My main objection to how the Boost works is not so much financial as in terms of distribution.

A non-boosted story - especially in recent months - will simply not be distributed effectively, largely because all the 'top slots' in the algo are set aside for the boosts (for which the platform has already paid $45, and needs to see some return in terms of user subs and stickiness).

I think that all of us, if we publish on an online platform, would like someone to read our words, or else we could just keep them on our hard drive or in our sock drawer.

But even if you write a piece in the same pub, on the same subject, with the same topic tags as one which had previously proven successful, and added genuine followers to your profile, it will usually be stillborn unless boosted.

I have seen this many times, and that is the source of my frustration. Yes, a couple of hundred extra bucks a month would be nice. But more importantly, what I wanted to see from this platform - and did in the early months in 2023 - was gradual organic growth, supported by an algorithm that learns from from people's engagement with stories and feeds more of the work they have enjoyed their way, to the mutual benefit of reader and writer.

That is something that Medium does very, very poorly, despite it being a basic functionality of an online content delivery platform.

Regular engagement with others' stories seems to have a knock-on effect in increasing algorithmic visibility. But if I have to make that a full-time job in order for a few dozen people to read my articles, it's just not worth it. I'd be better putting that effort into Substack, where I would have control over more aspects.

Medium should - and seems designed to - offer a simple, fire-and-forget way of launching articles, which, if well-written, would then achieve slow, gradual, organic audience growth for the writer.

But it has instead pivoted towards 'Boosted in the shop window, everything else flushed down the toilet'.

I've had 48 pieces boosted in the past 15 months, so I'm not complaining out of bitterness. I'm a nominator and have a good relationship with several other pubs where my serious, niche articles seem to be well received and have a good chance of being nominated, with an acceptance rate of maybe 70%.

Yet even from that 'privileged' position, I feel the system is poorly devised and executed, and is hugely disappointing and frustrating, both in itself, and in its impact on so many other aspects of the rest of the platform.