I recently read a Substack post on how the writing-publishing feedback loop has been screwed over as a result of the democratized self-publication process that Substack and other companies that provide similar tools have caused.
Specifically, the post discusses the fall of smaller magazines and how the writer was able to gather more direct feedback from their editors which would allow their writing to become better and to introduce themselves to a wider variety of writing than if they remained shoehorned in just one niche.
First and foremost, writers, more so bloggers, but writers regardless, have been self-publishing their work for decades now. Substack is not the catalyst of this cascade.
Or perhaps I spoke too soon. After all, Substack and other platforms make it free and much easier to write online, and many people have only made the leap to writing online as a result of these companies; and by no way am I dissing them (even though I prefer self-hosted WordPress as I retain ultimate control). I am a proponent for people following their passion, and if this is how they go about it, then by all means go ahead.
But the writer of the aforementioned post seems to have a problem with it because it allows others to bypass going through editors and just going straight to publication with no other set of eyes to look at the work before it’s released; and if that’s the primary reason. Then I would say that he is not wrong in that. Many writers, myself included, would probably benefit from having an editor or someone looking at the work before it’s shipped out. I did technically have a beta reader, but they were more focused on fan-fiction and my work does not qualify as such.
The primary reason that writers just self-publish directly is for money and time’s sake. It can take a lot of effort to find a magazine or outlet willing to accept you, alongside having to go by their rules. Which means some of your style may be decimated for “structural” purposes.
Of course, one of the major reasons why people subscribe to and read a magazine or other outlet is in order to read multiple writers and hear slightly different perspectives all under one viewpoint. That is probably one of the downfalls of this new democratizing craze, is that people are less compelled to subscribe to magazines when they can just support writers they like directly, and not deal with the bureaucratic overhead that many of these organizations possess.
I was writing back in 2020 as the blogging boom was slowly coming about again in the form of newsletters. Where writers are cultivating email lists to directly communicate with. Why go through a middleman if you can do it directly, and possibly win more of the monetary stake?
While I have not had an editor to help me, I have grown myself over the years and have developed a style that I am proud of. Yes, an editor would probably help me more. But I’m satisfied where I am, and I know other writers are proud of where they are too.
Now if you excuse me, I’ll just be self-publishing this piece right now. Thank you.
-z.a.