To be precise, I love to give feedback.

7 Harsh Truths After Medium’s Latest Changes

Feel free to share your opinion in the comments. I love feedback.

The Medium Blog published a 12 min read about all the fantastic changes coming August 1st on Medium. At the time of writing, it has 28,332 claps from 1,372 people and 683 comments. In other words, it would make sh*tloads of money if it was paywalled.

Here’s what you need to know about the upcoming changes:

#1 — Everyone is super-duper happy about the changes.

Isn’t it wonderful how everybody agrees with the boss? It reminds me of my first job in a corporation. I was lucky enough to have a mentor. The first tip she shared was to laugh at my supervisor’s jokes — even if they aren’t funny.

My naive reply was: “But he said he was open to feedback and that I should always feel free to share my thoughts with him.”

“Yeah, no. Don’t believe that. Never believe that. People say they want feedback, but less than 5% can take it. Also, you just arrived and lack any experience, so please keep your feedback to yourself.”

#2 — Several writers said it convinced them to “return to the platform.”

I won’t comment on the fact that if they could read and comment on the blog, they didn’t go too far when they left, but I will comment on the most commonly shared delusional take, which reads (I’m paraphrasing):

“These are great changes. Nobody wanted to read my stories before, but now that Medium prioritizes quality over quantity, I will get many thousands of readers.”

Sorry to burst your bubble, but no, it won’t happen. If people didn’t want to read your stories before, they won’t after the changes, no matter how much Medium tries to force-feed the boosted delicacies into our throats (assuming you get a boost, which is far from likely to happen).

If stories are not to the readers’ taste, they won’t read them.

Also, if Medium force feeds too many “deeply thoughtful and brilliantly researched” articles nobody wants to read — readers will leave the platform. (I have mixed feelings about the boost — could you tell?)

#3 — 30 second rule

If people spend less than 30 seconds on your article, it won’t count. You won’t get anything — not even the usual 2 cents.

Quote: “Bouncing from a story before reading it for 30 seconds will prevent earnings from accruing from that member.”

According to Medium, it will prevent clickbait.

According to Smillew, it won’t work. Yes, it will prevent shitty clickbait, but nobody was reading it for more than 5 seconds in the first place. But well-crafted clickbait, the one about controversial or edgy topics, will stay. Sometimes they will also get a boost.

I would love the rule if it prevented people from clapping and running, but as I understand, it won’t. The best would be if clapping/replying/highlighting was possible only after spending 30 sec on an article.

#4 — Medium extends its partner program to 12 more countries (with more to come).

Quote: “By the end of the year, we plan to open up to another 50 or so.”

There are two reactions to Medium’s announcement:

• “YAY. Thank you for (finally) including my country!”
• “WTF? Why is my country still not included? Do better, Medium.”

Sorry, three reactions:

• “Will my country be part of the next 50 countries? I know you didn’t write the names in your post, but maybe you will write them in the comment section?”

I shared my thought about the extension here. I think it will be great for readers. Maybe not so good news for current writers, at least at first.

#5 — No more minimum of 100 followers to get into the Partner Program

I wrote before I thought this rule was stupid. It was too easy to game with the follow 4 follow tactics, and therefore unfair to people who didn’t want to use or didn’t know about them.

Medium never did anything to stop the tags “100 followers” or “100 followers on Medium.” Medium also lets some of its users follow 57,000+ users …

I’m glad this rule is out.

#6 — But now you need to pay to be part of the Partner Program

Unsurprisingly, people don’t read the FAQ.

Many commenters didn’t know that you didn’t have to be a member to earn from your stories on Medium. The logic was that Medium Membership was for readers (unlimited reading for $5), and the Partner Program was for writers (earn from your writings).

Readers don’t care about this rule, but many writers do because they feel cheated.

That’s a topic for another post, but as I wrote here, I think Medium didn’t have a choice to change this rule given the purchasing power disparities between countries in the partner program starting August 1st.

#7 — Writers will receive a bonus if they write stories controversial enough to make readers write angry replies

In other words, it is time to make wild claims in your articles. Here’s what Medium said:

“All stories will also earn more based on more explicit signals like claps, highlights, and replies.” (bolding mine)

They also said that only the first signal counts. So, if you reply and don’t clap and don’t highlight, it will still count as a signal.

Medium calls it “sparking a discussion,” but if you’ve been around more than five minutes, you must have noticed that many of the articles getting comments are about contentious topics.

It’s not a new phenomenon, but the difference is that now Medium will reward writers for triggering their readers.

Yes, you’re right; I take the pessimistic viewpoint. But let’s be honest about social media. People are more likely to comment to say “F*ck you” than to say, “Yes, you’re right.” I acknowledge both exist, but I would still argue that controversial topics are more likely to elicit comments from both sides. Write about broccoli, and nobody will get much excited about it. Write an article explaining why you will vote for Donald Trump in the next presidential election, and enjoy the comment section.

It confirms a rule of social media too many people seem to forget: Do Not Engage With Polarizing Content. The authors who write these articles do NOT look for a genuine discussion. They’re trying to bait you into engaging because it signals the algorithm to pick up their story. And now, your replies also tell Medium to give them more money.

Conclusion

Online writing is an art.

It consists in writing at the intersection of what people want to read and what the platform wants to promote.

You can’t be a successful online writer if you don’t learn how to game (or play with, if you prefer) the system.

Maybe Medium’s latest changes will promote what they call “high-quality personal stories, hidden life wisdom, and deep knowledge that’s locked up in our collective lives.” (fingers crossed)

But thinking all these stories will be genuine is like believing all the stories tagged “this happened to me” happened to the author.

(Or that I’m always telling the truth.)

Conclusion #2

Medium needs a downvote button so that any engagement on a downvoted article wouldn’t count toward the author’s earnings. That would limit clickbait.

Disclaimer

I’m grateful for Medium and the possibility to write and earn from my stories. I wish the platform and the writers all the best with all these significant changes. I purposely looked at the recent announcement from a different perspective because I got tired of all the “yes-people” in the comment section of Medium Blog. My opinions are my own and do not represent the views of my employer.