"Substack won with clarity, right? But now, success is pulling it in new directions—live video, short reels, community, social feeds. Is it becoming what it once disrupted?" That is the question.
I'm a late-comer to Substack, and while I appreciate the clean design of posts I initially was (still am) lost with a broad picture UX of the thing:
- It's not a newsletter-focused solution anymore.
- It's a combination of newsletters, twitter-like feed, chats, and what have you
- What the hell is the difference between a post, activity, chat message and reaction (I know what they are technically; what are their goals, how do I use them?)
- How do different publication streams for one author work, and why is the setup process so obscure?
I could actually go on for much longer.
I understand that for long-timers these things appeared step by step, so they were much easier to pick up. But for someone looking for a home for their writing, it's a mess. And I bet it's only going to get worse.
Thank you for including me! Appreciate it. :) And great post! Still feel that LinkedIn's newsletter feature is kind of spammy and Substack is the place to be.
Amazing, thank you for citing me AND my doodle! We’re both feeling very seen and dangerously close to printing this out and framing it!
This is such a powerful, timely and relevant post. I really appreciate your analysis, and the whole idea behind this series. I’ll be here for the next chapters.
Substack feels like writers were in the room when it was built, look:
It gave us narrative, a villain (algorithms), a hero (authenticity), and a plot twist (monetization).
1. I totally agree that LinkedIn's initial push towards newsletters feels misaligned. A good indicator of this is the fact that all your connections are automatically subscribed to your LinkedIn newsletter. That doesn't seem right. People connect on LI to grow their network, not to receive content.
2. You mention LI randomly bolting features on to keep people on the platform as a losing tactic. That sounds right. It's the same reason I don't really get those games LI have started launching. I understand it keeps people on their platform (ads!), but how does it add to the experience? Games are a fairly straightforward evolution of a casual social network like FB, but with LI again it feels wrong & forced. Yet, it seems I'm wrong as LI games are trending like mad (between July launch & September last year, game users grew 20% WoW).
Spot on. That auto-subscribe behavior is such a telling signal—it reveals how LinkedIn prioritized distribution optics over intentional readership.
Yes— I’ve had the same “wait, why?” reaction. Feels misaligned, but… somehow trending but I don't know with Who!.
Appreciate you surfacing this. These are exactly the kinds of tension points I wanted to highlight—would love to dig into them more in a follow-up piece 🔥 if you want to participate :)
Yet... Substack didn't win the war. Because there was no war.
Exactly as you pointed out, for LinkedIn, newsletters were just another feature.
For Substack, it was the core of existence.
From a vantage point of a newsletter publisher, these might have been alternatives. And, again, I agree with most (if not all) points why Substack won this comparison hands down.
From a perspective of LinkedIn and Substack, it's not even comparable.
Hypothetically, if LinkedIn took over the whole Substack business overnight, they wouldn't even see it in their bottom line. And that's a business whose value Substack largely created over time (it wasn't there waiting up for grabs; again, I agree with your points why it was a good time for that).
And of course, one could bring up the Kodak argument. They didn't want to pursue digital photography because they didn't want to cannibalize their cash cow—the analog photo business. Ten years down the line, and they went belly up.
However, I don't think it applies here. We would need to make an assumption that the paid newsletter business will be worth tens of billions of dollars. Oh, and that the paid newsletters would necessarily cannibalize the recruitment services and/or ads.
What follows, the newsletters on LinkedIn were just a feature. And probably well suited in some contexts. If they get the readers to stick on the platform, they might even have a good return on investment for LinkedIn.
So if there was a "war" it was more like a "fight" between an elephant and a mouse. Sure, an elephant might have accidentally stepped on a mouse and killed it (if LinkedIn, by sheer luck, built an excellent newsletter UX). But, by far, the most likely outcome was that a mouse would be nimble and fast enough to escape such a tragic outcome (Substack's focus on key business to survive).
"Substack won with clarity, right? But now, success is pulling it in new directions—live video, short reels, community, social feeds. Is it becoming what it once disrupted?" That is the question.
I'm a late-comer to Substack, and while I appreciate the clean design of posts I initially was (still am) lost with a broad picture UX of the thing:
- It's not a newsletter-focused solution anymore.
- It's a combination of newsletters, twitter-like feed, chats, and what have you
- What the hell is the difference between a post, activity, chat message and reaction (I know what they are technically; what are their goals, how do I use them?)
- How do different publication streams for one author work, and why is the setup process so obscure?
I could actually go on for much longer.
I understand that for long-timers these things appeared step by step, so they were much easier to pick up. But for someone looking for a home for their writing, it's a mess. And I bet it's only going to get worse.
Thank you for including me! Appreciate it. :) And great post! Still feel that LinkedIn's newsletter feature is kind of spammy and Substack is the place to be.
It’s and while and after posting this article, I‘m noticing how spammy it’s!
Amazing, thank you for citing me AND my doodle! We’re both feeling very seen and dangerously close to printing this out and framing it!
This is such a powerful, timely and relevant post. I really appreciate your analysis, and the whole idea behind this series. I’ll be here for the next chapters.
Substack feels like writers were in the room when it was built, look:
It gave us narrative, a villain (algorithms), a hero (authenticity), and a plot twist (monetization).
That’s very true Karo 👌
And yes, prepare yourself to be part of the series 🙌 - a surprise and not easy one upcoming :)
Great post! and thank you for including my 2 cents :)
Your thoughts are always inspiring Claudia. Happy it resonates!
Imagine we’re touring the great marketplace of ideas, where two bakers set up shop.
One asked, “How can I feed the hungry?”
The other asked, “How can I keep them browsing pastries?”
One built a community.
The other built... a mall.
Guess whose bread still smells warm today?
LinkedIn didn’t lose because it baked bad bread.
It lost because it forgot it was supposed to feed people—
and instead built a cheesy food court nobody asked for.
I liked the example a lot Dean. And that’s absolutely true, LI forgets many things .
Great piece! A couple of thoughts:
1. I totally agree that LinkedIn's initial push towards newsletters feels misaligned. A good indicator of this is the fact that all your connections are automatically subscribed to your LinkedIn newsletter. That doesn't seem right. People connect on LI to grow their network, not to receive content.
2. You mention LI randomly bolting features on to keep people on the platform as a losing tactic. That sounds right. It's the same reason I don't really get those games LI have started launching. I understand it keeps people on their platform (ads!), but how does it add to the experience? Games are a fairly straightforward evolution of a casual social network like FB, but with LI again it feels wrong & forced. Yet, it seems I'm wrong as LI games are trending like mad (between July launch & September last year, game users grew 20% WoW).
Thanks for the thoughtful take Alex!
Spot on. That auto-subscribe behavior is such a telling signal—it reveals how LinkedIn prioritized distribution optics over intentional readership.
Yes— I’ve had the same “wait, why?” reaction. Feels misaligned, but… somehow trending but I don't know with Who!.
Appreciate you surfacing this. These are exactly the kinds of tension points I wanted to highlight—would love to dig into them more in a follow-up piece 🔥 if you want to participate :)
I agree with the product-related arguments.
Yet... Substack didn't win the war. Because there was no war.
Exactly as you pointed out, for LinkedIn, newsletters were just another feature.
For Substack, it was the core of existence.
From a vantage point of a newsletter publisher, these might have been alternatives. And, again, I agree with most (if not all) points why Substack won this comparison hands down.
From a perspective of LinkedIn and Substack, it's not even comparable.
Hypothetically, if LinkedIn took over the whole Substack business overnight, they wouldn't even see it in their bottom line. And that's a business whose value Substack largely created over time (it wasn't there waiting up for grabs; again, I agree with your points why it was a good time for that).
And of course, one could bring up the Kodak argument. They didn't want to pursue digital photography because they didn't want to cannibalize their cash cow—the analog photo business. Ten years down the line, and they went belly up.
However, I don't think it applies here. We would need to make an assumption that the paid newsletter business will be worth tens of billions of dollars. Oh, and that the paid newsletters would necessarily cannibalize the recruitment services and/or ads.
What follows, the newsletters on LinkedIn were just a feature. And probably well suited in some contexts. If they get the readers to stick on the platform, they might even have a good return on investment for LinkedIn.
So if there was a "war" it was more like a "fight" between an elephant and a mouse. Sure, an elephant might have accidentally stepped on a mouse and killed it (if LinkedIn, by sheer luck, built an excellent newsletter UX). But, by far, the most likely outcome was that a mouse would be nimble and fast enough to escape such a tragic outcome (Substack's focus on key business to survive).