Tony’s message on John’s article perfectly captures Medium’s current state—denial. No acknowledgment despite overwhelming evidence, no transparency, no apology, just the blame game.

John asked, ‘Who killed Medium?’ While the answer is complicated, the final blow was Scott’s desperate message—one that clearly wasn’t reviewed by the CEO or anyone who understands audience psychology. The post, though subtly worded, blatantly labeled authentic writers as spammers, justifying the drastic earnings cut. He later admitted they had ‘tweaked’ something, but the change was glaring—writer earnings were slashed by about 99%. They walked it back slightly, but according to data shared with me by those smarter than I am, the payouts are still shockingly low.

I transparently shared my own stats with the support team, asking them to escalate the issue to leadership. Two weeks later, still no response. I get that they’re busy, and I don’t envy Medium’s employees, but acknowledging the problem instead of denying it could have helped with damage control.

As far as I know, no authentic writer wants Medium to fail. Everyone wants this community to thrive. But now, Medium is waging war against authentic writers—and we all know who’s going to lose this battle.

I’ll turn this into an editorial bulletin later, as some new concerns have started troubling me and my editorial team. I will also engage in John's outstanding story. Thank you. Sriram, for your version which is spot and well articulated.