136
This is a photo of how I see my post on programming. Dev instance.
This is how I see my post from my alt account on Reddthat.
all 34 comments
sorted by:
hot
top
new
old
[removed by mod]
Content of the image is unrelated to this post FYI
It should have been blurred out or redacted, then. Because naturally, people will be more eager to discuss a Nazi problem than some fediverse bug.
If I were in a conspiratorial frame of mind, I might think that there are people who are trying to push the "Substack = Nazis" narrative, by spreading it around in contexts where the "official" content of their message is actually something different, which is usually a lot more effective at spreading the gestalt you're trying to spread around than just spamming "Substack = Nazis" everywhere.
The whole framing of the underlying freakout, that if Substack sent you a push notification about somebody's blog, they're obviously endorsing it, and it's "being pushed algorithmically" by Substack, and look, here's this very visual-picture-friendly juxtaposition of the Nazi logo in a Substack notification, even if the actual accusation is being walked by to "I think they should ban Nazis and this shouldn't even be an issue" (which would be a fair thing to say) and "I'm alarmed that they took VC money from some pretty suspect people at different points in their history" (which would be a fair thing to say).
But, that's not what they lead with. What they lead with is "don’t take any action" (they did take action), "'oops, all nazis' notifications issue" (not even sure what that means, but Substack is overwhelmingly leftist obviously, not "oops all nazis")... you get the idea. There's some other innuendo stuff in there, implying that "free speech" is just a cover because Substack loves Nazis so much that they're hosting a ton of solid left-wing journalists and providing them funding, just so they can have a handy excuse to host this one Nazi blog with 768 followers, which is the real goal.
Ask me if I'm salty about this whole conversation lol
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy (I just learned about this one and since then I've been seeing it everywhere; Lemmy people love to do it it seems like)
Honestly, "OP did this on purpose" is an entirely reasonable stance on the issue. And either way, the blame might also fall on the instance moderators for allowing it (are there rules about off-topic posts? I'm too tired to check)
And yeah, you're definitely right to be salty about this. The Internet is where nuance goes to be stabbed to death in a back alley.
As for the Substack discourse, I guess that Substack is at the very least being naive about the whole thing? Idk. I'm tired of all of this Intenet discourse and having a new hot topic issue every goddamn day.
All I know is that if a platform sent me a notification about an openly Nazi blog, swastika and all, I would have some second thoughts about using it.
What's going on? Why does this offtopic comment have 14 upvotes and no upvotes?
EDIT: Dead internet theory here in full force. This post is about Lemmy. The only thing that has to do with Substack is the example post that OP highlighted to demonstrate issues with Lemmy federation. And yet the top comment (and replies to my comment) is going on as if this post is about Substack, almost as if it was written by a technology that cannot understand context.
There's a good bit of fake voting on Lemmy, but after a quick glance at the votes I don't think this is that, I think it's just people legitimately believing the narrative that "Substack = Nazis" and upvoting it because they believe in it.
IDK, missing (or deliberately ignoring) context is also a deeply human issue. Don't act like you captcha-pressers are any better than us in that matter.
This is of a piece with "Mamdani isn't left wing enough for me" / "AOC supports genocide" / "Bernie is a Zionist" kind of glib one-liner reasons why left-wing people need to stop supporting left-wing things, because they're not really virtuous enough, and so we need to abandon them in pursuit of some kind of imaginary virtue solution instead of just having unity.
TL;DR: They took some funding from Marc Andreessen long ago, they were willing to give blogs to everyone including Nazis (bc free speech) and the whole internet yelled at them, so they caved and removed the Nazis. IDK how this particular push notification happened, but I would bet that the blog will be removed. They are not wholly ideologically pure, I think Richard Spenser is the worst person they willingly host and he's pretty bad, but they don't allow Nazis anymore specifically because of the hue and cry it raised up the first time.
More conversation about it here, I don't have the patience right now to write up a full explanation. TL;DR someone who's panicked at you about the Substack Nazi problem is listening to something that's mostly designed to hurt a mostly left-wing platform.
Your link is to your older comments, and claims they "kicked out the nazis" they had on their platform. So the nazis are all gone, huh?
Their systems just pushed a very racist notification from the nazis currently on their platform to users. The article also points out that one of the other nazis accounts is being pushed algorithmically to users via substacks "rising" tab, with the nazi account currently at number 46. That's seperate from their "oops, all nazis" notifications issue. How is substack not a nazi platform when its still promoting and platforming nazis?
Also, they just took more funding from Marc Andeerssen in their most recent $100 million funding round 13 days ago, so your TL;DR is also all fucked up.
Are you under the impression that a person at Substack manually reviews every notification about every newsletter that gets sent out? It would be surprising to me if that was how it worked.
The URL has a "1" at the end, which usually means someone lost their account the first time and is now making a new one. I can't really make sense of how old the "1" version of the account is or if there used to be one without it. The blog hasn't been deleted yet, which sure isn't great, but I'm fairly sure that the people at Substack didn't make this blog or deliberately take pains to make sure it exists in any way.
I mean, you do understand that when I get a gmail notification about herbal Viagra, that doesn't mean Google has gone into the herbal supplements business, right? And in general how platforms generally work? As I understand it (and tell me if I'm wrong), their currently policy is to ban Nazis and this one should be gone soon. Maybe I'm wrong, I'll check back in a couple days and see what happened with it.
Honestly, it makes infinitely more sense to think that this is a fuck-up that is being spun to sound like a deliberate decision by internet trolls, than to think that Substack has decided to start sending literal Nazi propaganda to their users on purpose.
Also, they just took more funding from Marc Andeerssen in their most recent $100 million funding round 13 days ago, so your TL;DR is also all fucked up.
I mean, not from him personally, any more than they did from Kim Kardashian or Skims, the apparel company. I do agree that lots of VC money flooding in is a significant problem, just because it's usually (almost always) a corrupting influence in the long run. That doesn't mean that "Substack has a Nazi problem" all of a sudden becomes validated.
Comparing a platform internal push alert system with a random spam email is asinine. This was the companies own system pushing nazi content they host to users, all with their own tools.
I have no idea what youre on about with the URL, but i absolutely accept that their notification system fucked up and mass spammed users with literal Nazi content they actively host on their platform. Machines break, computers are no exception.
The "actively hosting Nazi content" is the issue. Not hosting Nazis is actually a stunningly good way to prevent your internal tooling from spamming customers with Nazi shit. Its nearly flawless. The fact that Substack does not employ it is the issue.
Do check in and see if the two listed Nazi stacks get deleted. It would be a reasonable thing for Substack to do if they don't want Nazis on their platform. If they don't do it, I would expect that both of us will have our answer of what they want to host.
Are you under the impression that someone at Substack manually reviews every notification that goes out, for every user-generated post / blog? I feel like you failed to grasp the essential point I was making. Yes, comparing it to "Google is sending me push notifications about herbal supplements!" is precisely the analogy I'm intending to make. You are aware that those email notifications are also push notifications, sent to you by Google, based on user-generated content, right?
I have no idea what youre on about with the URL
Seems pretty straightforward to me. Is there a better way I can explain it to you, do you have any questions about the explanation? What part doesn't make sense?
I have no idea if Substack is planning to take this blog down (actually I kind of doubt it, now looking into it more). But it seems like you're failing to grasp really incredibly simple things that I'm saying, which makes me kind of not trust your overall judgement about what the far more complex issue of what the right overall judgement and opinion to hold towards Substack is.
Are you even reading the comment you're replying to? It doesn't seem like it.
Gmail doesnt "push notifications" for anything besides receiving email. Recieving a spam messsage, i.e an interaction with a federated service that anyone can run, is not at all the same as a company's app, that they full control, pushing a notification, that they fully control, from content on their site, that they full control. Comparing that to Gmail, which is in this case would be a neutral party to the content of the push notification, is not the same.
I very clearly pointed out that i expect the notification came from a computer fucking up. You should re-read the comment to make sure you understand it. I also made it very clear that if you have nazi shit on your platform, your computers may fuck up and push that that Nazi shit out to people. The best way to combat that is not having Nazi shit.
Either way, it's good to see you accepting that "Substack welcomes Nazis" is accurate now. Maybe it wasn't in 2023, the last time they made headlines for paying Nazis to post on their platform, but it is now. I expect with the very recent 100 million cash influx from far right Trump supporters, that isn't going to change.
Maybe stop carrying so much water for a site that is clearly absolutely cool with Nazis?
from content on their site, that they full control
They don't. Or, rather, to exactly the degree that Google "controls" the mail servers that forwarded the spam email to you.
Anyway, you seem to be grasping the point I was making now, so great. Anyway, to me, the bottom line is: It's better to let people talk. I federated with Hexbear and lemmy.ml, too (or did, back when I had a server of my own, sniff), for exactly the same reason. It's not Substack's fault that there are Nazis in the world, and in this particular case and framing, I don't think moving them to some other segregated platform does anyone any good. I actually think it helps the Nazis a lot to separate them from the main flow of information exchange. I realize I'm in the minority in thinking all of this.
The best way to combat that is not having Nazi shit.
Banning Nazi shit, especially if you are now taking a ton of money from standard silicon valley VCs, is the first step towards banning all "antisemitic" shit. It's just a hop, skip, and a jump away. I think I actually had this exact conversation specifically about Substack with someone, at great length, a few years ago, and they were pointing to Germany as an example of how it should work (banning Nazi shit), and I pointed out that the same laws could easily be used against pro-Palestinians, and they all told me I was crazy.
AND OH, LOOK WHAT HAPPENED IN GERMANY
We're probably not going to see eye to eye on it. Whatever. Anyway: I'm not in favor of Nazis. I'm in favor of left-wing platforms. I'm noticing that you are not taking the standpoint "We need to get the Nazis off Substack, because it's a good thing, but the Nazis are horrifying." That would actually be totally reasonable to me even though it's not my opinion. You're taking the standpoint "Fuck Substack all the homies hate Substack," apparently, which I have a problem with. Or that seems to be your stance. Am I wrong? Maybe so, if so tell me.
I don't like policing people's speech, even when literal Nazis are involved. I'm probably in the minority on that. But I just don't like all the disingenuous ways of attacking Substack that all seem to boil down to some pretty dishonest framings... everything you're saying now, I think is more or less reasonable, we just don't agree on it. As long as you're not saying "SUBSTACK IS PROMOTING NAZI BLOGS ON PURPOSE BECAUSE THEY'RE NAZIS," as some people seem to be, I think we good.
Your gmail notification point doesn't track, but its the most minimal point so i'll drop it.
I dont think Substack is specially just a Nazi platform. I think they are Capitalists that will use any kind of speech to make money. While bootstrapping, they found a niche in leftist independent journalism. Now, they view far right hate as profitable, both directly with Nazi commentors and being paid large sums to enshittify the platform from far right figures.
They dont care about racism or hate because they are rich and it makes them money. That does make them bad people, no matter how many leftists they also profit from.
I absolutely expect they will follow a Twitter style path from here on out, with or without Musk at the helm. Once you let the Nazi's into the bar, they take over by driving everyone else out. Substack has said "come on in!" so they will. Some leftist will remain for a while, but eventually the Nazis will be all that's left.
I expect you make some kind of living off Substack? Maybe look into Ghost as an option. They take way, way less money even when fully hosted.
For me personally, the A16Z investment is a much bigger issue than the Nazi blogs. From my perspective, it means the management is comfortable working with criminals (pump and dump and pyramid schemes haven't yet been made legal in the US, have they?).
Performative claims of support for "free speech" is pretty standard stuff, I wouldn't be surprised if it was a part of the go-to-market strategy (it would be funny if they created the Nazis blog themselves to stir things up).
(it would be funny if they created the Nazis blog themselves to stir things up).
Jesus Christ, see this is what I was talking about. You're making up nonsense. What they actually did was invested a bunch of money in paying actual journalism people to do actual journalism things, and then create a new way of doing things that invited a ton of qualified mostly leftist journalists to do real journalism on a platform that's a little closer to how people actually consume media now, and get paid for it, and in a sustainable fashion now that all the previous media empires are either crashing down or getting replaced with explicit propaganda.
That's where some of that A16Z money went: To journalists (some of it literally and directly, to get the ball rolling). That's why there are all these people like Robert Reich and Tim Snyder on Substack right now, doing journalism and getting paid for it. It's a good thing.
Of course, it's super easy to pretend they created a bunch of Nazi blogs instead. They didn't do that, but "it would be funny" is easy to say. Man, get lost.
I am not American (although I have lived there, and have traced extensively and have many good friends); I did not find American polemics around freedom of speech to be in the least convincing.
Absent convincing evidence to the contrary, it is reasonable to be sceptical of Substack's claims. People in other countries get severally beaten up (or even killed) in an attempt to do real journalism - that is a commitment to free speech. Not some drama about blog hosting.
I do have some exposure to silicon valley go-to-market strategies. It is not at all "nonsense" to speculate that in theory a startup could engage in a guerrilla marketing (especially using free speech copytext, which is extremely fashionable among their target market).
Where did I make any claims about how the A16Z money was used? Sure, it likely was used to fund journalists on the platform, including people who do good work. It is a good thing that they are getting paid.
I think you misunderstand my worldview, I have nothing particularly against substack.
I just don't buy the colourful story about "commitment to free speech" (not sperixi to substack) and the uncritical view of the A16Z investment.
I am not American
Great, congratulations.
it is reasonable to be sceptical of Substack's claims
What "claims"?
People in other countries get severally beaten up (or even killed) in an attempt to do real journalism
IDK if you've been paying attention, but they've been putting journalists here in ICE detention for doing real journalism. IDK why you are trying to frame pro-journalism as a thing that is somehow unique to non-America, or in any way related to Substack. That framing just makes literally 0 sense.
Journalists good. Beating up journalists bad. Hopefully we can agree on that.
Also, hosting journalists good. Hopefully we can agree on that. No? Or does the first thing mean the second one is bad somehow? This is the type of weird circuitous framing I always see when people are bringing in some kind of bullshit narrative. "Substack hosts Nazis, I don't like that" makes perfect sense, I can dig it, we can talk about it. This is just some weird circuitous nonsense.
Where did I make any claims about how the A16Z money was used?
I mean, you sure brought it up as a bad thing. Which, yes, it's pretty suspect. I would actually describe the centralization of Substack (which means it's vulnerable to a single legal action or something torpedoing the whole thing or putting them in a position where they actually do have to skew their journalism in some sort of pro-fascist direction) as the biggest problem, but you didn't touch on that, because it can't be summed up in a bite-sized "What about the A16Z money!" nugget.
Sure, it likely was used to fund journalists on the platform, including people who do good work. It is a good thing that they are getting paid.
Great! Glad we finally agree on something. Yes, it is, and it's why the centralization and VC money was maybe a necessary evil to some extent where something like Ghost will have a harder time sending bunches of money to journalists, which is why all these good left-wing journalists are on Substack right now. Which is a good thing. I mean, at least we're getting somewhere on that part lol.
I just don't buy the colourful story about "commitment to free speech"
Honestly, why not? If a platform is 80% left wing voices and raised money specifically to give to those left wing voices, and then also hosts a tiny minority (much less than 20%, just kind of the ones who show up who don't cross certain objective lines, like being Nazis) of right-wing voices, why would "free speech" not be the most logical explanation for why they're doing that?
I am aware that "free speech" is often used as a code-word to excuse Nazi platforms, but those ones are usually pretty easy to identify because they host majority Nazi voices, they kick the left-wing ones off instead of raising funding for them, and so on and so on. I get the instant suspicion of "free speech" at this point in the American media landscape, but I don't get why someone who took more than a cursory look at what Substack's doing would come to any other conclusion about why they're doing it.
and the uncritical view of the A16Z investment.
Sounds good! If I find anyone taking an uncritical view of the A16Z investment, I'll let you know, and you and they can hash it out.
The claim that they are somehow really committed to "free speech". I don't believe this. Heard these sort of polemics a lot when I lived there (both on an institutional level and from individuals).
Me not trusting their alleged commitment to "free speech" doesn't necessarily mean I think Substuck is particularly bad or that one shouldn't use it or read it.
It's not circuitous nonsense to highlight that statements made by Americans companies (and many individuals for that matter) about "free speech" are often shallow, performative and unconvincing. From my perspective, this is a factual statement.
This has nothing to do with the % split between leftist or rightist bloggers.
I don't deny VC money may be necessary evil. A16Z is not the only VC company there is.
I am just pointing out that not trusting Substack's claims about their alleged passion for free speech and seeing more nuance than "A16Z investment is a necessary, end of story! No discussion allowed!" does not make one a purity obsessed leftist that thinks substack is full of Nazis.
The piece about Substack making nazi blogs to stir up drama was not meant to be taken seriously; I was making fun of American startup culture (and many startups do engage is super sketchy behaviour, perhaps not substack though) and the bombast with which free speech polemics are often marketed.
seeing more nuance than "A16Z investment is a necessary, end of story! No discussion allowed!" does not make one a purity obsessed leftists
Aw, jeez, you're right. I hate discussion and I hate nuance. You got me. That's exactly a really good summary of what I was saying.
The piece about Substack making nazi blogs to stir up drama was not meant to be taken seriously
Ah, yes, Schroedinger's leftist. "I was just joking! Unless...? Also, BTW, Substack's got a Nazi problem."
But you do take any scepticism of A16Z as an immediate sign that one is a "purity obsessed leftist". This is not reasonable.
OK, so you are saying that I started lying in this thread, I actually believe substack is full of Nazis, but I decided to temporarily back down from this view in order to try and "win" this discussion.
You can agree that substack is not full of Nazis and it's a viable platform, while also recognising that they are an American tech company that received money from a VC firm that is commited to authoritarianism, corruption and criminal schemes.
What's your logic here? I am genuinely curious.
You are ranting against "left orthodoxy on purity", yet you yourself are demanding acceptance of A16Z specifically.
A nuanced take in response to casually lobbed accusations of Nazism? How come you haven't been banned?
!fediverse@lemmy.world hasn't yet succumbed to the international shittymod conspiracy. Give it time, I'm sure once they secure their hold over dbzer0, they'll get to work on some of the medium-sized LW communities, and start booting out defenses of Substack because of "trolling" or something.
(I am joking. I think. Maybe not.)
[removed by mod]
Ah man.
What is the solution here?
I don't know what it is about me or who I follow but I don't seem to get Nazi push notifications in any of my socials or on substack or on YouTube. I wonder why that is 🧐?
What's the difference or issue here?
this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2025
136 points (94.7% liked)
Fediverse
44003 readers
446 users here now
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, Mbin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration)
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS