I'm not very educated on US politics, but what I've come to learn as a universal truth is that politics are fueled by a difference in a fears rather than a difference in ideals, this is why political conversations often emotionally charged.<
People are more motivated to keep something they're afraid of losing, rather than win something new. So when urgency and scarcity are used in political speeches (and that is often) it only fires people up, as it feels very personal to them (same logic is applied when wanting to create viral content)
Once I understood that, I became more tolerant of people that hold different views than my own. Having said that, I thank you for providing a space devoid of politics.
I am days behind in my reading (late comment noticed). Ironically, your post came at the perfect moment for me. Two days ago I read a Substack that ranted about politics, leaving no room for considerate discussion and seemingly intent on stirring up the muck. (an ugly rhyming word...)
This same author had commented just days before about how she railed against the 'brazen social media' and that we needed to demonstrate respect for others in conversation. Whaaaaat?
I stewed for a couple of hours then responded that I appreciated the information that she had provided. In her attempt to slander something, she had also provided a link to the 'terrible' material. I said that I was going to read all of the document(s) and form my own opinion rather than relying on quoting media. I also suggested that she could download the document in question and read it herself (which she had not done). She suggested that we could cross post our thoughts.....no way on this side of the galaxy that that will happen. And if politics are the way to go viral, then you and I can take that hike together. I have some amazing readers in my little community....from all persuasions....and we are respectful and considerate of everyone. You go girl. Give me your kind of humor and your kind humor any day.
I agree; it’s all about staying true to yourself. For me, I live in a county unfortunately famous for its politics (Loudoun County, VA) and I do a lot of community activism, so politics come in. I am planning much more content on sharing stuff about banned books to combat the misinformation out there, as well as info about how people can get involved in politics by supporting candidates and policies they align with. Of course i’m not doing any of that to go viral; just to improve our country for everyone!
It’s a 100% ego choosing articles to write in the hopes of going viral. It’s disingenuous, icky, and seems to be rampant on Substack. Do this, do that, etc to go viral. Why? Write from your heart on topics that resonates with your readers. Everything else will fall into place. At least, that’s my philosophy.
So, I guess the only part where I disagree is in discussion of myself, my existence, and my right to exist, which - nothing to do with me personally - has become intensely political. Man, life would be great if it wasn't. But being a transgender man who happens to also be raising a trans son means that my life, my access to medical care, my right to correct identity documents, and so many other stupid things about my life are part of an ongoing political battle 7 days a week.
1. No. I hope they will find me. Trying to find them is a guarantee that I will do the opposite bad thing of trying to stir up trouble by picking on something to oppose, which is trying to find something I can conform to.
2. No. Because the moment you switch to the shortest line, it instantly becomes the slowest line because the cash register blows up or the old guy ahead of you wants to pay with pennies that he has stored in five different pockets or a customer suddenly remembers that she wants to go buy five gallons ice cream and could you please wait while she goes and gets it, etc.
I have yet to watch Sarah’s workshop, and I may avoid it altogether. Going viral is not something we can control, and I don’t want to know if she is selling hope to her readers. In my years writing and producing animated videos for marketing in the 2010s, clients always asked me to make them a viral video. *insert eyeroll*
More importantly, is to find your people. Your readers, viewers, listeners - whomever your audience is. Find your people, cultivate community, and the community will keep the growth momentum going.
I certainly understand and appreciate your sentiment. Two of my most popular posts have been tributes to friends who died. People shared them over and over, because it brought people together. You can certainly kick up a shitstorm, like cutting in front of others at Costco, but is that what you want in the end?
I was a political junkie at one point and realized that it didn't make me or anyone else happy. So I turned my back to it. One thing I learned, have a political opinion is easy. Actually doing something or learning something is hard. So instead of 30 minutes of reading politics, I've spent the last few years learning Mandarin, Algebra, etc. No politics there.
So, you’re saying that, having taken a similar vow of non-political silence regarding Rule of Three, I can expect that my weekly columns will never go viral? I’m cool with that, too.
Politics in the U.S. has infiltrated every relationship and every aspect of life so thoroughly, I even have political views that oppose my own political views. I'm sick of it, there's more to life than this gladiatorial media circus.
Nicely written - thanks for reminding us that going "viral" isn't a laudable goal for many people. I prefer to go "vital" and write things that nourish, enthuse, improve and uplift. And one way I've done that is to remind myself that My Purpose on Substack ISN'T to use it as a social media platform (where going viral is a common modus operandi) but as a 1-1 platform for MY readers only.
This has always disturbed me about the introduction of NOTES and other "social media" aspects of a platform that I initially adopted EXCLUSIVELY as a better way to share with my 1-1 audience of subscribers, without ANY reference to the surrounding "environment" of other writers (I wish them well, but they aren't really why I write here). So the more Substack introduces or encourages the social-media aspects of their platform, the LESS I want to use those parts. The exceptions are COMMENTS - because I am grateful to discuss content from INTERESTING WRITING rather than social utterances.
Speaking for myself, I am best served when I remember that I make the MOST (both most DIFFERENCE and MOST money) when I get on Substack and write to MY READERS. And the best part: I don't need to GO VIRAL with people I already know, love and have connected with!
Appreciate this piece. Thanks for saying what may of us have often thought.
Too many want to create drama for the sake of “virality”, which I find more toxic than “virility”. Even newspapers hook onto that dark sludge of sensationalistic polarisation because … “bad news sells”.
But I agree with you. I’m not into alienating people and pushing them away for so-called “king of the sandpit” popularity.
When I was a political blogger it was a pretty well known fact that the more controversial your post, the more traffic it would get. I never really wrote controversial posts, I wrote facts, I did research. I did not have a lit of viral posts, but I caught the attention of the readers that mattered most, decision makers.
I didn't catch this class, and I'll watch the replay with different attention - thanks @csteefel. It feels hard sometimes, to just write something true that doesn't have an angle, that is written just to be written well, so someone else might resonate with it, which is what I do. I feel so much pressure to do something market-y with my writing, but the reason I'm here on Substack is to write what I want to write, not what I think people want or what others say to write. It feels hard some days though with all the noise here about numbers.
The most common formula for speaking to one group while opposing another is the grievance narrative. And this is quite often an identity-driven grievance. I won't list the many writers and Substacks devoted to it, but there are cottage industries in grievance hustling. I agree -- count me out. I do enjoy a good polemic now and then, and write some critiques of higher ed on my site, but I think my motivation is what you suggest: to search for commonalities, and if they can't be found, to suggest how they might be.
Thanks for writing this piece. It's a refreshing alternative to the noise of other people dunking on each other!
I'm not very educated on US politics, but what I've come to learn as a universal truth is that politics are fueled by a difference in a fears rather than a difference in ideals, this is why political conversations often emotionally charged.<
People are more motivated to keep something they're afraid of losing, rather than win something new. So when urgency and scarcity are used in political speeches (and that is often) it only fires people up, as it feels very personal to them (same logic is applied when wanting to create viral content)
Once I understood that, I became more tolerant of people that hold different views than my own. Having said that, I thank you for providing a space devoid of politics.
I am days behind in my reading (late comment noticed). Ironically, your post came at the perfect moment for me. Two days ago I read a Substack that ranted about politics, leaving no room for considerate discussion and seemingly intent on stirring up the muck. (an ugly rhyming word...)
This same author had commented just days before about how she railed against the 'brazen social media' and that we needed to demonstrate respect for others in conversation. Whaaaaat?
I stewed for a couple of hours then responded that I appreciated the information that she had provided. In her attempt to slander something, she had also provided a link to the 'terrible' material. I said that I was going to read all of the document(s) and form my own opinion rather than relying on quoting media. I also suggested that she could download the document in question and read it herself (which she had not done). She suggested that we could cross post our thoughts.....no way on this side of the galaxy that that will happen. And if politics are the way to go viral, then you and I can take that hike together. I have some amazing readers in my little community....from all persuasions....and we are respectful and considerate of everyone. You go girl. Give me your kind of humor and your kind humor any day.
I agree; it’s all about staying true to yourself. For me, I live in a county unfortunately famous for its politics (Loudoun County, VA) and I do a lot of community activism, so politics come in. I am planning much more content on sharing stuff about banned books to combat the misinformation out there, as well as info about how people can get involved in politics by supporting candidates and policies they align with. Of course i’m not doing any of that to go viral; just to improve our country for everyone!
It’s a 100% ego choosing articles to write in the hopes of going viral. It’s disingenuous, icky, and seems to be rampant on Substack. Do this, do that, etc to go viral. Why? Write from your heart on topics that resonates with your readers. Everything else will fall into place. At least, that’s my philosophy.
So, I guess the only part where I disagree is in discussion of myself, my existence, and my right to exist, which - nothing to do with me personally - has become intensely political. Man, life would be great if it wasn't. But being a transgender man who happens to also be raising a trans son means that my life, my access to medical care, my right to correct identity documents, and so many other stupid things about my life are part of an ongoing political battle 7 days a week.
1. No. I hope they will find me. Trying to find them is a guarantee that I will do the opposite bad thing of trying to stir up trouble by picking on something to oppose, which is trying to find something I can conform to.
2. No. Because the moment you switch to the shortest line, it instantly becomes the slowest line because the cash register blows up or the old guy ahead of you wants to pay with pennies that he has stored in five different pockets or a customer suddenly remembers that she wants to go buy five gallons ice cream and could you please wait while she goes and gets it, etc.
3. No.
4. I see what you are doing here.
I have yet to watch Sarah’s workshop, and I may avoid it altogether. Going viral is not something we can control, and I don’t want to know if she is selling hope to her readers. In my years writing and producing animated videos for marketing in the 2010s, clients always asked me to make them a viral video. *insert eyeroll*
More importantly, is to find your people. Your readers, viewers, listeners - whomever your audience is. Find your people, cultivate community, and the community will keep the growth momentum going.
I certainly understand and appreciate your sentiment. Two of my most popular posts have been tributes to friends who died. People shared them over and over, because it brought people together. You can certainly kick up a shitstorm, like cutting in front of others at Costco, but is that what you want in the end?
I was a political junkie at one point and realized that it didn't make me or anyone else happy. So I turned my back to it. One thing I learned, have a political opinion is easy. Actually doing something or learning something is hard. So instead of 30 minutes of reading politics, I've spent the last few years learning Mandarin, Algebra, etc. No politics there.
So, you’re saying that, having taken a similar vow of non-political silence regarding Rule of Three, I can expect that my weekly columns will never go viral? I’m cool with that, too.
Politics in the U.S. has infiltrated every relationship and every aspect of life so thoroughly, I even have political views that oppose my own political views. I'm sick of it, there's more to life than this gladiatorial media circus.
From one No-Drama-Queen to another, thank you!
Nicely written - thanks for reminding us that going "viral" isn't a laudable goal for many people. I prefer to go "vital" and write things that nourish, enthuse, improve and uplift. And one way I've done that is to remind myself that My Purpose on Substack ISN'T to use it as a social media platform (where going viral is a common modus operandi) but as a 1-1 platform for MY readers only.
This has always disturbed me about the introduction of NOTES and other "social media" aspects of a platform that I initially adopted EXCLUSIVELY as a better way to share with my 1-1 audience of subscribers, without ANY reference to the surrounding "environment" of other writers (I wish them well, but they aren't really why I write here). So the more Substack introduces or encourages the social-media aspects of their platform, the LESS I want to use those parts. The exceptions are COMMENTS - because I am grateful to discuss content from INTERESTING WRITING rather than social utterances.
Speaking for myself, I am best served when I remember that I make the MOST (both most DIFFERENCE and MOST money) when I get on Substack and write to MY READERS. And the best part: I don't need to GO VIRAL with people I already know, love and have connected with!
Appreciate this piece. Thanks for saying what may of us have often thought.
Too many want to create drama for the sake of “virality”, which I find more toxic than “virility”. Even newspapers hook onto that dark sludge of sensationalistic polarisation because … “bad news sells”.
But I agree with you. I’m not into alienating people and pushing them away for so-called “king of the sandpit” popularity.
When I was a political blogger it was a pretty well known fact that the more controversial your post, the more traffic it would get. I never really wrote controversial posts, I wrote facts, I did research. I did not have a lit of viral posts, but I caught the attention of the readers that mattered most, decision makers.
I didn't catch this class, and I'll watch the replay with different attention - thanks @csteefel. It feels hard sometimes, to just write something true that doesn't have an angle, that is written just to be written well, so someone else might resonate with it, which is what I do. I feel so much pressure to do something market-y with my writing, but the reason I'm here on Substack is to write what I want to write, not what I think people want or what others say to write. It feels hard some days though with all the noise here about numbers.
The most common formula for speaking to one group while opposing another is the grievance narrative. And this is quite often an identity-driven grievance. I won't list the many writers and Substacks devoted to it, but there are cottage industries in grievance hustling. I agree -- count me out. I do enjoy a good polemic now and then, and write some critiques of higher ed on my site, but I think my motivation is what you suggest: to search for commonalities, and if they can't be found, to suggest how they might be.
Thanks for writing this piece. It's a refreshing alternative to the noise of other people dunking on each other!