Chris Best of Substack on the Future of Media

I wrote "The Two Futures of Media," where I argue that when you ask these questions, you inevitably delve into philosophical inquiries like, "What is the purpose of media?" and "What are we doing here?" I believe one purpose of media is to entertain and have an effect. People often say media is used like a drug: you scroll, you watch, and it creates a pleasant feeling in the moment. That's something many seek from it. I think this aspect of media will become supercharged. We now have very sophisticated AI. Is that a good thing? I don't know, but it's happening. This will apply to everything, including short-form videos and similar content.

The impact of recent years is truly understated. As a country, and globally, we've moved so fast that we've forgotten what 2020 and 2021 were like, especially for media. The 2020 period was incredibly turbulent for anyone in thought leadership or media. For example, in the summer of 2020, James Bennett, then editor of The New York Times op-ed page, was forced to resign for publishing an op-ed by a sitting senator who remains in office. It was a time of intense scrutiny, where writing anything perceived as heretical, questioning, or unorthodox was met with significant backlash.

I've always viewed free speech as an important pillar, though not the primary one, of Substack's mission. We see Substack as creating a new economic engine for culture. The core idea, which isn't partisan or directly political, is that independent voices produce great work when they can pursue their beliefs, earn a living, maintain editorial freedom, and connect directly with their audience. Substack was founded on the premise that the internet disrupted many existing business models for culture.

The right to exit is crucial. Many thought it was foolish, asking, "If you let customers leave, won't they just go?" In the short term, perhaps, but long-term, it created the right structure. It forced us to build a network so valuable that even though customers can leave, they don't want to. And if they do leave, they might return. This has kept us focused on what's important. However, the direct connection is even more vital. It's not just about the option to leave; a subscription, to me, is the ability to reach out and tap someone on the shoulder.

We realized that to truly make this work for people, we needed to build our own network, one based on different principles. We aimed to create a destination where you could experience the internet, enjoying the benefits of social networks but with a distinct business model and incentive structure. This network wouldn't replace existing platforms; instead, it would coexist with them. It would be the one place online that genuinely supports your success, encouraging you to discover interesting long-form content to read or watch.

The way I'd describe it is we've entered a world where attention is the scarce resource. This isn't new with AI; I trace it back to the social media and internet revolution. When I was a kid, you could get bored, wishing you had something to pay attention to. If you could get something free to distract you, that was a great deal. That was the situation where the original media and social network giants emerged. It was a land grab for attention because everyone had so much attention to give, but not enough to distract them.

This reminds me of something Marc Andreessen said about Substack. He told me, "You're going to do to media what venture capital did to software and tech. Previously, if you knew how to build great software, you'd get a job from someone in a suit who dictated your work and paid you a salary. The hidden reality was that those who created the products were generating immense value but were massively underpaid and under-recognized. Even more interestingly, once you freed them from that structure and put them in charge—making the creators the bosses—it massively increased variance in a very positive way."