Substack vs Your Own Website:
What Are You Actually Building?
Lately, I’ve seen a lot of conversations circling around Substack — whether it’s “worth it,” whether it replaces a website, and whether it’s the smartest place to publish long-form content.
And I keep coming back to the same quiet question beneath all of it:
What are you actually building?
Because this isn’t really about Substack versus WordPress. It’s about ownership, longevity, and where you want your work to live over time.
Why Substack Is So Appealing
Substack is attractive for very real reasons.
It’s simple.
It removes friction.
It lets you write and send emails without thinking about tech, SEO, or structure. And now, it offers discovery through follows, notes, and conversations built into the platform.
If your primary goal is writing — especially gated, long-form content delivered through email — Substack can feel like a relief.
No setup. No decisions. Just publish.
That ease is the point.
What Substack Actually Is
Substack started as a newsletter tool.
It’s now something else entirely.
Today, Substack functions more like a social publishing platform:
- You follow writers
- You engage in threads
- Content lives inside a feed
- Visibility is shaped by interaction
That shift has to be considered.
Because the moment a platform becomes social, the rules subtly change.
When a Platform Becomes Social, So Does the Pressure
Social platforms reward:
- consistency
- engagement
- immediacy
- reaction
Not necessarily depth or longevity. And certainly not quiet relevance.
That doesn’t make Substack bad, but it does change the agreement you’re entering into.
The more social Substack becomes, the more your work is shaped by what performs now, not what lasts.
And for some creators, that’s energizing.
For others, it’s exhausting.
Neither is wrong.. but they are different paths for sure.
The Question Most People Skip
Here’s the part I think we need to be more honest about:
When you publish on Substack, you’re building on someone else’s land.
You don’t control the platform.
You don’t control discoverability rules.
You don’t control how content is surfaced, throttled, or prioritized in the future.
If Substack shifts direction — or attention shifts elsewhere — your work doesn’t move with you cleanly.
So the real question becomes:
Is that a trade-off you’re comfortable with?
What a Website Actually Gives You
Your website isn’t just a place to post content.
It’s a long-term digital asset.
On your own site:
- Your writing compounds over time
- Posts can rank for years
- Content supports your services, offers, and ideas
- You control structure, internal linking, and context
- Your work exists outside of feeds and algorithms
There’s no follower count.
No pressure to perform.
No urgency baked into the system.
Your content is there to be found when someone is looking — not when a platform decides to surface it.
You Can Still Create Long-Form, Gated Content on Your Own Site
This is an important point that often gets missed.
You don’t need Substack to:
- publish long-form writing
- create paid or gated content
- build an email list
- nurture depth over time
You can do all of that on your own website — without giving up ownership.
Substack makes it easier.
Your website makes it lasting.
So… Which One Should You Choose?
This isn’t a “one or the other” answer.
It’s about hierarchy.
If you want:
- speed
- simplicity
- built-in conversation
Substack can be a powerful distribution layer.
If you want:
- search visibility
- authority
- a long-term business asset
Your website should be your foundation.
Social platforms come and go.
Ownership doesn’t.
A Note on Cross-Posting (and What It Means)
Cross-posting simply means publishing the same piece of content in more than one place.
For example, you might write an essay on your website, then share that same piece — or a version of it — on platforms like Substack, Medium, or social channels so it reaches more people.
On the surface, it sounds efficient. One piece of content, multiple places.
But how you cross-post — and which platform you treat as the original source — makes all the difference.
When Cross-Posting Makes Sense
Cross-posting isn’t inherently a bad idea.
In fact, done intentionally, it can be a smart way to extend the life of good content, especially if you’re clear about where that content lives.
The key difference is direction.
When your website is the source and other platforms are distribution, cross-posting becomes amplification, not dilution. Your work still has a home. Everything else simply points back to it.
Where people tend to run into trouble is when the platform becomes the archive. When the original disappears into feeds, timelines, or apps you don’t control, the long-term value quietly erodes.
Cross-posting works best when:
- your site remains the original publication
- syndicated versions clearly reference the source
- excerpts or reframed versions lead back to the full piece
- platforms are treated as doorways, not containers
In other words, cross-posting should help your content travel — not relocate.
If you enjoy writing on platforms like Substack, Medium, or social channels, those can be powerful places to start conversations. Just make sure the work you care about most has a permanent home you own.
That distinction matters more over time than most people realize.
A Final Thought
There’s no wrong choice here, only conscious ones.
Just be clear about what you’re building for, and where you want that work to live five years from now.
Social platforms reward relevance now.
Websites reward relevance over time.
And knowing the difference is the real strategy.
A Couple Podcast Episodes You Might Enjoy…
If you’re nodding along to this, I’ve talked about these ideas more openly on the podcast — especially why I care so much about content that keeps working long after it’s published: