Used to, you had to go through the media gatekeepers to put your work out there. With the advent of the internet and platforms like X, Substack, YouTube, and others, however, the masses can all create personal accounts and honk news and opinions into the world. The competition is no longer just between different outlets, but now extends to individual people. Who can speak the loudest and draw the most attention? Who can create the most effective personal “brand”?

The Washington Post saw a massive drop in subscriptions following its decision not to endorse a presidential candidate for the 2024 election. But its influence was already declining. The media giant responsible for breaking the vast background story of the Watergate story in the 1970s no longer enjoys its dominant place in the media landscape. Instead, primetime shows on CNN and MSNBC get their viewership numbers challenged by independent reporters and creators like Megyn Kelly, Tucker Carlson, and Matt Taibbi.

Is this evidence of a massive shift in the media climate?

Donald Trump went on Joe Rogan’s podcast just days before the presidential election, a video conversation that lasted almost three hours and then amassed millions of views virtually overnight. Although invited, Democratic candidate Kamala Harris did not show up on the popular platform, a decision that may have contributed somewhat to her defeat on November 5th. All that to say, media is changing. With the right approach, marketing acumen, and decent resources, just about anybody might hypothetically become the next Joe Rogan. Whether or not you agree with folks like him is besides the main point. His influence is simply a fact.

Culture writer Ted Gioia has all but forecasted the coming doom of legacy media and traditional publishing, noting how more and more people are opting for self-publishing platforms like Substack. He writes (on Substack, no less):

Substack exerted a significant influence during the campaign, breaking huge stories both from the Left and Right. But podcasting is now flexing like never before.

The number of people listening to podcast has tripled over the last decade. And I don’t anticipate any slowdown — and certainly not a collapse.

How are mainstream publications to compete with this? Can they?

While Gioia thinks Substack might be the future of publishing, and perhaps even should be, not every writer is welcoming towards the evolution of online media. Becca Rothfeld, a book critic for The Washington Post, thinks it’s a mistake to abandon traditional forms of media, including, say, the publication she works for. She writes particularly that it’s a mistake to think Substack should replace legacy media. She writes,

what i mean to contest here, then, is the idea that the “substack model” — in which a bunch of rogue losers write their little screeds and send them off into the world without any kind of editorial oversight — can or should compete with the “legacy model” — in which a publication with some sort of quality control gathers many different voices in one centralized location.

(Note: Rothfeld doesn’t capitalize traditionally in her Substack posts. I’m not sure why.)

Rothfeld makes the fair point that Substack and other unsupervised blog platforms don’t have the usual guardrails or fact-checking apparatus needed to curate excellent work. She goes on to note that she writes better when she knows she’s submitting her writing to a publication with high editorial standards. This, of course, makes perfect sense. On Substack, you type and post. Or if you’re a podcaster on YouTube, you record and distribute. The independent creator economy represents a phenomenal opportunity for want-to-be commentators, but it strips away accountability, constructive pushback, and the editorial standards that have traditionally made for good content.

As media is changes, and legacy media struggles to compete with new online voices, the challenge will be for the average consumer to wisely weigh different sources of information, entertainment, and commentary. In a democracy, where in theory we all have a voice, how do we decide, without the traditional gatekeepers, which voices are worth listening to?