By Matt Wolfbridge
Everyone, everywhere knows journalism is in the deepest crisis of our lifetimes. The fourth estate is besieged from all angles. Social networks censor and throttle. Billionaires purchase, plunder, and install politically aligned puppet editors.
In early 2026, robber-baron Jeff Bezos ripped the guts out of The Washington Post, with the sports and books verticals being the most notable casualties. More recently, CNN-owner Warner Bros.-Discovery has signaled they may rekindle their negotiations with Paramount-Skydance, a corporation helmed by the Trump-aligned billionaire who installed “heterodox” Bari Weiss as editor-in-chief of CBS.
And if it’s not billionaires purchasing, plundering, and installing politically aligned puppet editors, it’s social networks (also owned by billionaires) reducing reach, engaging in alleged censorship, or creating mecha Hitler.
Despite it all, journalists continue their essential work. But what was once an industry of institutions is now an industry of a hundred thousand disparate newsletters all scrambling for the same $5 subscription fees.
Most people in, or adjacent to, the industry see apocalypse.
Lex Roman sees opportunity.
Lex Roman is a digital marketing expert who got their start supercharging audience and revenue growth for nascent tech companies and eventually moved up to larger entities like Nissan, Toyota, and Macy’s. But they’ve since pivoted to solo entrepreneurship as it relates to independent publishing, running the newsletter Revenue Rulebreaker to help individual creatives and other small-scale online operations reach profitability (editorial disclosure: I am a subscriber).
Now, don’t judge me too harshly, but as the founder of Typebar Magazine I just so happen to be a media entrepreneur. Shocking, I know. But digital media marketing tactics are essential knowledge to the artistic project of Typebar Magazine; we can’t pay writers if we have no income! I’m also the kind of insufferable nerd who genuinely enjoys thinking about open rates, conversions, referral sources, etc.
But what really impressed me about Roman was their response to a Talking Points Memo essay from last fall titled Patron-Supported Journalism Can’t Be the Future of News. The piece, which correctly maligns the state of contemporary journalism, didn’t produce the sense of overwhelming dread and pity in Roman that it did in most others online. Like I said, Roman sees opportunity where others see apocalypse.
What I find particularly striking is Roman’s doggedness in finding solutions. In an era where journalism has been torched down, it’s easy to say “everything is ashes” and much harder to say “here’s how we rebuild.” Is something as seemingly trivial as better marketing the foundation of that rebuilding strategy?
My conversation with Lex Roman is below, and has been lightly edited for clarity.
Typebar Magazine: I think a lot of people are gonna balk at the headline (which IMHO is the sign of a job well done hah hah). So let’s discuss our terms. How do you define “marketing” as it relates to the business of writing text online? And why do you think it’s so necessary?
Lex Roman: Marketing is really just making people aware of what you’re doing. Whether you’re throwing your kid’s birthday party or launching a multimillion dollar software brand, you need people to know what you’re up to. The same is true for writers. In the past, some writers could rely on publishers to promote their work but that era is over now. Authors, journalists, essayists, poets, even screenwriters are all waking up to the fact that they must market or become irrelevant. A select few may luck in[to] viral sharability where their readers market for them, but that is exceedingly rare and not usually sufficient to build a career off. Most of us need to bring attention to our work. And not just to your work, but to your revenue streams. Pre-order my book. Become a paid subscriber. Buy an event ticket. You’ve got to promote every part of what you’re doing and I know that premise is exhausting but I don’t see an alternative. If you’re not already getting free promo, you will need to do it yourself.
I would argue that this “everyone has to be a marketer” dilemma is affecting everyone, not just writers. Even jobseekers have to market themselves on LinkedIn or at networking events. It’s a skill that is required for the future so it’s best to get comfortable with it and find a way to promote that feels at least mildly rewarding to you.
TBM: Last fall you took intellectual umbrage with a Talking Points Memo article by Ana Marie Cox titled Patron-Supported Journalism Can’t Be the Future of News. The piece, which maligned the growth of individual newsletter operations likening them to “a privatized patchwork of tip jars,” generated a lot of discussion on Bluesky, with many praising the essay though it did have some others like media industry journalist Simon Owens disagreeing.
I think you’d agree that the journalism industry and the writing industry more broadly have collapsed almost entirely, at least as far as institutions and the ability to earn a full-time living go. At the time of this interview, it’s been one week since Jeff Bezos desecrated The Washington Post with some of the most dispiriting layoffs I’ve seen and I’ve been in the industry for 15 years. Cox isn’t wrong about the industry being shattered into thousands of individual newsletters or blogs. But what specific criticisms did you have about the rest of Cox’s conclusions?
LR: My main issue with Cox’s piece is that because her Substack didn’t work, the entire model of reader subscriber-backed indie publishing is failing. It’s not. It’s actually working exceptionally well for those who take a real run at it (which Cox, in her piece, admits she did not.) I started tracking the success of reader-funded journalists in this spreadsheet and I’ve documented several case studies in depth, not just for worker-owned collectives but for solo writers too. Most of those live at Project C now.
Cox conflates the failure of Substack with the failure of the paid subscription model. The real issue is that writers have been sold a lie by platforms like Substack and Patreon that they can just produce great work and the revenue will follow. That was always glossy tech bullshit and I’m sorry so many writers and journalists fell for it. What I see happening from the hundreds of journalists I’ve worked with over the last two years is that they are simply not promoting their paid subscription properly. It’s a simple course correction and if you learn how to promote your revenue streams as writers like Max Read, Caitlin Dewey, Alan Sepinwall, Ty Burr, Matt Brown, Alissa Walker and countless others have, you can make a living on your own with reader support. No one is pretending it is going to single-handedly save news or that it’s the right move for every writer or journalist. But just because you halfassed a Substack doesn’t mean you need to tear down what is a viable path forward for those willing to learn it. Writers already have the worst scarcity and hopelessness I’ve ever seen from early stage entrepreneurs. We don’t need more doom and gloom from within.
The reader-funded model is creating and sustaining careers for hundreds of journalists who would not have jobs otherwise. I wish journalists like Cox would take note of their success and ask what they’re doing right rather than blow up one of the very, very few options writers have to stay employed in 2026.
TBM: In early February, science fiction author Licoln Michel published an essay in his newsletter Counter Craft concluding literature needed to adopt a “punk rock mindset.” That is, in his words: “It is DIY or die. We have to do this ourselves. We need to build our networks, fund what we can if we have the resources...”
Towards the end, Michel reminds the reader that they, too, can create something from scratch. “You can start a small press with limited funds. You can create a book review website or host a reading series. And if you do have institutional connections, you can use them. E.g., anyone who is working for a university-funded literary magazine could do literature a real benefit by adding book reviews and paying the reviewers.”
From reading your newsletter, it seems like you are very much a practitioner of this punk rock ethos. Why do you think it has taken journalism and literature so long to adopt it? And why do you think there seems to be this kind of knee-jerk opposition to it at times?
LR: I am on the same wavelength as Lincoln Michel for sure. The job market—in the United States at least—is abysmal. Entrepreneurship, whether or not you claim that title, is the way to freedom. Not everyone is up for that. Some people still want to be told what to do at a job or even by a publisher. They just want to do a single function like write stories. But those options are dwindling quickly and if you want to define your own career, you’re going to also have to build your own career.
For journalists and writers, what I’ve come to learn is that they were taught to hate business and they were shielded from what that entailed. As a result, they didn’t learn any necessary skills related to business and they’re up against a big learning curve. I think they’re also resentful that they have to learn it when they were told ten or twenty years ago to just focus on their craft.
To that I say, join the fucking club. Filmmakers, graphic designers, artists, dancers, musicians and even us marketers are all having to learn how to promote ourselves and get our work seen in the modern era. It’s affecting everyone, not just you, and it’s long past time to come to terms with that and focus on how you can make the journey fun for you. There are tons of beacons of hope in the entrepreneurship space to follow for inspiration like Michelle Jackson of Creators Getting Paid, Amelia Hruby of Off the Grid, Lucy Werner of Hype Yourself and Seth Werkheiser of Social Media Escape Club.
TBM: For me, I think the main argument and the most significant barrier, is that institutions are able to command resources that can protect writers (a legal team, namely). A team of qualified lawyers is much harder to bootstrap, no? Obviously legal protection is a little less important for literary criticism (though still important of course) compared to something like journalism where it’s absolutely vital. How can optimizing email marketing flows possibly replace this?
There are solutions for legal advice—for example, my lawyers charge $125/mo for unlimited advising calls and contract reviews which is pretty accessible to a solo operator or small team. There are also solutions for liability coverage for journalists. Annalyn Kurtz got some quotes for a Columbia Journalism Review piece and at the high end, it was about $1000/year (or $83/mo). Journalists will balk at these prices, but this is just [the] cost of doing business stuff, and honestly pretty low compared to what the rest of us are paying for insurance. All of us have to budget for legal, accounting, healthcare and other aspects of our professional work. It’s part of being self-employed.
Email marketing doesn’t replace this. Email marketing drives the revenue you need to cover these expenses.
TBM: To me, it seems like we’re seeing a redefinition of what it means to be a journalist. We saw this back about 15-20 years ago when social media was getting popular. Suddenly your ability to make yourself heard on Twitter or elsewhere became vital (it’s not a coincidence that the biggest names on Substack were often the biggest names on pre-Musk Twitter) and after a few more years, social media knowledge and expertise became part of the core skillset. What essentials from the marketing realm do you think journalism aspirants and established names alike should master?
LR: What journalists need to master immediately is figuring out how to reach their audience across channels. Part of the downfall of being a star on Twitter or Substack is that, if that channel goes away (as many argue Twitter did), you can’t recoup that audience quickly because you were a one trick pony only good at one medium. Journalists need to learn how to experiment and master multiple channels. At least three. And they do not need to be social media. You could join the speaking circuit. Guest on podcasts. Cross-promote with other writers. Flyer your neighborhood. There’s hundreds of ways to find your potential base.
I’d also say the secret to being good at building and monetizing an audience in 2026 is what audience engagement teams inside newsrooms have been hammering on for years: build a community. Writers love to broadcast one sided into the ether, but if you get to know your fans, engage them through events, comments, livestreams, replies, you will build a loyal audience that will migrate with you through platform and career changes. Most importantly, they will pay you, share your work and stay longer. It doesn’t take much to achieve this relationship and you’ll also learn where your people are coming from which will inform where you invest your marketing efforts.
If this premise sounds overwhelming to you, I highly recommend joining a peer community related to marketing or entrepreneurship. You can join something marketing focused like Lucy’s Hype Yourself or Seth’s Social Media Escape Club or you can just band together with other authors to share challenges and wins. There’s lots of these communities out there. They will make building your writing business much more fun for you and they will keep you in the game longer.
Matt Wolfbridge is the founder and editor of Typebar Magazine.