2 new signs Medium fixed the algorithm and 3 more tweaks I’d make
It’s starting to feel a bit more like the good ol’ days on Medium — and that’s a very positive thing indeed.
Ever since the site re-jigged the Medium Partner Program back in August, I’d heard nothing but complaints from the site’s top writers.
I personally saw an overnight drop of 70% in earnings, and I was constantly running into other high quality, long-form writers in the comments saying they’d been wrecked by the new system and were thinking of jumping ship.
The main problem was that by drastically reducing the amount it gave for read time in favor of paying for engagement (specifically comments and new follows), Medium had effectively killed off writers’ back catalogs of stories.
And for people who spent years building those back catalogs (I have close to 300 posts in just over a year, for example), it was absolutely crushing.
I also predicted that the moves would result in massive pay bumps for short, junky content at the expense of the quality writing Medium was trying to incentivize.
And that’s exactly what happened.
Worse, engagement hackers fraudulently gamed the system and attempted to siphon gobs of money from legit contributors before Medium caught on to the scheme.
Yes, things got really dark around here indeed.
But something has changed in the past week or so.
2 signs Medium has fixed the algorithm
Specifically, I’ve seen 2 promising signs that Medium is starting to fix the algorithm.
First off, my revenue per mille (RPM, or revenue per 1,000 view) has started creeping back toward the previous numbers.
Prior to the changes, my RPM was about $45-$50.
After the changes, it went down to close to $15.
Over the past week, it’s been back to around $30.
Still not ideal, but I’m hoping the trend continues in this direction.
The second sign is that story formats I used to publish under the old system and that were beloved by readers are starting to generate tons of views again.
After the August changes, my work would die a quick death if it even took off in the first place.
3 tweaks I’d still make
Although I’m extremely pleased that Medium seems to be coming around to supporting its legitimate writers again, I think the site could make further improvements in 3 ways that would ultimately help it in the long term.
Fix 1: Kill the Boost
I’ve never been shy about the fact that I’m no fan of the Boost system.
I find it too subjective and esoteric to be effective.
I’m all about the K.I.S.S. Method: Keep it Simple, Stupid.
I dislike that hand-selected humans — with all their biases and subjectivity — are deciding who gets an earnings acceleration from Boosted stories.
When I worked in newspapers, one of the most revealing things was the arrival of web stats.
All of a sudden, you could see what editors thought people were reading versus what they were actually reading.
Putting so much power in the hands of Boosters as the arbiters of good taste feels a bit elitist to me.
One of the coolest things about Medium was that it paid a fair wage to truly independent writers.
The Boost has changed that somewhat, requiring writers to jump through hand-selected editors’ hoops to have any prayer of making good money.
I’d love to see Medium go pedal down on a pure YouTube model.
Every day — independent of any effort on my part — YouTube puts my videos in front of people who would likely want to see them.
If a lot of people like my videos, they have the potential to go viral.
The best measure of the value of writing is the time people spend reading it.
Fix 2: Stop paying nominators
This one is going to be quick.
The other reason I don’t like the Boost system is that it seems expensive.
Medium can pay nominators hundreds of dollars per month to put stories up for possible Boosts.
Paying nominators takes money away from the people who do the actual real work around here: the writers.
This is an extension of the Boost program and should be done away with if you ask me.
But what to do with that money instead?
Fix 3: Bring back the referral program
The referral program was actually genius.
In my opinion, it would have been a Substack killer in the long run.
Both platforms gave you a share of money from paying subscribers, but Medium also gives you access to a massive built-in audience that has the potential to discover and pay you via reads.
The referral program here — which gave you half the revenue if you could bring in subs from the outside — really incentivized off-platform work to drive traffic to Medium too.
In fact, you’d be shocked at how many people tell me in the comments that they found me here via my YouTube channel.
I was actually leveraging Substack to direct readers here in the past, but there’s no longer much incentive to do so.
The right direction
The 80/20 principle applies to most things in life, and I’d guess it does to Medium too.
The vast number of views and reads will be produced by a small number of writers.
By hurting those writers the most in the new MPP, I think Medium was playing a dangerous game. Many talked about leaving.
I’m so happy to see that things seem to be turning around because I only want the best for Medium.
I adore this platform, and I’m so happy it’s starting to make sense to keep writing here again.
Publish Every Day project update: Day 14
I’m doing an experiment to see if I can make enough cash to retire from commuter life within 1 year by publishing every day on multiple platforms and investing my earnings.
How much I need to retire comfortably: $250 CAD per day
What I earned on Day 14: $51.47 (writing), $1.29 (YouTube) — $52.76 total
Progress chart:
What I published yesterday:
My trending stories:
3 super healthy habits that keep Victoria Beckham fit as hell at 49
Mark Cuban perfectly explained why most people are depressed at work
1 strong new sign I saw this weekend that society is shunning alcohol
My most popular stories: