<rant>
If you write on Substack, you’ve probably noticed that posting to Twitter doesn’t really work. All that shows up is the URL. No image. Nothing to attract the reader.
Everywhere I look, people are blaming this on Twitter. But that’s nonsense.
This is purely a Substack problem, and I have no idea why they won’t fix it.
If you view the source of a Substack post, you’ll find something like this:
<meta data-preact-helmet name="twitter:image" content="
followed by the URL for an image. The correct code, which works everywhere, including Twitter, is this:
<meta property="og:image" content="
You can also use
<meta property="twitter:image" content="
but it seems silly to have to have two different meta tags when one will do.
This is the easiest thing in the world to fix. And it irks me that they’re effectively suppressing the reach of Substack authors on Twitter by not doing so.
</rant>
Sorry, but that’s been bugging me for a while. It actually irritates me more when I’m trying to share someone else’s post to Twitter, because if it’s mine, I can at least add an image myself.
Anyway.
<schnorr>
It’s the High Holidays, so I’d like to make a High Holidays appeal. I’ve been out of work since March. And a paid subscription here is not expensive at all. I prefer not to hide my posts behind a paywall, and just “rely on the kindness of strangers”, but I hope you’ll consider getting a paid subscription. It’s $8 a month, of which I get $6.61. It’s not a lot, but if a bunch of people do it, it could make a difference for me.
</schnorr>
What is Twitter's er...X's fault is the impressions your post receives. When they see a post that originates on a competing platform, they do not feel obligated to promote or help in any way. That probably goes the other way too, though it seems to a lesser extent.