting from Nazis. That feels a whole lot more simple: Substack is likely making money from these Nazi blogs, some of which are monetized and have paying subscribers, of which Substack takes a 10% cut.
That's one of the nice things about money: You don't have to accept it from Nazis. Money has a way of making things a lot more clear. Content has moral ambiguity; money doesn't.
You either take the Nazi money or you don't. Substack is apparently choosing to take it.
Substack's business model is more akin to Etsy than pure posting platforms like X/Twitter or Reddit. Users sell driftwood with "Live laugh love" painted on it — or blog posts — strangers buy them, and Etsy/Substack takes a cut of the transaction. (Etsy does expressly forbid Nazi merchandise.)
I imagine that Substack's leaders would prefer to imagine it as a platform for expression and ideas — a nobler cause than selling crocheted toilet cozies. That makes some sense: I agree that words and thoughts should have more value in our society than mere commerce; the freedom to write an essay is more important than the freedom to sell a customized mug.
But the argument that this freedom of expression should be allowed to exist on the platform is different from whether Substack, the company, should be earning money from fans of Nazis and helping other Nazis make money.
It's not surprising that Substack doesn't want to wade into the content moderation muck and mire that big social platforms like Facebook and YouTube have been battling. It's expensive, it sucks, it's a nightmare, no one is happy.
Platforms like YouTube have had a "demonetization" option as a means of removing themselves from the yucky business of actively profiting off bad content. It seems odd that Substack isn't willing to pull that lever.
Eventually, this does become a business problem for Substack. Right now, it seems that Nazi and extremist content is a very tiny amount of revenue for Substack. I'm guessing here, maybe it's 0.1% of their overall revenue. Just a trickle. But would people feel less comfortable if that changed to 20%? 50%? At what point does the trickle become too much?
If the argument against stopping these blogs is that it's a slippery slope against speech, what about the slippery slope of Substack earning more more and more money this way?
I'm reminded of an old viral Twitter thread about a bartender who kicks out a polite customer with a Nazi patch on his vest. The bartender explains that if you let one polite Nazi drink at the bar once, he becomes a regular, and then he brings his friends, and pretty soon your business is known as the Nazi bar.
If there's one thing that the recent evolution of X has proven is that if people with abhorrent ideas know they're allowed at the party, they'll come. And they'll bring their friends.
I like Substack's vision for saving the internet by creating an alternate to big ad-supported social platforms. A model where 1,000 true fans pay a small monthly fee to read quality content is, I think, is the way of the future.
But Substack has made a very wrong choice about a very simple thing; don't take the Nazi money.