If you’ve been looking for a blog about anything, whether philosophy or Philadelphia, AI or angels, you’ve probably encountered the blogging platform Substack. Even Substack has a Substack page. The platform markets itself as a “subscription network for independent writers and creators”—a centralized platform for which writers, bloggers, and journalists can publish their ideas. Yet for many popular creators and writers, Substack is their livelihood. 

For a simple blogging platform, the company has encountered unprecedented success. It’s valued at $1.1 billion. How has the platform become so popular? This article looks at the rise of Substack, touching on the short-form sinkhole, the fall of Twitter, and the increasing necessity to monetize the Internet.

How did we get here?

The rise of Substack can be understood by a three-part shift in the way people consume, think about and share social media content.

In the last five to seven years, social media has shifted from photo-sharing and Twitter threads to an emphasis on short-form content. The rise of TikTok as a popular platform prompted rivals Instagram and Facebook (both owned by Meta) to launch their own short-form offerings with Reels. YouTube followed suit with YouTube Shorts. While short-form content made these platforms significant amounts of money, some users disliked the forcing of short-form content (several popular social media platforms limited their users to 140 280 characters).

The algorithms of social media platforms have changed the way people speak. Adam Aleksic (better known as @etymologynerd on various social media platforms) told Reuters that in efforts to avoid certain sensitive words that would get flagged by algorithms, users have used other words to convey the same meaning. If you’ve ever heard someone use the word “unalive” (a word I absolutely despise, although that’s probably an article for the Opinion section), you’ve witnessed the way algorithms affect language.

Those who disliked short-form content didn’t have many places to go; those who created long-form content had even fewer places to go. A downturn in traditional journalism meant that the standard instant-news website was Twitter (when it was still known by that moniker). Elon Musk’s takeover and rebrand to X has driven many users away from the platform, opening the doors for companies such as Mastodon and BlueSky. Furthermore, built-in X features such as xAI’s Grok began generating other problems for users and advertisers.

With short-form content on the rise and traditional platforms no longer available, long-form writers and academics jumped at the opportunity to use a long-form content platform. One scientist who made the move cited “[having] a whole lot more ownership” over the content they produce and not being tied to a schedule. 

Since moving from social media to Substack requires forgoing platform advertising revenue, authors have begun monetizing paid Substacks similar to news subscriptions. Top creators exceed $500,000 in annual revenue, with most revenue earned from subscriptions going directly to creators. (Substack takes a 10% cut of subscription revenue to cover its overhead costs; its payment provider, Square, takes an additional 3%.)

While the platform’s lax moderation policy has occasionally caused issues, Substack has risen to become a feasible alternative for long-form content creation. For those looking to create blogs, discover new voices, or consume information, Substack may be a platform worth considering.

Not all technology is bad, though; many beneficial uses of technology exist. We have all probably used spell-check software to remove embarrassing typos or artificial intelligence to do research for an assignment. As I’m writing this line, I have Microsoft Word open to write this article, Firefox open to research it and Taylor Swift’s “Suburban Legends” playing in my headphones. I use lots of technology.

And you probably do, too. Unless you are reading this article in the December 2023 print edition of the “Hilltop Monitor”, you are using a device of some kind—whether mobile phone, tablet, or laptop—to read this. Technology can serve humanity in all sorts of ways. We cannot deny that we are living in the Information Age.

But this relationship—technology serving humanity—is often reversed.

The Culprits
In an essay for New York Magazine, ominously titled “I Used to Be A Human Being,” Andrew Sullivan draws our attention to what seems a very simple statement. Mobile phones are, well, mobile. “At your desk at work, or at home on your laptop, you disappeared down a rabbit hole of links and resurfaced minutes (or hours) later to reencounter the world. But the smartphone then went and made the rabbit hole portable, inviting us to get lost in it anywhere, at any time, whatever else we might be doing.”

The emergence of the Information Age, especially social media, creates three critical problems.

1. Quantification of Social Standing
Social media causes the quantification of social standing. In other words, social standing now comes with numbers attached. Instagram, X (formerly known as Twitter) and Facebook all show (publicly!) how many people follow you and how many people interact with your posts. Snapchat shows you a Snapscore that increases every time you send someone a picture. YikYak has a leaderboard of people who use it, sorted by how many upvotes you receive.

These numbers on social media are a double-edged sword. Research from the University of Florida shows a significant negative impact on users’ mental health. People who look at “upward” connections—i.e., profiles that indicate the profile’s creator is “better off” than the viewer—came away with “deflated self-esteem.” In contrast, when people look at content indicating other users are “worse off”, they feel better about themselves. We trade short-term benefits for long-term detriment—while people do feel better in the short term, they do so at the expense of others.

2. Information Overload
We suffer from information overload. We have access to worlds of knowledge at our fingertips: nearly two and a half quintillion bytes per day. If you type into Google the words, “how much information is available to us right now,” Google returns this:

This does not seem to be a problem per se. Sure, there is a lot of information to sort, but there is nothing wrong with the information existing. Processing that information, though, requires our attention. As such, humans have to triage; we discern what is important, focus on those bits and disregard the rest.

However, the internet puts that system into overdrive. “Viewing and producing blogs, videos, tweets and other units of information called memes have become so cheap and easy that the information marketplace is inundated,” write Thomas Hills and Filippo Menczer of Scientific American. We do not have the ability to effectively parse everything, so our biases take over.

This inability to fully process stimuli activates what I call our “lizard brain.” We are unable to determine fact from fiction or beneficial information from bologna. Critical thinking ceases and we are open to misinformation. We need only look back two years to understand the cost of such misinformation. A Brown University analysis of the COVID-19 pandemic estimates that 319,000 lives could have been saved with vaccinations. That is ten times the population of Liberty, Missouri!

3. Virtual Substitution
Social media, messaging apps and podcasts serve as a virtual substitution for human contact. This does not seem like it should be a problem, either. After all, research exists linking “[the] quantity of one’s virtual interaction partners… [and] better mental health at both the daily level and the weekly level.”

Virtual interactions are wonderful, especially when distance makes in-person interactions impractical or impossible. But if we lack meaningful physical contact (because we limit our interactions to being virtual), we do not benefit as much. Multiple studies indicate that in-person interactions are more fulfilling; Zoom fatigue is real!

We have to take time to talk to the people we care about. If distance makes doing so impossible, maybe give the person a phone or video call. It is so much better than texting, as we can hear a person’s voice or see their face in a call.

The Solution
So what can we do? Fortunately, the Internet has plenty of information on how to avoid the devastating effects of the Internet. (Ironic, I know.) A notable work in this field is Cal Newport’s Digital Minimalism. In the latter half of his book, Newport provides solutions to escape the world of technology. I have used his recommendations to outline three easy recommendations and one difficult recommendation for busy college students.

The whole text of Digital Minimalism is worth a read; if you want to read it, it is available here for free from the Internet Archive. (Quick shoutout to the Internet Archive!)

1. Walk to Class Alone
In 1845, transcendentalist and author Henry David Thoreau expressed concern about an overly interconnected world. “We are in great haste to construct a magnetic telegraph from Maine to Texas,” wrote Thoreau in Walden, “but Maine and Texas, it may be, have nothing important to communicate.” Thoreau is not challenging the existence of the telegraph, far from it. If Maine and Texas had something important to say, then there would be justification for its construction. Thoreau is simply concerned with remaining intentional in communication.

Newport defines the phrase solitude deprivation as a “state in which you spend close to zero time alone with your own thoughts and free from input from other minds.” When this lack of solitude happens, we lose our sense of identity. I describe this phenomenon as “being afraid of my own thoughts,” however, we need time to be alone with our own thoughts.

“Ethan,” I hear you already saying, “I’m so busy with athletics or academics or extracurriculars or all three at once. How do I find time to do this?” You have more time than you think.

I often find myself (and see other people) with headphones on as soon as I walk out the door of my residence hall, keeping music or video content on for my entire walk to classes or to the Union. For those looking for an easy way to find time with their thoughts, consider walking to class alone. No headphones. Nothing playing. Just you, nature and your thoughts. You would be surprised what it does to you.

2. Stop Liking Things
Weird heading, I know. You might think I told you to not have hobbies, but that is not what I mean. Clicking ‘Like’ on something seems to be a standard way to say, “I like this! This is cool.” When Facebook introduced the ‘Like’ button in 2009, that is what it was supposed to be for. According to Newport, the ‘Like’ button was “introduced as a simpler way to indicate your general approval of a post, which would both save time and allow the comments to be reserved for more interesting notes.”

The quantification of social standing incentivizes people to constantly check their accounts, investigating to see if anyone else has ‘Liked’ their posts or story. But in terms of information conveyed, the ‘Like’ button conveys exactly one bit of information, the least amount of information possible to convey, according to information theory. “To say it’s like driving a Ferrari under the speed limit is an understatement,” writes Newport, “the better simile is towing a Ferrari behind a mule.” By conditioning our brains to accept ‘Likes’ instead of proper communication, we are selling our amazing communication capabilities short. We have limited the amount of fuel our communication can run on; we are literally receiving information one bit at a time.

3. Schedule Everything
Our lives are all defined by schedules. Every person at this College, whether student, staff or faculty, has a schedule to follow. For students, that could be a class schedule; for athletes, it could be a practice schedule. One easy way to limit your screen time is to schedule it.

Schedule time to check your social media, watch television or employ whatever form of screen enjoyment you like best. After that, put the screen away. Newport continues: “Without access to your standard screens, the best remaining option to fill this time will be quality activities.” This is a good blend of abstinence and enjoyment; while you do not have to give your media up completely, you are able to limit it in this way.

4. Detox
This solution is not for the faint of heart. If you attempt to detox, you will have to demonstrate significant self-restraint. When I first read Newport’s book as a senior in high school, I attempted this solution and failed to maintain the thirty days required of me.

Newport’s tough suggestion is to give it all up.

Take thirty days and eliminate all non-optional screens from your life. Newport considers a technology non-optional if “its temporary removal would harm or significantly disrupt the daily operation of your professional or personal life.”

Take Instagram, for example. In considering if Instagram is essential, one must ask themselves if temporary removal of Instagram would significantly disrupt their lives. In most cases, the answer is no (and no, finding out about events is not considered essential). However, if someone runs a business from Instagram (where, for example, they are posting handmade goodies to sell), then Instagram is an essential technology for them.

After the thirty-day detox, begin to introduce non-optional technologies back into your life. Doing so enables you to think critically about whether technology needs to be there or not.

If you are considering this, I seriously suggest reading the entirety of Newport’s book. He provides many more examples and much more research than I can include in this article.

Conclusions
At the beginning of this article, I noted that technology’s relationship with humanity was backward—that humanity served technology, and not the other way around. However, I sincerely believe we can undo this relationship by making our relationships both with technology and other humans intentional. By using our time wisely and using technology to our benefit, not to our detriment, we can save humanity from this servitude. The world is increasingly moving online; we must learn how to adapt.

In a world where information is constantly at our fingertips, ethical consumerism has emerged as a powerful force, reshaping our shopping habits and influencing businesses worldwide. This movement revolves around the belief that our purchases can have a positive impact on society and the environment. But what exactly is ethical consumerism? 

Ethical consumerism, also known as ethical consumption, is a conscious approach to buying products that align with one’s morals. Ethical consumerism is concerned with a broad spectrum of considerations, including sustainability, labor practices, animal welfare and social and environmental impacts. At its core, ethical consumerism aims to hold businesses accountable for their practices and encourages consumers to make informed choices that reflect their values.

The first key in ethical consumerism is knowing the ethical values that matter most to you. These values could include sustainability, fair labor practices, animal welfare or supporting local businesses. Identifying your priorities will guide your consumer choices. Next, you should research the products and industries you engage with regularly. Learn about the ethical and environmental issues associated with them. While being conscious about the purchases you make may be more difficult, it will be worth it to see a positive impact in your community and society.

The ethical consumerism movement has been promoted by social media. Social media has revolutionized the way we access and share information. Platforms like Twitter, Instagram and Facebook have given individuals a space to express their opinions, share stories and amplify their voices. This has created an environment where information travels at lightning speed and consumers can easily scrutinize a company’s ethical track record.

Social media has been absolutely instrumental in exposing unethical business practices. Through viral campaigns and hashtags, consumers have shed light on issues such as sweatshop labor, environmental pollution and animal cruelty. The speed at which these stories spread has put pressure on companies to address their shortcomings and adopt more responsible practices. In response to this pressure, companies have been adapting more environmentally friendly and sustainable policies. Last year, Adidas manufactured 17 million pairs of shoes made out of recycled plastic. A study of 850 companies worldwide, found that more than 80 percent planned to increase their investments in sustainability.

While ethical consumerism has undeniably made significant strides in raising awareness and driving change, its effectiveness in controlling businesses remains a subject of debate.

One argument is that ethical consumerism primarily targets the symptoms rather than the root causes of unethical practices in business. Critics argue that by focusing on individual choices, it places the responsibility on consumers to bring about change, while corporations should be the ones held accountable for systemic issues. While individual consumer choices can influence corporate behavior to some extent, it does not tackle the systemic issues that drive unethical practices. These systemic problems include income inequality, exploitative labor practices and the relentless pursuit of profit above all else. Ethical consumerism alone does not have the capacity to effectively address these deeply ingrained issues. 

Instead, we should be engaging in ethical consumerism and recognizing its limitations. To enhance its impact and effectively target the root causes of unethical practices, consumers should adopt a more strategic and holistic approach. You can do this by engaging with like-minded consumers and organizations that share information and strategies. A great place to start could be the Global Directory of Ethical Consumption Organisations. It contains several organizations across the world that are working towards a better and more sustainable future. Collective action can be more effective in bringing about change than individual efforts alone. You can also advocate for stronger government regulations that address root issues in business practices. Push for policies that promote fair wages, environmental protection and corporate accountability.

While its effectiveness in constraining businesses is subject to debate, there is no denying that ethical consumerism has already driven positive change in many industries. Ethical consumer movements have effectively promoted dolphin-friendly tuna and animal cruelty free products through successful campaigns. Ultimately, it reminds us that our purchasing power carries the potential to create a more ethical and sustainable future.

Earlier this month, the internet forum Kiwi Farms was dropped by its primary service provider, Cloudflare, after intense public pressure protesting the website’s encouragement of hate crimes. 

Since its inception nearly a decade ago, Kiwi Farms has been known to be a platform for harassment campaigns, particularly against members of the LGBTQ+ community. The forum has historically been used for attacks on individuals, such as by swatting—sending a false tip to authorities so that police will raid an individual’s home—and doxxing—publishing an individual’s private info on the internet with malicious intent.

A new Kiwi Farms site went online earlier this week, but was reported to have major security flaws in protecting user data. As the site owner of the new Kiwi Farms forum works to resolve the security issues, they warn that account usernames, passwords, emails and IP-address may have been leaked following a massive data breach on Sept.19.

The effort to get Kiwi Farms removed from Cloudfare reached its peak after Clara Sorrenti, a transgender Twitch streamer known as Keffals, was repeatedly doxxed by the forum. Last month, she was swatted and arrested in her own home by London police. Sorrenti fled to Ireland out of fear, where she was found and targeted again in a matter of days.

These attacks resulted in Sorrenti reaching out to multiple news outlets and posting on social media about the harassment she endured. She led a #DropKiwiFarms movement on Twitter that quickly picked up traction.

In the midst of the situation, Cloudflare was hit with widespread backlash. The service ultimately decided to take down Kiwi Farms after violent threats escalated on the forum. Following their decision, users were met with a statement when attempting to access the site: “Due to an imminent and emergency threat to human life, the content of this site is blocked from being accessed through Cloudflare’s infrastructure.” 

Opponents of the take-down argue that by dropping the website, Cloudfare is censoring free speech. Others counter that the harm done by Kiwi Farms far outweighed any semblance of free speech protections that it claimed to have.

Since the removal of the Kiwi Farms forum, an anonymous individual  bought the URL kiwifarms.info and redirected it to the Transgender Law Center website, where people can donate to “advance the rights of transgender and gender-nonconforming people, defend our victories and ensure our movement’s strength.”