Personally , I am happy to read whatever the author feels like putting in front of me . It is entirely my choice to subscribe , my choice to read to the end or not . I see absolutely no reason why any author should tailor their writing on Substack to attempt to keep everybody happy . Fiona , love your writing , it is informative , entertaining and pretty erudite so just keep going as you are
I've never once thought 'Fiona is wittering on'. I love your posts and I do think one of the pleasures of writing on Substack is being able to be as succinct or wordy as one likes.
The chatty friendly discursive informative and longer form of writing is the USP of Friday 5.Story telling will never go out of fashion,especially if you invite people into the story- which you do!
This is about pleasure; food and drink are best not rushed, its your very particuar voice we get with your enthusiastic, chatty and insightful style. With reading we can always jump. Its youtube and other content makers that need editing!
I guess you are coming to this as a seasoned journalist Fiona. So even your most rambling text will be tighter and more focused than the work of someone who never learned the discipline of writing concisely.
My own take is that yes, it's nice to be able to publish a deep dive on Substack without agonising to squeeze it into 1,000 words. But I always check my wordcount, and if I see it getting anywhere near to 2,000 then I'll take a hatchet and trim it back.
Readers only have so much time and attention span after all. I remember an experienced wine blogger once dishing out a shocking truth: "That brilliant last line you spent hours crafting? No-one will read it, because no-one gets to the end any more".
That kind of editing has always struck me as problematic. If one has to rip out all the fun stuff to get it to fit, is that really serving the reader well?
I enjoy your writing.... I wouldn't subscribe if I didn't.....I sometimes skip stuff that just doesn't apply because I don't live in the UK, but I realise I'm in the minority and don't expect you to adjust to that 😜. I really enjoy your travel tales and recs for places to stay etc..
I only pay subscription on a v few substacks. That’s because those always add something to my knowledge or thoughts and have enough substance. I enjoy your writing and love the range of topics
I like the current length of the post. The essence of what your feelings are about a topic is the most important aspect to me and delivered in your humorous personalised style with an edge of being controversial and cheeky.
You are at the top of your profession with knowledge about so many different aspects of food and wine that the more you tap into those areas the more chance there is of getting a well rounded, balanced view of the topic.
I can get a little spooked when a short-form writer switches to something longer (and vice-versa actually), so think consistency of expectation is one thing. But good writing/useful information, short or long, always wins out.
(Oh, and I think 1 free recommendation of the 5 each week to non-subscribers is a very clever and appealing offer.)
I think your newsletters are just the right length, Fiona. As you say, when there are a lot of wines to write about, you need a chunk of wordage for each one. You've caused me to think about my own newsletters... I know they've been too long on occasion – much as I try to keep my former chief sub-editor Les's words in my brain ('Kāren: do you mind if I cut that paragraph?' ...Not always that politely!). It's particularly tricky when you're writing a guide to a destination and there's a long list of excellent recommendations to cover. I'm a big fan of the hard edit two days after writing, but that's not always practical when time is short.
The thing is, Substack is designed as long form. I think that recognises that some of us like more than just headlines. It’s a self conscious antidote to much on my phone. Don’t stop writing!
I do struggle to self edit and I go off on indulgent tangents. I’m trying to restrain myself more and keep things to 1200 words as a target, but maybe others would find that insufferable!
I think it depends, as others have said, on the subject matter. This post which was on a single subject was quite easy to keep to 600 odd words. If there's a big supermarket wine round up or a travel guide it can easily hit 1500 so 1200 seems quite reasonable.
I do think it's probably good practice though - and this applies to me as much as it does to you or any other author - to read through and cut out any excessive padding!
Pieces should be as long as they need to be for you to say what you want to say. I love reading your work so I'm happy with whatever you choose to do. It's YOUR substack after all so your choice I'd say.
I really enjoy your writing and I do feel like a friend because your writing is so personal and you let your readers inside your world. So I’m happy with the current length and find the content both informative and interesting. I like the relaxed style as well.
I do enjoy reading your posts and like your chatty style … I confess to feeling sometimes overwhelmed and then a bit guilty at not having enough hours in the day to read all the posts I feel I should ( esp as I am paying for more than I read ! ) .. and reading usually on my phone is not helping ! I try to keep my own posts pretty snappy but I usually just have a little bit of food history to share …
I enjoy your comments. They are written with good humour and always insightful. The wine reviews are mostly useful but I shop in majestic and Waitrose and smaller merchants like Swig. I don’t shop in aldi,Lidl etc so not always so useful, to me anyway.
Maybe separating the restaurants and cookbooks from the wine reviews and have two sets of reviews. The Wine matching which was why I subscribed in the first place, I always found useful, but that’s a separate payment now as well so I go back to my copy of the Wine Dine dictionary if I’m stuck. Enough rambling from me, keep up the great work.
Thanks Mike. The idea of the Friday 5 was that each week there would be something for everyone so I'd be reluctant to hive off restaurants but cookbooks, I think, are a special case and do have their own section
I do apologise for charging for Matching Food & Wine. It was really either that or give up. I find it outrageous how AI just lifts content. But you're in good hands with the Wine Dine Dictionary
Personally , I am happy to read whatever the author feels like putting in front of me . It is entirely my choice to subscribe , my choice to read to the end or not . I see absolutely no reason why any author should tailor their writing on Substack to attempt to keep everybody happy . Fiona , love your writing , it is informative , entertaining and pretty erudite so just keep going as you are
Thanks Johnnie! Not sure I've ever been called erudite before but I'll take it!
I've never once thought 'Fiona is wittering on'. I love your posts and I do think one of the pleasures of writing on Substack is being able to be as succinct or wordy as one likes.
High praise, India, thankyou! And yes, not being edited has its upside too.
The chatty friendly discursive informative and longer form of writing is the USP of Friday 5.Story telling will never go out of fashion,especially if you invite people into the story- which you do!
And you consistently turn up, Paul, which I really appreciate!
This is about pleasure; food and drink are best not rushed, its your very particuar voice we get with your enthusiastic, chatty and insightful style. With reading we can always jump. Its youtube and other content makers that need editing!
Thanks, John. And yes it is (about pleasure)!
I guess you are coming to this as a seasoned journalist Fiona. So even your most rambling text will be tighter and more focused than the work of someone who never learned the discipline of writing concisely.
My own take is that yes, it's nice to be able to publish a deep dive on Substack without agonising to squeeze it into 1,000 words. But I always check my wordcount, and if I see it getting anywhere near to 2,000 then I'll take a hatchet and trim it back.
Readers only have so much time and attention span after all. I remember an experienced wine blogger once dishing out a shocking truth: "That brilliant last line you spent hours crafting? No-one will read it, because no-one gets to the end any more".
I remember being equally disheartened to learn the best way to cut a piece was to take out the jokes 😔
That kind of editing has always struck me as problematic. If one has to rip out all the fun stuff to get it to fit, is that really serving the reader well?
Which is why we love Substack! (Mainly true of American publications I used to find.)
Yes that sounds familiar!
I enjoy your writing.... I wouldn't subscribe if I didn't.....I sometimes skip stuff that just doesn't apply because I don't live in the UK, but I realise I'm in the minority and don't expect you to adjust to that 😜. I really enjoy your travel tales and recs for places to stay etc..
Thanks, Lucy! Yes, conscious the supermarket recs are most useful to UK subscribers which is why there’s all the other stuff!
I only pay subscription on a v few substacks. That’s because those always add something to my knowledge or thoughts and have enough substance. I enjoy your writing and love the range of topics
That’s so kind of you, Anne.
I agree with Johnnie P-H.
I like the current length of the post. The essence of what your feelings are about a topic is the most important aspect to me and delivered in your humorous personalised style with an edge of being controversial and cheeky.
You are at the top of your profession with knowledge about so many different aspects of food and wine that the more you tap into those areas the more chance there is of getting a well rounded, balanced view of the topic.
Thanks David. So very kind of you to say so.
*writes exceedingly long comment*
I can get a little spooked when a short-form writer switches to something longer (and vice-versa actually), so think consistency of expectation is one thing. But good writing/useful information, short or long, always wins out.
(Oh, and I think 1 free recommendation of the 5 each week to non-subscribers is a very clever and appealing offer.)
Well, judging by the poll so far that's the way it's going! Thanks, Matt x
I think your newsletters are just the right length, Fiona. As you say, when there are a lot of wines to write about, you need a chunk of wordage for each one. You've caused me to think about my own newsletters... I know they've been too long on occasion – much as I try to keep my former chief sub-editor Les's words in my brain ('Kāren: do you mind if I cut that paragraph?' ...Not always that politely!). It's particularly tricky when you're writing a guide to a destination and there's a long list of excellent recommendations to cover. I'm a big fan of the hard edit two days after writing, but that's not always practical when time is short.
Ideally I will leave it 24 hours after drafting but that rarely happens. Once a journalist, always a journalist!
The thing is, Substack is designed as long form. I think that recognises that some of us like more than just headlines. It’s a self conscious antidote to much on my phone. Don’t stop writing!
Thanks, Anne. I might be a touch more disciplined - maybe - but I won’t!
I do struggle to self edit and I go off on indulgent tangents. I’m trying to restrain myself more and keep things to 1200 words as a target, but maybe others would find that insufferable!
I think it depends, as others have said, on the subject matter. This post which was on a single subject was quite easy to keep to 600 odd words. If there's a big supermarket wine round up or a travel guide it can easily hit 1500 so 1200 seems quite reasonable.
I do think it's probably good practice though - and this applies to me as much as it does to you or any other author - to read through and cut out any excessive padding!
Agree and thank you.
Pieces should be as long as they need to be for you to say what you want to say. I love reading your work so I'm happy with whatever you choose to do. It's YOUR substack after all so your choice I'd say.
Thanks Stella. I will regard that as licence to rabbit on ... (Don't worry, anyone else reading this. I am taking account of the feedback!)
I really enjoy your writing and I do feel like a friend because your writing is so personal and you let your readers inside your world. So I’m happy with the current length and find the content both informative and interesting. I like the relaxed style as well.
That's very kind of you, Colin. Thankyou.
I do enjoy reading your posts and like your chatty style … I confess to feeling sometimes overwhelmed and then a bit guilty at not having enough hours in the day to read all the posts I feel I should ( esp as I am paying for more than I read ! ) .. and reading usually on my phone is not helping ! I try to keep my own posts pretty snappy but I usually just have a little bit of food history to share …
I feel that overwhelm too, Jacky - You just have to accept that you can't read everything!
I enjoy your comments. They are written with good humour and always insightful. The wine reviews are mostly useful but I shop in majestic and Waitrose and smaller merchants like Swig. I don’t shop in aldi,Lidl etc so not always so useful, to me anyway.
Maybe separating the restaurants and cookbooks from the wine reviews and have two sets of reviews. The Wine matching which was why I subscribed in the first place, I always found useful, but that’s a separate payment now as well so I go back to my copy of the Wine Dine dictionary if I’m stuck. Enough rambling from me, keep up the great work.
Thanks Mike. The idea of the Friday 5 was that each week there would be something for everyone so I'd be reluctant to hive off restaurants but cookbooks, I think, are a special case and do have their own section
I do apologise for charging for Matching Food & Wine. It was really either that or give up. I find it outrageous how AI just lifts content. But you're in good hands with the Wine Dine Dictionary