What you've articulated here is a mirror to what's been swirling in my head about not just Glennon, but so much more. You've expressed it better than I ever could.
We're reaching a threshold of sorts and Glennon unwittingly placed her finger in a societal wound she's not responsible for. That wound has spread its infection to every aspect of life, and the emotional backlash is becoming swifter and stronger.
With Substack the movement seemed to start with the sense that high- profile accounts were being recruited (particularly political / current events accounts) and are being driven upwards by the algorithm while smaller accounts struggle for every subscriber. It's sometimes hard to stay motivated here while seeing how some accounts become best sellers the week after joining up.
I see this shake-up as a phase this platform needs to get through. I certainly have no beef with Glennon, Liz Gilbert, Aaron Parnas or Jim Acosta or Michael Cohen; I read and listen to their content on occasion.
The central question for this platform is what will it evolve into? I'm hoping that it will be a place with integrity that holds space for all writers.
Thank you for your thought provoking post, Kirsten.
One of the things I really hated about this whole debacle was the whole 'lack/scarcity mindset.' While yes, theoretically, there is enough for everyone, we don't live in that world right now. And people, including many writers who make a living on Substack, are dealing with ACTUAL scarcity in their lives, so to tell people who are struggling with inflation and rising costs and prices that 'it's all in your head' was utter bs in my opinion.
If I have $20 to spend on Substack, and some of that money is now going to Glennon (or insert any other famous celebrity here) that’s real money not going to smaller or independent writers. That’s just a fact and to see people ignoring it so willfully was wild. She absolutely should have not been bullied, but so many people seemed to be missing the point here.
This is insightful Kirsten. I missed this aspect of the controversy. Because I am insulated from the feelings of insufficiency and unfairness that you highlighted.
What a thoughtful piece, as always, Kirsten. Thank you for describing the deeper underlying forces at work in the reaction to Glennon coming to Substack and I do get your point on how this is really about capitalism. And while I was among those who prefer to believe in abundance rather than scarcity (I had absolutely no qualms, only joy, about Glennon coming aboard)--the reality of what more popular writers and cultural figures with already huge followings can mean for the small, little-known author struggling to make an income here--i can see your point that scarcity thinking is not just a matter of manifestation of abundance but a reality for many of us.
I took a beat, because I wanted to look more critically at my own responses, judgements, criticisms and find the deeper truths which for me, is about preserving what I love about Substack. I believe it can continue to be a home for writers big and small and everything inbetween. But we're going to have to continue to have conversations like this to make sure it remains that way.
Amy, I am the same. I actually do believe in abundance and I do feel like when I’m acting from a place of abundance life moves more easily for me. But I have to hold this in tension with the reality that there are structural issues in play. The two things seem contradictory but I think that is where the truth always is. The two things can live in tension and side by side.
Beautifully said, and that made me feel better as I agree with you. Living with a sense of lack doesn’t feel good and it usually doesn’t deliver what we want. Thank you Kirsten for bringing deeper and broader perspectives to this conversation.
Kirsten, this is so good! I’ve restacked it to invite others to read it. You explain the reaction against GD so well; plus I didn’t know that Adam Grant had 500k subs and no paywall. Given her own work and books, GD could have handled Substack in the same way. (Re her fear of “trolls” in the comments, not sure what I think…)
Thx Debbie! I understand why someone would only want paid comments. After all that’s how I have things set up. But that’s mostly because I come from a place where people have strong feelings about me because of my politics, and there would be a lot of trolling if I opened it up. A few times I have opened it up. It’s been a disaster. I don’t know why that would happen with Glennon but maybe it would, in which case it would make sense to make comments paid. But there are also other ways to handle it. If you have resources, you can have a moderator for example. Anyway, I don’t really know because like I said, I don’t even think it’s about her and I think it’s unfortunate that she became the focal point when she’s one of the few who speaks up about systemic issues
Well said! Thank you! I too value Glennon’s hard work & why we shouldn’t place blame with her as you so well differentiate specific disparities fueling problem power imbalances!
This is excellent and worthy of conversations at community tables In the early 90s my sister had me read an Econ book called Winner Takes All Society. Here’s a link to the executive summary. Technological advances and other things has this type of society on steroids in 2025 and its fallout in terms of shared agency, growing poverty and stress a real experience in the US at minimum https://sobrief.com/books/the-winner-take-all-society
What you've articulated here is a mirror to what's been swirling in my head about not just Glennon, but so much more. You've expressed it better than I ever could.
We're reaching a threshold of sorts and Glennon unwittingly placed her finger in a societal wound she's not responsible for. That wound has spread its infection to every aspect of life, and the emotional backlash is becoming swifter and stronger.
With Substack the movement seemed to start with the sense that high- profile accounts were being recruited (particularly political / current events accounts) and are being driven upwards by the algorithm while smaller accounts struggle for every subscriber. It's sometimes hard to stay motivated here while seeing how some accounts become best sellers the week after joining up.
I see this shake-up as a phase this platform needs to get through. I certainly have no beef with Glennon, Liz Gilbert, Aaron Parnas or Jim Acosta or Michael Cohen; I read and listen to their content on occasion.
The central question for this platform is what will it evolve into? I'm hoping that it will be a place with integrity that holds space for all writers.
Thank you for your thought provoking post, Kirsten.
Well put! 💜
One of the things I really hated about this whole debacle was the whole 'lack/scarcity mindset.' While yes, theoretically, there is enough for everyone, we don't live in that world right now. And people, including many writers who make a living on Substack, are dealing with ACTUAL scarcity in their lives, so to tell people who are struggling with inflation and rising costs and prices that 'it's all in your head' was utter bs in my opinion.
Exactly—ppl were essentially being told that they were imagining their reality.
If I have $20 to spend on Substack, and some of that money is now going to Glennon (or insert any other famous celebrity here) that’s real money not going to smaller or independent writers. That’s just a fact and to see people ignoring it so willfully was wild. She absolutely should have not been bullied, but so many people seemed to be missing the point here.
Exactly — it’s just math. People don’t have unlimited resources.
This is insightful Kirsten. I missed this aspect of the controversy. Because I am insulated from the feelings of insufficiency and unfairness that you highlighted.
The fact your know you are insulated makes you a remarkable exception, which I’m always grateful for.
What a thoughtful piece, as always, Kirsten. Thank you for describing the deeper underlying forces at work in the reaction to Glennon coming to Substack and I do get your point on how this is really about capitalism. And while I was among those who prefer to believe in abundance rather than scarcity (I had absolutely no qualms, only joy, about Glennon coming aboard)--the reality of what more popular writers and cultural figures with already huge followings can mean for the small, little-known author struggling to make an income here--i can see your point that scarcity thinking is not just a matter of manifestation of abundance but a reality for many of us.
I have taken my own passionate stance in this debate since Glennon's arrival and swift departure, and wrote about it today here: https://amybrown.substack.com/p/why-i-love-being-here-on-substack
I took a beat, because I wanted to look more critically at my own responses, judgements, criticisms and find the deeper truths which for me, is about preserving what I love about Substack. I believe it can continue to be a home for writers big and small and everything inbetween. But we're going to have to continue to have conversations like this to make sure it remains that way.
Amy, I am the same. I actually do believe in abundance and I do feel like when I’m acting from a place of abundance life moves more easily for me. But I have to hold this in tension with the reality that there are structural issues in play. The two things seem contradictory but I think that is where the truth always is. The two things can live in tension and side by side.
Beautifully said, and that made me feel better as I agree with you. Living with a sense of lack doesn’t feel good and it usually doesn’t deliver what we want. Thank you Kirsten for bringing deeper and broader perspectives to this conversation.
Kirsten, this is so good! I’ve restacked it to invite others to read it. You explain the reaction against GD so well; plus I didn’t know that Adam Grant had 500k subs and no paywall. Given her own work and books, GD could have handled Substack in the same way. (Re her fear of “trolls” in the comments, not sure what I think…)
Thx Debbie! I understand why someone would only want paid comments. After all that’s how I have things set up. But that’s mostly because I come from a place where people have strong feelings about me because of my politics, and there would be a lot of trolling if I opened it up. A few times I have opened it up. It’s been a disaster. I don’t know why that would happen with Glennon but maybe it would, in which case it would make sense to make comments paid. But there are also other ways to handle it. If you have resources, you can have a moderator for example. Anyway, I don’t really know because like I said, I don’t even think it’s about her and I think it’s unfortunate that she became the focal point when she’s one of the few who speaks up about systemic issues
Best take I've read yet. Thanks for simplifying it so usefully, Kirsten!
Spot on! You’re still my favorite on Substack!
Thx Alan !
Well said! Thank you! I too value Glennon’s hard work & why we shouldn’t place blame with her as you so well differentiate specific disparities fueling problem power imbalances!
This is excellent and worthy of conversations at community tables In the early 90s my sister had me read an Econ book called Winner Takes All Society. Here’s a link to the executive summary. Technological advances and other things has this type of society on steroids in 2025 and its fallout in terms of shared agency, growing poverty and stress a real experience in the US at minimum https://sobrief.com/books/the-winner-take-all-society
I was hoping you would share your take on this.
Seeing how this played out with her bothered me because she is as real as they come. I was happy to see her here and I'm disappointed she's gone.
Thank you Kirsten. Thoughtful and feels spot on to me.