Ev Williams is a brilliant man. His vision for online publishing offers up a near-utopian vision of what a democratized internet looks like in Medium. He also once ran a couple of other businesses you may have heard of: Twitter, which he co-founded, and Odeo, a popular podcast app that may have actually launched before the public was ready for it, and years prior to the new podcast boom.
And then he lost his goddamn mind.
Earlier this year, Williams laid off 50 staff members. He also announced Medium would be removing ads from the site until the company found a better way to monetize its content. Ads, he said, ā[are causing] increasing amounts of misinformationā¦and pressure to put out more content more cheaplyāāādepth, originality, or quality be damned. Itās unsustainable and unsatisfying for producers and consumers alikeā¦.We need a new model.ā
Heās right. All of those things are spot on, and we need a new path forward, a path that pays journalists and publications for their hard work, and one that rewards sites consistently putting out great content.
No argument there.
But I have my doubts as to whether this is it. Today, Williams took to Medium to announce a subscription model. For just $5 a month, you can get a handful of extras, including: exclusive content, early access to a new UI, and an offline reading list ā which most of us already have, in Pocket.
If Ev Williams truly believes this is the āsomething betterā to turn the corner from ad-supported publishing, then I stand by my original statement: heās lost his goddamn mind.
Ask the New York Times about the success its had with a paywall ā arguably a better subscription model since it actually blocks content until you pony up a few bucks, something Medium isnāt doing. Or, thereās Sarah Lacy over at Pando. Iām sure sheās doing great, but I think her email pleas to past subscribers tell publishers all they need to know: scaling is hard for publications with a subscription model. Then, thereās The Information, Stratechery, and a handful of others I pay for each month; all offer great content, few are scalable.
Or maybe Williams doesnāt really care about profitability after all, something a handful of past Medium employees posited after their unceremonious exit. If thatās the case, this will certainly bring in some revenue. It wonāt, however, support a platform the size of Medium.
Again, Williams isnāt stupid. He has to know that this isnāt the answer. Perhaps, though, itās just phase one. Or, maybe he really is āThe Forrest Gump of the Internet,ā as The Atlantic once proclaimed.
Itās worth dwelling on that idea for a moment. Williams, the perpetual corporate traveller that only slows to IPO before moving on to the next big idea seems to always be in the right place at the right time, a la Forrest Gump. You can call it luck, sure, but in a big picture sense, Williams sees the high-res image while most are still squinting at an outline.
Itās almost disappointing for someone who helped to shape the open web bet on a solution thatās failed for so many. Or, as The Atlantic put it, maybe he really is betting against a creation heās helped mold.
Or, maybe the myth of Williamsā genius was just that, a myth. Maybe Medium really is just Blogger 2.0, or WordPress, LiveJournal, or any of the countless blogging platforms weāve long-since forgotten about. It doesnāt matter, though. For Williams, Mediumās challenges are the same as the ones staring other publishers in the face.
And if this is really the way forward, subscription models, weāre all fucked.
Get the TNW newsletter
Get the most important tech news in your inbox each week.