Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Napoleon Dynamite and Why I Am Leaving Substack
https://newsletter.aprogressiveway.com/p/6bf0dfa1-1965-4e3e-ad40-5fccfdc5f7bc/My newsletter statistics started changing last August—at least that is when I noticed. In short, while my subscribed readers kept reading, I was losing what I called accidental tourists—people who found my work through Notes and chats. At first, I blamed myself, reviewing what and when I posted: opening paragraphs, keywords, SEO text, tags—just throwing darts. But as I wrote in a “guest article” by ChatGPT a few weeks ago, I realized Substack was the villain.
Substack had changed how it connects readers to writers through Notes. While the algorithm is inscrutable, the strategy is clear. Substack presents as working hard to be like Netflix, connecting readers to writers not by stated interests, but through textual analysis of what they have just read.
You could see this as good—Substack simply searching out more of what you like. But what if you are a Napoleon Dynamite? This very offbeat 2004 film was Netflix’s Achilles heel in the mid-2000s: its algorithm could not reliably predict who would like the film. This was back when Netflix was mailing DVDs, so viewers could wait days to receive a movie they hated—not good for business. Netflix put up a million-dollar prize, ostensibly to improve recommendation accuracy by 10 percent, but the real drivers were outlier films like Napoleon Dynamite that resisted prediction.
Netflix got its 10 percent, but did not solve Napoleon Dynamite. So, Netflix threw in the towel and changed strategy. As The Guardian documents, Netflix’s turn toward what critics call “algorithm movies” reflects a deliberate retreat from cultural risk.
Substack had changed how it connects readers to writers through Notes. While the algorithm is inscrutable, the strategy is clear. Substack presents as working hard to be like Netflix, connecting readers to writers not by stated interests, but through textual analysis of what they have just read.
You could see this as good—Substack simply searching out more of what you like. But what if you are a Napoleon Dynamite? This very offbeat 2004 film was Netflix’s Achilles heel in the mid-2000s: its algorithm could not reliably predict who would like the film. This was back when Netflix was mailing DVDs, so viewers could wait days to receive a movie they hated—not good for business. Netflix put up a million-dollar prize, ostensibly to improve recommendation accuracy by 10 percent, but the real drivers were outlier films like Napoleon Dynamite that resisted prediction.
Netflix got its 10 percent, but did not solve Napoleon Dynamite. So, Netflix threw in the towel and changed strategy. As The Guardian documents, Netflix’s turn toward what critics call “algorithm movies” reflects a deliberate retreat from cultural risk.
**SNIP**