What counts as "real" journalism?

Legacy media, new-age platforms, and the fight over reputation

Good morning, everyone. It’s true what they say—the Twitter feed really is the window to the soul. Earlier this week, mine was consumed by a heady conversation about journalism, independence, and creatorship...so guess what I’m writing about today!

Quick note: There are lots of important things at the bottom of this email so if I might be so bold as to suggest you read the whole thing? Lovely. With that, I can’t hold out anymore. Let’s talk about the sector I’ve come to know as both my safest harbor and my wildest tempest: media.

ReAl JoUrNaLiStS DoN’t uSe SuBsTaCk

This week, the discourse du jour in my corner of Twitter dot com centered around a fantastically honest piece from New York Times media columnist Ben Smith. The piece in question: Why We’re Freaking Out About Substack.

Now, it’s not Smith’s words themselves that ruffled my feathers, but rather the subsequent commentary on Twitter. For me, it started with the following tweet, specifically the part that goes “I would love to see more newsletters that do real journalism.”

Mathew Ingram @mathewi

Something I find depressing is that most of the big-name Substacks are pure opinion. There are exceptions of course (Judd Legum, Casey Newton) but I would love to see more newsletters that do real journalism. And I say this as a former opinion columnist

nytimes.comWhy We’re Freaking Out About SubstackA company that makes it easy to charge for newsletters has captivated an anxious industry because it embodies larger forces and contradictions.

I will admit that Mr. Ingram has me beat in terms of experience. And I will concede that I’ve never met him. But I take issue with the assertion it seems Ingram is making—that “real” journalism can really only flourish under a specific set of controlled circumstances. Circumstances that are, apparently, harder to come by on platforms like the one I’m using to send you this email.

That, though, was just the beginning. As it’s wont to do, Twitter took Ingram’s comments and ran with them. The tl;dr? A lot of media folks chimed in to voice their support of ideas like this one:

JD @jarroddicker

@mathewi @mbaram & "real reporting" also goes beyond the byline. it's often the contributions of many vs. the contributions of one. opinion and substack's are very much about the "one".

And this one, which by the way comes from a media friend whom I deeply respect:

Ian Kar @iankar_

Journalism is a different product that Substack doesn’t enable. They’re a newsletter content creation platform. Most journalists are better off w the infra, support & distribution of a mainstream publication

Mathew Ingram @mathewi

Something I find depressing is that most of the big-name Substacks are pure opinion. There are exceptions of course (Judd Legum, Casey Newton) but I would love to see more newsletters that do real journalism. And I say this as a former opinion columnist https://t.co/Xrg1L7M2oB

I agree that writing a really, really good story takes a village. But some villages can be small and still get things done, can they not? Do villages really have to be mainstream publications and mainstream publications only?

Respectfully, I call bullshit. At its core, what is journalism if not the pursuit of truth? Can you really only pursue truth with a team of 27 editors behind you? The answer is no, but legacy media, clinging to an argument that reeks of self-preservation, might try to tell you differently.

To many of the journalists and editors at old-school publications, “real” journalism can’t come from those of us going it alone. To them, I ask this: Ziwe Fumudoh might not win a Pulitzer for her iconic, hard-hitting interviews distributed via YouTube, but it doesn’t make her any less a journalist. She is speaking truth to power, synthesizing and disseminating information, and arming her audience with context.

The idea that journalism like that isn’t “real” troubles me. And to suggest that you need a specific platform (in this case, a newspaper with rank and file worker bees) to be a journalist is, frankly, wrong.

By suggesting as much, legacy brands have engineered a bifurcation within the media world—there are reporters who work at papers and there are content creators who work for themselves, and only the former are capable of “real” journalism. If you want to be taken seriously, you work for a legacy brand and accept the fact that you’ll make no money and cede ownership over your product.

That’s ridiculous.

I’m an independent writer, which in 2021 puts me firmly in the “content creator” camp. No one pays me to do this. No editors assign me stories. But I still deploy a thorough editing and fact-checking process that involves willing and gracious friends (you should see the shit my cofounder Josh writes in the margins of these drafts). 

Back when I was regularly hosting a podcast (promise I’m doing that again soon) I spent hours on my own researching stories, asking hard questions, and working vigorously to synthesize the most important information to share with all of you.

It was my life. It still is. I do this—ask questions and write about the answers—because I can’t not do it. And yet I’ve been haunted by the idea that I’m a fraud...not a real journalist because my medium of choice isn’t a traditional one. Questioned because my format can at times feel performative. Doubted because my job titles have been flash writer, newsletter writer, business editor, podcast host, and now independent creator.

It makes me wonder, almost constantly: Am I not a “real” journalist because I’m working independently? 

[PAUSE FOR DRAMATIC EFFECT]

Now might be a good time to remind you that I have a B.A. in Business Journalism.

I spent four years learning how to be a reporter in a rigorous program that famously handed anyone who made a singular fact error an F on the assignment. It was during school that “being a journalist” became an integral part of becoming the woman I am today.

But, as many of you know, I’ve spent the last month doing a great deal of soul-searching. My formal education and the career in journalism for which it readied me have not been exempt. As I look back on the ways my career and outlook have changed since I left the comfort of my schooling, I can’t help but think about the perception of “real” journalism, both as a writer and a voracious media consumer. 

When I stepped into my first journalism class in September of 2013, I was certain that the pinnacle of a reporting career was a job at the New York Times. There was never a single mention of the possibility of becoming an independent podcast host, Substack reporter, or anything like what I’m doing now when I graduated four years ago. 

Things have changed.

Is Casey Newton a journalist? Yes. 

Is Hasan Minhaj a journalist? Yes.

Is Alex Cooper from Call Her Daddy a journalist? You might say no, but I might disagree—she’s going straight to the source, asking incisive questions, and sharing it with you. 

The point is this: For some, that job at the NYT is still the pinnacle of a reporting career. But not for me. It’s because today, there are more options. And having more options will never be a bad thing (editor’s note from Josh: “unless you’re on dating apps”).

Journalism isn’t the product of a platform or a publisher or an algorithm. It’s the product of a person...and that means it can happen anywhere.

To say otherwise is to submit to an outdated point of view, one sorely missing out on the possibility that good, real journalism can happen all over the internet. It might not look like page A1 of the Times, but that doesn’t mean it lacks value.

Recognizing I’m an ex-newsroom reporter with a chip on my shoulder and a Substack account, might I suggest the following from the Ben Smith piece I referenced in the first paragraph:

• “Substack has captivated an anxious industry because it embodies larger forces and contradictions.” 

For all its flaws, Substack remains the fast-paced disruptor here to wrestle control away from the storied publications that have enjoyed it for decades. I don’t blame legacy publication journalists for at times feeling threatened. 

But in order to protect the ideal of a free and fair press, we have to recognize this: Today, ample journalists (real journalists) recognize that there’s power in owning your voice. That’s rarely an option at legacy publications. But it is on platforms like Substack.*

The tools and metrics may change, but the job description does not. Journalists still bear a tremendous responsibility and accountability, no matter where their words appear. Perhaps instead of denigrating independent creators for taking ownership over those words, we can celebrate them for lighting a new path in the direction all of us in journalism purport to be heading...the truth.

*I’ll talk more about this when I go live on Instagram tomorrow. I had 876 more words written for this piece that I cut for length. Tomorrow, they get their airtime. More info coming right up.

---

Thank you for reading, everyone. You’re obviously subscribed to at least one newsletter, so I’d love to hear from you about your perception of this media caste-ish system. Do you think the traditional media realm has beef with so-called content creators like me? Do you even care or am I stuck in my media bubble? Sound off, folks. Smash that MF reply button.

While you’re stewing on your ideas, consider penciling in some of my upcoming ~appearances~ to your calendar:

1. On April 22, I’m hosting an event for our dear friends at Cut the Crap. The person I’m interviewing is a surprise, but let’s just say this person has historically had a lot to say. I can’t wait, and I hope you’ll join. Get more info here and use the code CTCISCOOL to get your free ticket.

2. On April 27, I’m hosting a fireside chat for our dear friends at Public as part of their Women & Wealth Finance Fest. I’ll be speaking with the inimitable Sarah Kunst in a session aptly titled, “So, You Want to Be a Founder?” so...if you want to be a founder or hear from them, RSVP here.

And finally and most urgently, tomorrow—I’m going live on Instagram at 11:30 am ET. I’d love it if you joined for questions, ideas, conversation, and deeply personal tangents. Follow me here.

---

Last but not least, we’ve got a new section for this little newsletter. I’m not sure what to call it yet, but I was too excited about the idea to wait for the perfect branding. 

Here’s the gist: I’ve been utterly blown away by some of the responses this community has offered to my previous newsletters. They’ve made me laugh, tear up, and scratch my head, sometimes all at once. So starting now, I’m going to share some of the best, most thoughtful responses (with permission, of course) that have started genuine conversations.

Check it out here, along with the first entry in response to last week’s piece on trust, institutions, and the future of the influencer. More to come shortly.

Thanks for making it to the bottom, everyone. Have the best weekend and see you soon.

—Kinsey, proud owner of a new Twitter bio