For a special Labor Day edition of the Sunday roundup, I’ve written some personal thoughts on journalism, polling, forecasting, and the value of staying off algorithmic social media in 2026.
I go all the way back to my first lesson about Elliot G Morris, changing my perception of what it means to be a independent journalist, pro democracy institution when I saw an interview between he and Paul Krugmam. Mentally I said who in the fuck is this brave brilliant human that’s going to change the course of history. Thank you, Elliot.
A good way to avoid the algorithm on Twitter, X, and other social media is to choose Following, not For You. Then what you see if what you have chosen. I also use Twitter lists to filter out noise, whether lists I created on my own or reliable ones like from Josh Marshall.
Loved today's posts--and read every one without resorting to a beverage--adult or otherwise. Your honesty and transparency have built trust with your subscribers. And the fact that you listen to subscriber suggestions--for polling questions, for example--goes a long way on the credibility scale. Thanks! Look forward to both your data lessons and your life lessons.
Found this article fascinating and appreciate the tips on implementing social media guardrails. I appreciate your work and am proud to be a paying subscriber.
"Pew: 67% of Republicans call themselves “working class,” compared with 55% of Democrats — and the gap holds up even after controlling for income, education and occupation."
As a firm believer in knowing who the opposing team really is, this makes me curious. What does calling yourself working class give Republicans. Something is driving it.
Might be interesting to ask about in a future poll.
All on point and informative. I really wish more people understood what a dreadful use of time and source of info x is. You made that point so well where my concerns were more intuitive than data driven.
I love this site. The data driven analysis is superb and I feel like Elliott is someone I know. It feels personal while also being informative and interesting. It is a go-to site for me.
I am not a professional data guy, but I sure have found value in being a paid subscriber - for all the reasons you've listed. I canceled my subscriptions to legacy media and turned off the TV years ago, but I certainly depend on my SubStack writers for their insights and experience. Keep up the great job!
As is true elsewhere, it’s one thing to have theories about what works and quite another to be able to back it up. Elliot and his colleagues clearly back it up with SIN. Seems to me that too many pollsters as well as news media organizations feel they must two-sides every issue in a feeble and annoying effort to appear impartial and non-partisan but that inevitably prevents them from providing the unvarnished truth. I appreciate very much Elliot telling it like it is, especially when the news is encouraging, but even when it’s not.
Who else takes the day off in order to honor workers, and also takes time off for paternity leave, but nonetheless remains so industrious as to provide quality and voluminous content for his patrons? Probably don’t need a poll to answer that one.
I love “SIN”! I feel like I am ahead of the changes in the political “current”, because I subscribe. The fact that HCR references your work is a huge endorsement to me. Keep up the good work.
The work and dedication you have to this product is evident. It does reflect your values. That is why I feel connected to your work and find it meaningful. While you alluded to it, I’ll just call out the transparency of your work as a major feature. You are the ‘real deal’. That’s why I invest in your work. So, well done. 👍
I think another thing to add about why SIN is growing is because it's a great value proposition relative to the kinds of content that other creators want to make. I think a lot of writers are infatuated by the idea of being a sort of public intellectual that pontificates on a wide range of issues. But very few writers are able to do that. It takes a lot of intellectual discipline take ridiculous and stupid ideas seriously and write about them responsibly. So you end up with a LOT of bad takes with poor reasoning and shallow evidence (or outright rants masquerading as discourse). I used to subscribe to such substacks (Nate, Noah Smith, etc). But you have to wade through a lot of bad takes before you read something that is worth the money you're paying (Noah Smith's The Elite Overproduction Hypothesis is still one of the best opinion pieces I've ever read).
I think the strenght of SIN and the substacks I actually pay for is that I know what I'm getting week in and week out. The narrow focus kinda forces consistency. To Taylor Lorenz's point, I subscribe to the "jack of all trades" opinion writing just to get a taste of different perspectives, but I would never pay for them.
I was late to becoming a paid subscriber but, man, am I pleased to be supporting GEM.
I don’t know how many readers will finish this whole post - but I wish it could be some kind of mandatory reading! I really relate to this notion of not non-partisan fact-based truth-telling.
Nate Silver lost me when his book went from quoting Paul Meehl (giant of mid-20th century psychology) and other advocates of using base rate information to advocating using something akin to prediction markets to produce public policy. He seemed to get lazier and lazier and more willing to give poorly thought through opinions.
Having had to aggregate datasets in my early days, I can confirm that it easily takes a lot of time and labor.
You will always have a niche because journalists all seem to love talking about polls while admitting they're not good at math.
Elliott, your transparency is both admirable and strategically smart. Thank you.
I go all the way back to my first lesson about Elliot G Morris, changing my perception of what it means to be a independent journalist, pro democracy institution when I saw an interview between he and Paul Krugmam. Mentally I said who in the fuck is this brave brilliant human that’s going to change the course of history. Thank you, Elliot.
That interview with Paul Krugman was also where I became aware of G. Elliott Morris and his work.
A good way to avoid the algorithm on Twitter, X, and other social media is to choose Following, not For You. Then what you see if what you have chosen. I also use Twitter lists to filter out noise, whether lists I created on my own or reliable ones like from Josh Marshall.
Loved today's posts--and read every one without resorting to a beverage--adult or otherwise. Your honesty and transparency have built trust with your subscribers. And the fact that you listen to subscriber suggestions--for polling questions, for example--goes a long way on the credibility scale. Thanks! Look forward to both your data lessons and your life lessons.
Found this article fascinating and appreciate the tips on implementing social media guardrails. I appreciate your work and am proud to be a paying subscriber.
"Pew: 67% of Republicans call themselves “working class,” compared with 55% of Democrats — and the gap holds up even after controlling for income, education and occupation."
As a firm believer in knowing who the opposing team really is, this makes me curious. What does calling yourself working class give Republicans. Something is driving it.
Might be interesting to ask about in a future poll.
All on point and informative. I really wish more people understood what a dreadful use of time and source of info x is. You made that point so well where my concerns were more intuitive than data driven.
I love this site. The data driven analysis is superb and I feel like Elliott is someone I know. It feels personal while also being informative and interesting. It is a go-to site for me.
I am not a professional data guy, but I sure have found value in being a paid subscriber - for all the reasons you've listed. I canceled my subscriptions to legacy media and turned off the TV years ago, but I certainly depend on my SubStack writers for their insights and experience. Keep up the great job!
As is true elsewhere, it’s one thing to have theories about what works and quite another to be able to back it up. Elliot and his colleagues clearly back it up with SIN. Seems to me that too many pollsters as well as news media organizations feel they must two-sides every issue in a feeble and annoying effort to appear impartial and non-partisan but that inevitably prevents them from providing the unvarnished truth. I appreciate very much Elliot telling it like it is, especially when the news is encouraging, but even when it’s not.
Who else takes the day off in order to honor workers, and also takes time off for paternity leave, but nonetheless remains so industrious as to provide quality and voluminous content for his patrons? Probably don’t need a poll to answer that one.
I love “SIN”! I feel like I am ahead of the changes in the political “current”, because I subscribe. The fact that HCR references your work is a huge endorsement to me. Keep up the good work.
The work and dedication you have to this product is evident. It does reflect your values. That is why I feel connected to your work and find it meaningful. While you alluded to it, I’ll just call out the transparency of your work as a major feature. You are the ‘real deal’. That’s why I invest in your work. So, well done. 👍
Hey! Longtime subscriber, first time commenter.
I think another thing to add about why SIN is growing is because it's a great value proposition relative to the kinds of content that other creators want to make. I think a lot of writers are infatuated by the idea of being a sort of public intellectual that pontificates on a wide range of issues. But very few writers are able to do that. It takes a lot of intellectual discipline take ridiculous and stupid ideas seriously and write about them responsibly. So you end up with a LOT of bad takes with poor reasoning and shallow evidence (or outright rants masquerading as discourse). I used to subscribe to such substacks (Nate, Noah Smith, etc). But you have to wade through a lot of bad takes before you read something that is worth the money you're paying (Noah Smith's The Elite Overproduction Hypothesis is still one of the best opinion pieces I've ever read).
I think the strenght of SIN and the substacks I actually pay for is that I know what I'm getting week in and week out. The narrow focus kinda forces consistency. To Taylor Lorenz's point, I subscribe to the "jack of all trades" opinion writing just to get a taste of different perspectives, but I would never pay for them.
Thanks, C.M.! you should comment more!
Right on, Elliott (so to speak)!
I was late to becoming a paid subscriber but, man, am I pleased to be supporting GEM.
I don’t know how many readers will finish this whole post - but I wish it could be some kind of mandatory reading! I really relate to this notion of not non-partisan fact-based truth-telling.
My limited $s go to Krugman and Morris.
Thanks John. Glad to have you here!
Nate Silver lost me when his book went from quoting Paul Meehl (giant of mid-20th century psychology) and other advocates of using base rate information to advocating using something akin to prediction markets to produce public policy. He seemed to get lazier and lazier and more willing to give poorly thought through opinions.
Having had to aggregate datasets in my early days, I can confirm that it easily takes a lot of time and labor.
You will always have a niche because journalists all seem to love talking about polls while admitting they're not good at math.