I have two thoughts about this issue. The first I’ve posted on another thread. The second, came to me as I was reading this post. First, I think the dust up and discussion about Doyle is less about her and more that we are seeing the era of the influencer culture that focused on those like Doyle with of tens of thousands of devoted followers. The influencer paradigm, which flourished on other platforms, doesn’t fare well on Substack. Why? Because Substack audiences seem to prefer to engage with multiple perspectives and thoughtful conversations rather than hanging on the words of a single influencer who claims to have life figured out.
What we're witnessing is a shift toward more democratic and distributed wisdom.The pushback against Doyle's entrance to Substack reveals this tension—communities that value substance and depth are actively questioning whether celebrity status and emotional storytelling should grant automatic authority in spaces dedicated to meaningful discourse. People are growing weary of following personalities who position themselves as authorities primarily through their own painful experiences.
What figures like Glennon Doyle, who built their platforms on personal vulnerability and trauma narratives, now face, here and on other platforms, is increasing skepticism from audiences who once eagerly consumed their insights. This doesn't mean the end of influential voices, but rather a healthier ecosystem where authority is earned through a wider narrative and genuine insight rather than personal brand or follower counts. I applaud a platform that gives AOC a bigger boost than those coming from Instagram and other platforms to see if they can add followers. Perhaps, the backlash she received wasn’t an attack on Doyle but the inevitable fatigue with her message and the influencer paradigm.
Second, so many writers here on Substack have been here for years and have faced pushback (sometimes read as bullying) and little or no response to their work. Yet they stay. They continue to grind it out because they are part of a community they value. Did Doyle assume she was going to get instant recognition and complete support? Did she expect to be welcomed with open arms on a platform that prides itself on discussion and pushback. And if a thought piece like Pricilla’s was enough to send her running for the exit, maybe this simply wasn’t the right fit. Rather than blame those who didn’t roll out the red carpet and throw roses, we might think about why someone would choose to leave so quickly and make their case on another platform, rather than attempting to have a thoughtful discussion here. I’m more disappointed by the lack of engagement by Doyle than I am the less than artful engagement of others. Doyle has a large and supportive group of followers. If she really wanted to be here, I wish she had stayed and made her case.
I'm also a big fan of Glennon and as I was reading Priscilla Harveys post I thought ok this is ok, until she mentioned another "famous" person having an "ideal" entry to substack and basically pointing Glennon to how well that person entered substack. That felt really condescending to me and very much coded way of saying you're wrong. All the "I still really like you" after writing this fell very flat and disengenuine to me.
Of course Priscilla should not receive hate for what she wrote. I appreciate your thoughtful reflection.
Another thing that bothered me was the picture of her and Glennon. I absolutely know it was intended to show appreciation, but knowing Glennon s background with mental health and ED I didn't think it was a good idea.
This is a totally separate topic but I have been thinking a lot about celebrities and photos. I think when a fan gets a photo with a celebrity that there is a lot of potential to objectify the celebrity, especially if the person then posts the photo on social media. It's very transactional and solely benefits the non-celebrity.
This weekend I went to a literary festival and each book signing included a photo with the author which felt burdensome to the author. The performance to smile and put your arm around a perfect stranger. I declined the photo option for the sake of the author, and I wish we would stop expecting famous people to take photos. Again, a definite tangent there :) thank you for reading.
I was in the middle of writing my own note basically encouraging a growth mindset / “plenty of room for all” take. Glennon Doyle is not you or me or anyone else — we all have our own unique voices and expertise and the world needs each of us.
What really strikes me is that I have yet to see anyone whose take was “Glennon Doyle might bring a significant wave of new readers to Substack, and those people are likely to subscribe to other newsletters, too.” (Or create content of their own.)
I don’t point fingers at any one person for Glennon’s decision. Ultimately it was her choice, and I think it was a choice made in response to group dynamics, not one person. Still, I have a hard time seeing what’s happened as anything but an expression of scarcity mentality.
Absolutely agree and I talked about this too in a live I did with @claire Venus yesterday. In leaving we are all deprived of her audience of readers who might have become ours. She also felt compelled to explain herself and in doing so told about 200k people that she didn’t feel safe here and Substack wasn’t good for her mental health. That’s huge in terms of how some people will now see this platform and whether they choose to come here. Even at a strategic, individualist level, it was a dick move to make someone so influential feel unwelcome. On a human level it was unkind and a huge display of personal insecurity and as you say, scarcity mindset.
Thanks for saying this in a tone I don’t have because her insertion triggered a deep feeling of discomfort. But,I am not surprised she retreated, she tells women to retreat and cancel those that create discomfort as a basis for setting healthy boundaries. It’s her go to and it has created an entire culture of disengaged and performative white activists. I was not happy to see her bullied but I was happy to see women felt comfortable enough in these spaces to speak over fame and familiar to progress change.
I personally didn’t like the tone of her note. It felt very patronising and virtuous however sadly, it wasn’t the worst or most directly hostile thing I read and often the comments on people’s critical articles (some of which are now gone) were even worse.
I don’t think there was anything wrong with how she arrived. I believe her content would be have been great. I think her paywall was more about safety.
I think the whole thing proved that a lot of people have some thinking and work to do on what happens when they feel triggered by other people’s success.
I also think it’s interesting that out of all the big names who have arrived here, this happened to her.
I’m not at all surprised that her rollout met with this response and other famous writers didn’t. Doyle’s entire brand is empathy and authenticity and making people “feel seen” and I think she utterly failed to read her audience here.
“But I still think that there is perhaps a certain way that someone who signs up now and brings a huge following can do it in a thoughtful, aware, gentle way.” My question is: why? Why would she have to do that.
I also disagree, because I didn’t see her entrance as unthoughtful or unaware or rude. Not at all. That’s also so not Glennon. I don’t understand why women tell other women to stay small. Because that’s what this is.
Why not celebrate her success? If she can reach this level, we all can. That’s the way I see it.
I agree with you, Eleonora. I always aim to be thoughtful of others, but the quiet underlying message that it's not safe to be seen just as you are, big with bold expression, is something I am undoing. In the past, I would internalize this overarching message as, "see, it's not safe to be big." After a life of pushing myself down, I am relearning the strength to be seen authentically for who I am. I saw Glennon as a beautiful addition here. I didn't even recognize anything she did as "big" or "look at me," but rather, it's totally her. She hits record in authentic moments like driving in the car, and she expressed her joy of being here.
More than anything, I am reminded of the poem I hold so dear by Marianne Williamson: "Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure...We ask ourselves, Who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented, fabulous? Actually, who are you not to be? You are a child of God. Your playing small does not serve the world. There's nothing enlightened about shrinking so that other people won't feel insecure around you. We are all meant to shine, as children do. We were born to make manifest the glory of God that is within us." I find such profound encouragement and wisdom in her words. Let's keep charging forward and shining our light with "It is safe to be seen," humming softly in the background.
“And I’m wondering now, if the people who are attacking Priscilla Harvey for “bullying” Glennon off Substack are in fact behaving a little like bullies themselves?” I’ve had the same thought.
Very very well put and thoughtful, the nuance is very welcome 🤗
The fact that Priscilla talks about the "notes" side of the platform becoming incredibly reactive/social media-like in her post and the reactions to her post literally felt like a twitter war is incredibly ironic. Feels like a lot of people didn't even really read her post and jumped on a bandwagon, in a lot more aggressive, bully-like way. Also very ironic.
Thank you for the nuance in this. I believe this kind of reaction could save us from a lot of hate and problems at many subjects. You can still say what you believe without putting anyone down.
Beautifully said. I personally agreed with (and appreciated the kindness of) Priscilla’s note and hadn’t realized that piece was considered as part of the bullying. I really hope it wasn’t because it was a genuine exploration of what felt so off to so many. And while I can understand that plenty of people fell into a knee-jerk expression of their dismay at the energy in Glennon’s “I’ve arrived” announcement, I so appreciate folks like you and Priscilla taking the time to try to dig a little deeper.
My thoughts mirror yours. I didn't find Harvey particularly harsh, if anything she revealed herself as a genuine fan of Doyle's who may have felt her fandom taken for granted with the method of Doyle's arrival. I'm speculating about that part of it. I did have a bit of a who do you think you are reaction, though, when she prescribed how things should have gone down. Regardless, that stuff doesn't really matter. Doyle left because she felt unsafe. I wonder if that feeling had less to do with Harvey's post than with other messages she may have received. I imagine Doyle receives a lot of hate mail for being in a same sex marriage and supporting the cause of people whose sexuality and gender expression don't align with cultural norms. Again, pure speculation on my part.
Finally, Doyle is a sensitive person who puts herself out there anyway, the very definition of courageous. Her decision to quit suddenly could have been an impulsive one -- flight rather than fight was easier. It's fucking hard to be a celebrity any time but especially hard when your whole reason for fame is tied to vulnerability.
I actually hadn't heard of the controversy but it has popped up on me feed a lot today.
I'm really glad this was the first newsletter I chose to read on it because I think your take is really thoughtful and well put. Thank you for deciding to share this, and putting this out there!
Thank you for this post. I appreciate the nuance. I was a distant observer to the Glennon Doyle Substack experience, much like I am Glennon as a whole. I knew who she was. I think I listened to a couple of her podcasts.
My thought when I read that she left Substack was, “Well, that escalated…tragically.” I mean the whole thing—the entrance, the response, the exit, the response. So again, I’m appreciative of your thoughts here.
I’m also grateful for the comments in response to this article. They were informing and helpful.
I have two thoughts about this issue. The first I’ve posted on another thread. The second, came to me as I was reading this post. First, I think the dust up and discussion about Doyle is less about her and more that we are seeing the era of the influencer culture that focused on those like Doyle with of tens of thousands of devoted followers. The influencer paradigm, which flourished on other platforms, doesn’t fare well on Substack. Why? Because Substack audiences seem to prefer to engage with multiple perspectives and thoughtful conversations rather than hanging on the words of a single influencer who claims to have life figured out.
What we're witnessing is a shift toward more democratic and distributed wisdom.The pushback against Doyle's entrance to Substack reveals this tension—communities that value substance and depth are actively questioning whether celebrity status and emotional storytelling should grant automatic authority in spaces dedicated to meaningful discourse. People are growing weary of following personalities who position themselves as authorities primarily through their own painful experiences.
What figures like Glennon Doyle, who built their platforms on personal vulnerability and trauma narratives, now face, here and on other platforms, is increasing skepticism from audiences who once eagerly consumed their insights. This doesn't mean the end of influential voices, but rather a healthier ecosystem where authority is earned through a wider narrative and genuine insight rather than personal brand or follower counts. I applaud a platform that gives AOC a bigger boost than those coming from Instagram and other platforms to see if they can add followers. Perhaps, the backlash she received wasn’t an attack on Doyle but the inevitable fatigue with her message and the influencer paradigm.
Second, so many writers here on Substack have been here for years and have faced pushback (sometimes read as bullying) and little or no response to their work. Yet they stay. They continue to grind it out because they are part of a community they value. Did Doyle assume she was going to get instant recognition and complete support? Did she expect to be welcomed with open arms on a platform that prides itself on discussion and pushback. And if a thought piece like Pricilla’s was enough to send her running for the exit, maybe this simply wasn’t the right fit. Rather than blame those who didn’t roll out the red carpet and throw roses, we might think about why someone would choose to leave so quickly and make their case on another platform, rather than attempting to have a thoughtful discussion here. I’m more disappointed by the lack of engagement by Doyle than I am the less than artful engagement of others. Doyle has a large and supportive group of followers. If she really wanted to be here, I wish she had stayed and made her case.
Thank you. This gets so much more at the core issue than all the hyperbolating (shoot that’s not a word. It should be a word!)
I'm also a big fan of Glennon and as I was reading Priscilla Harveys post I thought ok this is ok, until she mentioned another "famous" person having an "ideal" entry to substack and basically pointing Glennon to how well that person entered substack. That felt really condescending to me and very much coded way of saying you're wrong. All the "I still really like you" after writing this fell very flat and disengenuine to me.
Of course Priscilla should not receive hate for what she wrote. I appreciate your thoughtful reflection.
That’s a very fair point Jenny, I have to say I hadn’t thought of it like that, but I can see what you mean. Thank you for your comment!
Thanks for considering my point, I appreciate it.
Another thing that bothered me was the picture of her and Glennon. I absolutely know it was intended to show appreciation, but knowing Glennon s background with mental health and ED I didn't think it was a good idea.
This is a totally separate topic but I have been thinking a lot about celebrities and photos. I think when a fan gets a photo with a celebrity that there is a lot of potential to objectify the celebrity, especially if the person then posts the photo on social media. It's very transactional and solely benefits the non-celebrity.
This weekend I went to a literary festival and each book signing included a photo with the author which felt burdensome to the author. The performance to smile and put your arm around a perfect stranger. I declined the photo option for the sake of the author, and I wish we would stop expecting famous people to take photos. Again, a definite tangent there :) thank you for reading.
I was in the middle of writing my own note basically encouraging a growth mindset / “plenty of room for all” take. Glennon Doyle is not you or me or anyone else — we all have our own unique voices and expertise and the world needs each of us.
What really strikes me is that I have yet to see anyone whose take was “Glennon Doyle might bring a significant wave of new readers to Substack, and those people are likely to subscribe to other newsletters, too.” (Or create content of their own.)
I don’t point fingers at any one person for Glennon’s decision. Ultimately it was her choice, and I think it was a choice made in response to group dynamics, not one person. Still, I have a hard time seeing what’s happened as anything but an expression of scarcity mentality.
Absolutely agree and I talked about this too in a live I did with @claire Venus yesterday. In leaving we are all deprived of her audience of readers who might have become ours. She also felt compelled to explain herself and in doing so told about 200k people that she didn’t feel safe here and Substack wasn’t good for her mental health. That’s huge in terms of how some people will now see this platform and whether they choose to come here. Even at a strategic, individualist level, it was a dick move to make someone so influential feel unwelcome. On a human level it was unkind and a huge display of personal insecurity and as you say, scarcity mindset.
Thanks for saying this in a tone I don’t have because her insertion triggered a deep feeling of discomfort. But,I am not surprised she retreated, she tells women to retreat and cancel those that create discomfort as a basis for setting healthy boundaries. It’s her go to and it has created an entire culture of disengaged and performative white activists. I was not happy to see her bullied but I was happy to see women felt comfortable enough in these spaces to speak over fame and familiar to progress change.
I personally didn’t like the tone of her note. It felt very patronising and virtuous however sadly, it wasn’t the worst or most directly hostile thing I read and often the comments on people’s critical articles (some of which are now gone) were even worse.
I don’t think there was anything wrong with how she arrived. I believe her content would be have been great. I think her paywall was more about safety.
I think the whole thing proved that a lot of people have some thinking and work to do on what happens when they feel triggered by other people’s success.
I also think it’s interesting that out of all the big names who have arrived here, this happened to her.
I’m not at all surprised that her rollout met with this response and other famous writers didn’t. Doyle’s entire brand is empathy and authenticity and making people “feel seen” and I think she utterly failed to read her audience here.
I see it differently. I had no problem with anything she did. I was genuinely delighted to see her here.
“But I still think that there is perhaps a certain way that someone who signs up now and brings a huge following can do it in a thoughtful, aware, gentle way.” My question is: why? Why would she have to do that.
I also disagree, because I didn’t see her entrance as unthoughtful or unaware or rude. Not at all. That’s also so not Glennon. I don’t understand why women tell other women to stay small. Because that’s what this is.
Why not celebrate her success? If she can reach this level, we all can. That’s the way I see it.
I agree with you, Eleonora. I always aim to be thoughtful of others, but the quiet underlying message that it's not safe to be seen just as you are, big with bold expression, is something I am undoing. In the past, I would internalize this overarching message as, "see, it's not safe to be big." After a life of pushing myself down, I am relearning the strength to be seen authentically for who I am. I saw Glennon as a beautiful addition here. I didn't even recognize anything she did as "big" or "look at me," but rather, it's totally her. She hits record in authentic moments like driving in the car, and she expressed her joy of being here.
More than anything, I am reminded of the poem I hold so dear by Marianne Williamson: "Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure...We ask ourselves, Who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented, fabulous? Actually, who are you not to be? You are a child of God. Your playing small does not serve the world. There's nothing enlightened about shrinking so that other people won't feel insecure around you. We are all meant to shine, as children do. We were born to make manifest the glory of God that is within us." I find such profound encouragement and wisdom in her words. Let's keep charging forward and shining our light with "It is safe to be seen," humming softly in the background.
“And I’m wondering now, if the people who are attacking Priscilla Harvey for “bullying” Glennon off Substack are in fact behaving a little like bullies themselves?” I’ve had the same thought.
Very very well put and thoughtful, the nuance is very welcome 🤗
The fact that Priscilla talks about the "notes" side of the platform becoming incredibly reactive/social media-like in her post and the reactions to her post literally felt like a twitter war is incredibly ironic. Feels like a lot of people didn't even really read her post and jumped on a bandwagon, in a lot more aggressive, bully-like way. Also very ironic.
Completely, well said!
Thank you for the nuance in this. I believe this kind of reaction could save us from a lot of hate and problems at many subjects. You can still say what you believe without putting anyone down.
Totally ❤️
Beautifully said. I personally agreed with (and appreciated the kindness of) Priscilla’s note and hadn’t realized that piece was considered as part of the bullying. I really hope it wasn’t because it was a genuine exploration of what felt so off to so many. And while I can understand that plenty of people fell into a knee-jerk expression of their dismay at the energy in Glennon’s “I’ve arrived” announcement, I so appreciate folks like you and Priscilla taking the time to try to dig a little deeper.
Thank you Nancy, I appreciate your thoughtful comment!
My thoughts mirror yours. I didn't find Harvey particularly harsh, if anything she revealed herself as a genuine fan of Doyle's who may have felt her fandom taken for granted with the method of Doyle's arrival. I'm speculating about that part of it. I did have a bit of a who do you think you are reaction, though, when she prescribed how things should have gone down. Regardless, that stuff doesn't really matter. Doyle left because she felt unsafe. I wonder if that feeling had less to do with Harvey's post than with other messages she may have received. I imagine Doyle receives a lot of hate mail for being in a same sex marriage and supporting the cause of people whose sexuality and gender expression don't align with cultural norms. Again, pure speculation on my part.
Finally, Doyle is a sensitive person who puts herself out there anyway, the very definition of courageous. Her decision to quit suddenly could have been an impulsive one -- flight rather than fight was easier. It's fucking hard to be a celebrity any time but especially hard when your whole reason for fame is tied to vulnerability.
I actually hadn't heard of the controversy but it has popped up on me feed a lot today.
I'm really glad this was the first newsletter I chose to read on it because I think your take is really thoughtful and well put. Thank you for deciding to share this, and putting this out there!
This means a lot Philippa, thank you!
Really well said.
❤️
Thank you for this post. I appreciate the nuance. I was a distant observer to the Glennon Doyle Substack experience, much like I am Glennon as a whole. I knew who she was. I think I listened to a couple of her podcasts.
My thought when I read that she left Substack was, “Well, that escalated…tragically.” I mean the whole thing—the entrance, the response, the exit, the response. So again, I’m appreciative of your thoughts here.
I’m also grateful for the comments in response to this article. They were informing and helpful.
Agreed, Jeff. It’s the first time I’ve seen something like this happening on Substack (maybe I’ve been in a bit of a bubble).
Thank you for sharing your thoughts! Nobody should be bullying the people they're accusing of being bullies - that's just silly! Here's my take.
https://open.substack.com/pub/thekidlitmama/p/a-neurodivergent-take-on-the-glennon?r=20yu4w&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true
I appreciate this post. These are my reflections https://open.substack.com/pub/tracichildressedd/p/on-not-throwing-people-away?r=ejkoh&utm_medium=ios