Medium Writers are at the Mercy of the “Boost”
What gets a story boosted, and why are writer interactions going downhill so fast?
Since the algorithmic changes in August, many writers have expressed concerns over significant decreases in earnings, myself included.
Yes, we get it. Medium is a business like any others, and its shareholders want to make more money. Guess what? They need writers to do that, and they’re alienating us one algorithmic change at a time.
Over the past few months my earnings have dropped about 50%. The only time I come close to what I was earning before the changes is when one of my articles is boosted. For me, that happens about once or twice a month. I write very regularly. I published 12 articles in January, and 22 in December.
I understand, they’re purportedly looking for quality writing, not quantity. Okay, so how does Medium determine quality writing? Nobody has any clue, not even the Medium editors themselves, it seems. There is no transparency about how they choose stories to boost, it’s simply at the whim of the editors.
I was doing much better on my own, earning based on people reading and interacting with my writing. That’s how it’s supposed to be: Write strong, relevant content and the people will come.
The new approach seems to be write as much as you can, as often as you can, and hope an editor happens to see your article and decides to boost it based on some nebulous, undefined criteria which nobody knows anything about.
Oh, yes, and don’t forget: If you’re a “Friend” of Medium (FoM) you’ll get more fellow-friends reading and interacting with your content because they expect quid-pro-quo, and FoM get you four times the earnings!
This is not the way to centre strong writing, support good writers, and foster a community of writers supporting fellow writers. That brings me to the other issue I’ve noticed lately.
Meaningless comments and tags
When someone comments on my article, I appreciate them taking the time to read and reflect on my writing. I enjoy comments which spark conversation, insightful comments that get me thinking differently about the subject matter. Those are my favourite.
What I don’t need is a summary of my own article. Why? I wrote it, I know what it says. People do this because they want to “prove” they interacted with your story and expect you to return the favour. That’s what this community is becoming: scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours.
No, thank you.
I want people to read and interact with my writing because it’s meaningful to them. Whether they agree or disagree, they have intelligent rebuttals or witty remarks, they ask questions or make points I hadn’t previously thought about. That’s what I loved about Medium when I first joined three years ago.
Maybe I’m being naïve. People aren’t going to behave a certain way just because I want them to, I get that. We’re all trying to earn some money and people are experimenting with different strategies to figure out how best to do that.
Perhaps I’m too much of an idealist. Being AuDHD does lend itself to thinking about things in black-and-white. There is one new behaviour, however, that I am firmly against.
Do not tag me in your writing just to get me to read it. If you’re responding to something I wrote or sharing my work, that’s wonderful, and I appreciate it immensely. Writers appreciating one another’s work is a beautiful thing.
There’s a new (at least new to me) tactic which has surfaced wherein people tag as many writers as they can at the end of their story in an attempt to get us to read it.
No. Just stop. That results in an immediate report and block from me. It’s annoying AF and I have no tolerance for ridiculous games. Maybe I sound curmudgeonly, but so be it. I may as well embrace my inner grouch and use it to my advantage.
I understand there won’t be some magical fairy-tale community where everyone is kind and supportive, where all interactions are genuine and authentic, and all the best writing gets seen.
But hell, if we’re not even going to try to aim for that, what’s the point?
Dear Medium editors, please do continue to boost my writing. Frankly, I need the income, and apparently that’s the only way to earn any money around here. But also, can we please go back to how things were a few years ago? They weren’t perfect, but they were a lot better than this.
Remember, a complaining customer is a caring customer.
I write because I actually care about this community and have seen the potential it has. Let’s not waste it.
© Jillian Enright, Neurodiversity MB
Related articles
Medium’s New “Friends” Program Favours The Privileged
I’m In A Toxic Relationship With My Favourite Writing Platform
Medium Needs To Pay Its Writers More
Ways to support my work
You can leave a “tip” on Ko-Fi at https://Ko-Fi.com/NeurodiversityMB
Become a paid subscriber to my Substack publication
Check out my online store at https://NeurodiversityMB.ca/shop
Read and share my articles from twoemb.medium.com
You can also follow me on facebook, and find all my links on LinkTree
More like this
What I’ve Learned In Two Years Writing Full Time
Inequities in Entrepreneurship
This cuts to the core of what I hated about writing for Medium- payment via volume production and favoritism towards certain writers and types of posts. I am not a big volume producer and do not write about the tech topics they favor, so I never made much.
What I am thankful for Medium for is helping me make social and business connections I wouldn't have made elsewhere, many of which have carried over here to Substack and other platforms. If Medium's good for one thing, it's that.