What have I learned from this Substack?
This summer, I challenged myself to post five editions of Q&A. Challenge complete, what - if anything - have I learned?
What’s the question?
What have I learned from this Substack?
What’s this all about?
Earlier this year, I was invited to ‘Pubstack’ – a meetup for Substack writers in Fitzrovia, London. There was a pub quiz, and my team came second, which was brilliant, and I met loads of interesting and impressive people, and I possibly even got flirted with (though I’m so old now that I can’t tell whether it’s flirting or just that I remind them of the grandpa in the Werther’s Original adverts). But I felt a fraud, because I didn’t have a Substack of my own.
So, I started dreaming about launching a Substack. But I was held back by all kinds of anxious thoughts. What if no-one reads it? What if no-one likes it? What if I can’t keep it up?
To clear these doubts, I set myself a simple objective:
‘Knowing that I will learn something from even a short-lived Substack, I can commit to posting five editions of Q&A.’
I stuck this message above my desk and for five Saturdays in a row, I’ve published this blog, which is all about questions and answers and the messy business of getting from one to the other.
So, now it’s time to take stock. What have I learned so far?
What are my initial assumptions?
Well, obviously I managed to post all five editions, so I can pat myself on the back about that. I have learned that I’m capable of publishing at least a short-lived Substack. There’s a bit of life in Werther’s grandpa yet. But the self-imposed schedule was a bit of a pain, as it meant finding time to research, write and publish a 1,400 word blog by mid-morning every Saturday.
What’s the other side of the argument?
Er, there isn’t an ‘other side’ to this argument.
Which highlights something else I’ve learned: this rigid Q&A format doesn’t work. I designed it to bring the intellectual virtues to every enquiry: curiosity, honesty, open-mindedness, humility and rigour. By asking myself about the other side of the argument, I was trying to cultivate open-mindedness, which works well for questions where there are other points of view, but not for questions that are about my subjective experience.
I’ve heard from other Substack writers that a standard format can help to break down the blank page into a series of manageable chunks, so I don’t want to jettison it altogether, but this particular format isn’t working for me.
What don’t I know?
I don’t really know what my audience thought about the five posts. A few friends left supportive comments and some strangers even subscribed, which gives me a particular thrill. But the vast majority of subscribers remained silent – just as I remain silent about the vast majority of other people’s Substacks that I read and enjoy (though I do usually tick the heart button, because I know how much it means to see the ‘like’ numbers going up).
I’ve learned that Substack, even if it’s a world away from TikTok and X, still has some of the fundamental emotional architecture of other social media platforms: it encourages us to seek validation by posting ever more content. The massive difference between Substack and many other platforms is that revenue-sharing is built into its architecture, so if my blog becomes wildly popular, and I turn on paid subscriptions, then I will get the bulk of that revenue.
For now, however, I don’t intend to ask for paid subscriptions, so I’m left with a handful of tiny hearts.
How can I find an answer?
No-one else knows what I’ve learned from this Substack. The only way I can find an answer is to look honestly at my own experience.
So, what’s the answer?
I’ve learned a few things from even this short-lived Substack:
I can post regular editions, but I can also get hung up on posting at the same time each week, every week.
I love the idea underpinning Q&A – that every answer begs a question – but my current format is too rigid. It must be possible to pursue intellectual virtues without having them set out in subheadings.
I enjoyed getting into some of the big ethical and epistemological questions about conscience and artificial intelligence, but I was skating on very thin ice as I don’t have any particular expertise on these issues. It was an interesting challenge to think clearly about them, but of limited benefit to my audience – a kind of upmarket equivalent to the ‘what I had for breakfast’ blog.
Overall, I’ve learned that I enjoy Substacking, but I need to make some changes in order to keep going with this.
Next question, please
I’m going to reflect on what I’ve learned and come up with a new scheme for the next five editions of Q&A, which will probably be looser in design and frequency, and more focused on issues where I’ve got some expertise to share.

“… more focused on issues where I’ve got some expertise to share.” It seems to me that your evolving thinking on the future of news is absolutely *perfect* for the kind of inquisitive, Soctratic Substack format you’re developing here. The issue is clearly what they call a ‘Wicked Problem’ with no single answer or silver bullet, rather something that requires a plethora of interventions and innovations. A topic where we still don’t know what questions we’re supposed to be asking.
I like an upmarket what l had for breakfast blog!