Aaron Severson recently had an extended back-and-forth with Ate Up With Motor commentator timmy (2021). The discussion ranged from the viability of V12 engines and the relative merits of 1950s automatic transmissions to the prospects of Packard surviving. It’s worth a read (start here).
The conversation reminded me of what I have long appreciated about Ate Up With Motor. Severson’s knowledge of the auto industry is vast, and he writes with an unusual degree of nuance. Severson also displays the humility to adjust his analysis when a new set of facts point him in a different direction. The latter is particularly important because all too much of U.S. automotive history amounts to little more than a rote repetition of “conventional wisdom” — no matter how questionable.
In reading Severson’s comments, I found myself wishing that he would return to regularly posting new articles at Ate Up With Motor. At the same time, I get why he has considered shutting down his website (2020a, 2020b). Even in the best of circumstances, self-publishing your own work can take a lot more time and money than writing for someone else. Paul Niedermeyer (2021) recently illustrated one of the many backshop challenges that small-scale publishers can face — the threat of being hacked.
Why don’t small-scale publishers just go freelance?
So why not avoid all of the hassles of publishing one’s own website by instead writing for other publications? One problem is that there are surprisingly few venues that have an interest in indepth and analytically provocative histories. The biggest commercial publications, such as Collectible Automobile and Hemmings, seem to prefer light reading for collectors.
In addition, my sense is that those who are drawn to developing their own websites tend to prize creative autonomy. In my case, freelance writing feels limiting because I also enjoy doing website design. In addition, I launched Indie Auto partly because much of what I wanted to produce didn’t fit into the format of existing publications. This is not just paranoia — a number of stories I have posted here were rejected for publication elsewhere.
Also see ‘SAH shows difficulties of creating a discussion board’
I may have a bias, but I think there is a place in the world for small-scale auto history websites. However, they are difficult enough to sustain that what you take for granted on the web today could very well be gone in a few years.
If the goal is to advance automotive history, I think we have a structural problem that needs fixing. For example, would we see more high-quality historical analysis being written if there were more easily accessible ways to get it published — and kept on the web?
Is Substack a useful model for auto history?
Substack is a fairly new initiative that gives writers the opportunity to produce their own websites without having to bother with all of the backshop tasks. In a way Substack is like a freebie WordPress blog, except that you have the option of charging readers a subscription price.
This is a useful service for those writers who either don’t have the skills to build their own website or want to focus largely on content development. Yet the writer maintains complete control of their work. Some authors are even making a good living from paid subscriptions.
I suspect that more than one auto history website would have done better financially if they could have worked through Substack to launch their website. That said, one limitation of the Substack model is that it is a for-profit business focused on generating subscription revenue. It doesn’t really care what happens to the content of websites that discontinue publication.
What if a nonprofit offered a Substack-type service?
As I mentioned in a story about Curbside Classic, the biggest weakness of entirely web-based auto history media outlets is that you can’t buy their content and store it on your bookshelf. So if a website goes offline, so goes all of its valuable historical analysis. In theory, you could access specific stories through the Wayback Machine Internet archives, but in my experience it isn’t comprehensive and reader friendly.
Also see ‘Preserving web-based automotive history is important’
Perhaps what we need is a home for discontinued content. One of the nonprofit auto history groups could be in the best position to take on such a project, such as the Society of Automotive Historians. And if they were going to get into the business of archiving content, why not go all the way and create a Substack-type service for the automotive field? Build in a subscription feature and auto history writers could more easily monetize their hard work. Which might lead to more high-quality writing.
I would consider tapping into such a service if it looked like it was well structured and sustainable.
Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.
RE:SOURCES
- Niedermeyer, Paul; 2021. “Security Update: Inactive Authors and Contributors Have Lost Posting Access – But You Can Readily Get it Back.” Curbside Classic. Posted June 14.
- Severson, Aaron; 2020a. “Whatever Happened to Ate Up With Motor?” Ate Up With Motor. Posted Jan. 10.
- ——; 2020b. “Update.” Ate Up With Motor. Posted Feb. 17.
- Timmy; 2021. Commentator in “Charge of the Light Brigade: The Last Stand of the Packard Motor Car Company.” Ate Up With Motor. Posted 7:43 p.m., June 7.
Be the first to comment