Ha, when I started listening to this I didn't expect to show up as a case study. :D
One aspect of the dual aspect of what I do that I think is quite important is that they are not entirely separate. The 'how to' stuff is really a behind-the-scenes on the writing of Triverse. And, perhaps more importantly. the fiction is the 'proof' that my 'how to' stuff has substance.
I'm always a bit suspicious of people who write about how to do something but don't seem to have actually...done it. I doubt I'd be comfortable writing the 'how to' stuff if I wasn't actually doing it, week-by-week.
It was never a business plan, of a growth strategy, though. I've always been someone who watches every single extra feature on the DVD, who reads interviews with musicians and filmmakers and comics creators. So I get a bit of a thrill from doing behind-the-scenes material on my OWN stuff. In retrospect it was a good way to bring in new readers as well, but that was mostly a happy accident.
Approaching this type of thing as a dual aspect of the same thing is a great way to frame it. Thanks for sharing that.
I share your suspicions about people who teach, but never do.
Knowing you I never did think these activities had their origin in a desire to attract new subscribers. I think it’s obvious to anyone who has read one of your guides that these were created out of curiosity and interest rather than as part of some larger agenda.
That was fun! I’d almost wiped Geocities from my memory, John. 💾 You gave me an idea to try out with an upcoming serial too.
At the end of last year, I emailed a list of some of my favorite serial fiction reads … because more than half of my subscribers are via email. They don’t see Notes or Chat as you said.
One of the reasons I opened up my “Behind the Curtain” section was because my Chat wasn’t getting a whole lot of traction when I posted about my writing progress or research rabbit holes and again, because my readers are mostly email.
I think there’s a real opportunity to expand all of our circles simply by talking about works (by other authors) that we enjoy in our newsletters. Good luck with your new serial!
I'm left wondering why fiction writers on Substack need to add extras to be seen as succeeding with their newsletters. Book authors don't have to stray from their chosen field, why the suggestion that fiction writers have to add value beyond their fiction?
They don’t *have* to do that. The examples I gave were things I have noticed various authors doing. I’m sure that the primary motivation for each of thse was simply because those topics interest them, but a side effect of that is that those topics do attract readers who may not otherwise have ever found them if they were publishing only fiction.
Scoot suggested that fiction writers should be doing something other than just write fiction.
There are many thoughts anyone could have about that suggestion, not least being that people writing fiction are multi skilled and have something else to offer. Sometimes true, but most often, probably not. 😁
Hi Caz, as the words came out of my mouth I was very worried this would be the takeaway and it's not at all what I wanted the takeaway to be. So you are right to hold me to the fire on this, I appreciate you.
The more precise point is as John described, that different behaviors will yield different results. Fiction writers *CAN* do things other than write fiction. The benefit of doing things in addition to writing fiction, as you say, is having another skill and appealing to another kind of audience. The downside of doing things in addition to writing fiction is that if you're not careful you can spend all your time not writing fiction.
The substack ecosystem, as it stands right now, rewards people who wear multiple hats. The venn diagram for writing fiction is relatively small (again--as it stands right now. Substack isn't known as a home of fiction yet, this is a rapidly changing landscape). So doing additional things draws additional eyeballs. That's just the raw math of the matter, and it's a little mercenary, but it is NOT required. Again--Fiction writers do not have to do this, are not obliged to, and lose nothing by not doing it. Different behaviors get different results.
I hope this makes sense. Your broader points that the reader should be the prize, and that fiction should be front and center, are well received and totally correct. Thanks for watching, Caz!
As I've responded to John, I've only seen a few fiction writers successfully leverage alternative content.
Biggest problem is in having other content that excites the writer and their potential readers!
Funny thing is, despite the refrain that Substack isn't known for being a fiction platform, the only reason I heard about and looked at Substack seven years ago was BECAUSE of the publicity around well known fiction writers coming to the platform. Back then, there was nothing much to see, and even less to explore. It was only years later that I came back, again because of publicity about fiction on Substack.
An anecdote of one is not data. Maybe it's only me.
I do now subscribe to essay writers, but I stay for the fiction.
I think he actually said they don’t have to do additional things, but that there’s a trade-off because if you only post fiction your growth is much slower. But, I don’t want to put words in his mouth. I’ll let him respond.
How bizarre to hear a conversation about readers being a different cohort on Substack, and that readers don't use Notes.
Notes, being only two years old, was deliberately set up for writers to talk to each other. The original conception of Notes has failed to shift. I get the impression that writers prefer to keep Notes as a place for writers, rather than a discovery place for readers.
Without readers, there's no Substack growth, in the same way that if book publishers only sold books to people who write books, the publishing industry would only exist as a tiny little exclusive market square.
Fiction newsletter writers generally are all reasonably good at building their writing community, as evidenced in the way they interact with each other.
Substack launched nearly eight years ago. Fiction writers are still focused on each other. That's why readers don't use Notes. That's why readers hit unsubscribe. Readers know when they're being treated as an exotic separate cohort, rather than the whole point of fiction.
I would like to have more readers on Notes. Honestly, I think if Substack figured out a way to bring more readers into using Notes that it would be the best thing they could do for discovery.
The reason I referenced them as being a different cohort is because they are different. Yes, there is some overlap in interests, but writers generally tend to talk about things that interest other writers. Readers don’t necessarily care about different ways to present point of view and how it could change the story. Readers tend to want a good story and aren’t generally (there are always exceptions) interested in how the sausage was made. Treating readers the same way you would treat writers feels like it would be rude and inconsiderate to me. I wasn’t trying to lessen the role of the reader because they are the ones we seek to serve. I wasn’t pointing out that they want different things than other writers. Am I wrong to look at things that way?
Very anecdotally, I'm seeing increasing numbers of people following me who don't have associated publications. I suspect there may be a significant cohort of silent readers who lurk quite happily on Notes.
I've always thought that Notes would be more interesting and fun if it wasn't just the writers talking to each other, and that's precisely why readers don't gather there (if they've looked at all, they become weary of the Notes content real fast).
I agree that at present Notes really isn’t designed for them and, honestly, I’m not sure how they could make it more appealing for readers because it’s already developed a culture. We are agreeing with one another here. The initial impetus to start Notes happened because Twitter started to block links and mentions of Substack. It seems like they wanted to make an alternative that would provide a place where writers could share their work. They built it, but so far, the readers haven’t come en masse. So you have writers promoting their work to other writers. That’s fine, but they also need a way to reach people who are exclusively readers. Some people have started accounts on Threads or Bluesky to do those things. Some people have decided to publish novels on Amazon with links back to their Substack which serves as an author’s newsletter. None of that, however, would be necessary if Substack could figure out a way to make their social media offering more appealing to writers.
Utimately, it doesn’t really matter. There are ways to achieve the same thing without having to change the entire platform.
The tiny minded Musk only started disabling Substack links a few months after Notes was launched.
Substack has continually enhanced Notes for discoverability, and basically that's how I use it - on the off chance that I find some new writing that appeals to me, whether a single post or a newsletter worth adding.
Readers posting on Notes are ignored, the writer clique is so entrenched now I don't think it can be undone. Similar is often reflected in comment threads in newsletters.
I'm not wholly convinced that Substack engendered this culture, I think fiction writers (essays are a different eco system) created and sustain that culture.
I always try to pay attention to reader comments. I’m sure other writers do as well. Not just comments on posts, but when they post notes as well. Readers are still a distinct minority on Notes, but I do see more and more of them popping up.
As far as writers being cliquish? Yeah, that’s true. No argument there.
There's often a different tone and content when writers respond to other writers, it's sufficient to be jarring when I see it. I'm sure they don't realise they're doing it. A comment from another Substack writer is treated as more valuable, more educated, and yet, having a Substack newsletter isn't a signifier of literary education or volume of reading over a lifetime, so it's always a little curious to me that a whole lot of assumptions are being made.
It's not something to be fixed, since they don't see how it comes off, the tone set. It's just an observation. I find it sufficiently off putting that I rarely comment.
“Product differentiation”— that’s the one business concept I feel in my bones!
This was great! I wish I could watch live.
I'm just grateful that you watched and found it to be useful.
Ha, when I started listening to this I didn't expect to show up as a case study. :D
One aspect of the dual aspect of what I do that I think is quite important is that they are not entirely separate. The 'how to' stuff is really a behind-the-scenes on the writing of Triverse. And, perhaps more importantly. the fiction is the 'proof' that my 'how to' stuff has substance.
I'm always a bit suspicious of people who write about how to do something but don't seem to have actually...done it. I doubt I'd be comfortable writing the 'how to' stuff if I wasn't actually doing it, week-by-week.
It was never a business plan, of a growth strategy, though. I've always been someone who watches every single extra feature on the DVD, who reads interviews with musicians and filmmakers and comics creators. So I get a bit of a thrill from doing behind-the-scenes material on my OWN stuff. In retrospect it was a good way to bring in new readers as well, but that was mostly a happy accident.
Approaching this type of thing as a dual aspect of the same thing is a great way to frame it. Thanks for sharing that.
I share your suspicions about people who teach, but never do.
Knowing you I never did think these activities had their origin in a desire to attract new subscribers. I think it’s obvious to anyone who has read one of your guides that these were created out of curiosity and interest rather than as part of some larger agenda.
That was fun! I’d almost wiped Geocities from my memory, John. 💾 You gave me an idea to try out with an upcoming serial too.
At the end of last year, I emailed a list of some of my favorite serial fiction reads … because more than half of my subscribers are via email. They don’t see Notes or Chat as you said.
One of the reasons I opened up my “Behind the Curtain” section was because my Chat wasn’t getting a whole lot of traction when I posted about my writing progress or research rabbit holes and again, because my readers are mostly email.
I think there’s a real opportunity to expand all of our circles simply by talking about works (by other authors) that we enjoy in our newsletters. Good luck with your new serial!
Looking forward to listening to this. Is the live option only available on the phone app?
Yes. You have to use the app at present. They’ve been rolling it out slowly to all members, but I don’t think it’s universally available at present.
Thanks for having me on, John! This was a great chat, I hope people find it valuable!
I'm left wondering why fiction writers on Substack need to add extras to be seen as succeeding with their newsletters. Book authors don't have to stray from their chosen field, why the suggestion that fiction writers have to add value beyond their fiction?
They don’t *have* to do that. The examples I gave were things I have noticed various authors doing. I’m sure that the primary motivation for each of thse was simply because those topics interest them, but a side effect of that is that those topics do attract readers who may not otherwise have ever found them if they were publishing only fiction.
Scoot suggested that fiction writers should be doing something other than just write fiction.
There are many thoughts anyone could have about that suggestion, not least being that people writing fiction are multi skilled and have something else to offer. Sometimes true, but most often, probably not. 😁
Hi Caz, as the words came out of my mouth I was very worried this would be the takeaway and it's not at all what I wanted the takeaway to be. So you are right to hold me to the fire on this, I appreciate you.
The more precise point is as John described, that different behaviors will yield different results. Fiction writers *CAN* do things other than write fiction. The benefit of doing things in addition to writing fiction, as you say, is having another skill and appealing to another kind of audience. The downside of doing things in addition to writing fiction is that if you're not careful you can spend all your time not writing fiction.
The substack ecosystem, as it stands right now, rewards people who wear multiple hats. The venn diagram for writing fiction is relatively small (again--as it stands right now. Substack isn't known as a home of fiction yet, this is a rapidly changing landscape). So doing additional things draws additional eyeballs. That's just the raw math of the matter, and it's a little mercenary, but it is NOT required. Again--Fiction writers do not have to do this, are not obliged to, and lose nothing by not doing it. Different behaviors get different results.
I hope this makes sense. Your broader points that the reader should be the prize, and that fiction should be front and center, are well received and totally correct. Thanks for watching, Caz!
As I've responded to John, I've only seen a few fiction writers successfully leverage alternative content.
Biggest problem is in having other content that excites the writer and their potential readers!
Funny thing is, despite the refrain that Substack isn't known for being a fiction platform, the only reason I heard about and looked at Substack seven years ago was BECAUSE of the publicity around well known fiction writers coming to the platform. Back then, there was nothing much to see, and even less to explore. It was only years later that I came back, again because of publicity about fiction on Substack.
An anecdote of one is not data. Maybe it's only me.
I do now subscribe to essay writers, but I stay for the fiction.
Was it me, Caz? Was I the well-known fictoin author you heard was on Substack? I’m joking.
If you'd been here in 2017, for sure I would have been looking for you. 😂
I think he actually said they don’t have to do additional things, but that there’s a trade-off because if you only post fiction your growth is much slower. But, I don’t want to put words in his mouth. I’ll let him respond.
Yep.
I've only seen a few fiction writers successfully leverage alternative content, and they tend to have many years of experience behind them.
How bizarre to hear a conversation about readers being a different cohort on Substack, and that readers don't use Notes.
Notes, being only two years old, was deliberately set up for writers to talk to each other. The original conception of Notes has failed to shift. I get the impression that writers prefer to keep Notes as a place for writers, rather than a discovery place for readers.
Without readers, there's no Substack growth, in the same way that if book publishers only sold books to people who write books, the publishing industry would only exist as a tiny little exclusive market square.
Fiction newsletter writers generally are all reasonably good at building their writing community, as evidenced in the way they interact with each other.
Substack launched nearly eight years ago. Fiction writers are still focused on each other. That's why readers don't use Notes. That's why readers hit unsubscribe. Readers know when they're being treated as an exotic separate cohort, rather than the whole point of fiction.
I would like to have more readers on Notes. Honestly, I think if Substack figured out a way to bring more readers into using Notes that it would be the best thing they could do for discovery.
The reason I referenced them as being a different cohort is because they are different. Yes, there is some overlap in interests, but writers generally tend to talk about things that interest other writers. Readers don’t necessarily care about different ways to present point of view and how it could change the story. Readers tend to want a good story and aren’t generally (there are always exceptions) interested in how the sausage was made. Treating readers the same way you would treat writers feels like it would be rude and inconsiderate to me. I wasn’t trying to lessen the role of the reader because they are the ones we seek to serve. I wasn’t pointing out that they want different things than other writers. Am I wrong to look at things that way?
Readers are busy reading newsletters, they're not on Substack for the social media function?
I’m not disputing that, but those same readers are on social media. Whether that’s Facebook or Instagram or whatever.
Probably, but they look at Notes and back away.
Agreed.
Very anecdotally, I'm seeing increasing numbers of people following me who don't have associated publications. I suspect there may be a significant cohort of silent readers who lurk quite happily on Notes.
I've always thought that Notes would be more interesting and fun if it wasn't just the writers talking to each other, and that's precisely why readers don't gather there (if they've looked at all, they become weary of the Notes content real fast).
I agree that at present Notes really isn’t designed for them and, honestly, I’m not sure how they could make it more appealing for readers because it’s already developed a culture. We are agreeing with one another here. The initial impetus to start Notes happened because Twitter started to block links and mentions of Substack. It seems like they wanted to make an alternative that would provide a place where writers could share their work. They built it, but so far, the readers haven’t come en masse. So you have writers promoting their work to other writers. That’s fine, but they also need a way to reach people who are exclusively readers. Some people have started accounts on Threads or Bluesky to do those things. Some people have decided to publish novels on Amazon with links back to their Substack which serves as an author’s newsletter. None of that, however, would be necessary if Substack could figure out a way to make their social media offering more appealing to writers.
Utimately, it doesn’t really matter. There are ways to achieve the same thing without having to change the entire platform.
I didn't disagree with you.
The tiny minded Musk only started disabling Substack links a few months after Notes was launched.
Substack has continually enhanced Notes for discoverability, and basically that's how I use it - on the off chance that I find some new writing that appeals to me, whether a single post or a newsletter worth adding.
Readers posting on Notes are ignored, the writer clique is so entrenched now I don't think it can be undone. Similar is often reflected in comment threads in newsletters.
I'm not wholly convinced that Substack engendered this culture, I think fiction writers (essays are a different eco system) created and sustain that culture.
I always try to pay attention to reader comments. I’m sure other writers do as well. Not just comments on posts, but when they post notes as well. Readers are still a distinct minority on Notes, but I do see more and more of them popping up.
As far as writers being cliquish? Yeah, that’s true. No argument there.
There's often a different tone and content when writers respond to other writers, it's sufficient to be jarring when I see it. I'm sure they don't realise they're doing it. A comment from another Substack writer is treated as more valuable, more educated, and yet, having a Substack newsletter isn't a signifier of literary education or volume of reading over a lifetime, so it's always a little curious to me that a whole lot of assumptions are being made.
It's not something to be fixed, since they don't see how it comes off, the tone set. It's just an observation. I find it sufficiently off putting that I rarely comment.