No. My argument goes like this…. Medium used to curate on the basis of quality of content, some publications had bigger readerships than others, but good writing was elevated to the homepage wherever it was found. Editors would contact writers directly by e-mail.

At some point last year a decision was made to form ‘publications’. Writers were employed to run and edit publications. Given that Medium publications have a huge advantage over other publications, the regular writers and contributors have huge audiences — and little to no quality control. The writers have adapated their writing to the audience and simply write things that the audience want to read. The symbiosis has resulted in an echo chamber.

The result is, the quality of the articles has gone down. This was inevitable. Medium should be a meritocracy. GEN runs towards my natural lefty bias, I often agree with the sentiment of what is written, but that doesn’t make it intelligent writing worthy of heavy promotion.

That’s the point. ‘Medium’s mission is to deepen readers’ understanding of the world and to empower writers to share their best work and biggest ideas’ — if you think the biggest idea worth sharing that day was ‘Trump is Hitler’ and the Kafkatrap ‘if you don’t agree with me, then you’re a Nazi’ then we have very different ideas of what quality and insightful writing is. The fact that it has 26K claps suggests lots of people agree with the article — but this conditioning Medium to become a left-wing tabloid newspaper. You’ll see people unsubscribe from Medium entirely — I don’t follow GEN, and yet stories regularly appear on my homepage.

Whether or not anyone reads my publication or not is entirely up to them. I genuinely don’t care, I don’t promote it — and it’s a storage place for my writings, that’s all.