Can you demonstrate that the substack accounts on the list largely profit on false-conspiracy promotion?
I assume that you don't apply your logic to the MSM. Otherwise, your statement's inherent neutrality would make it pointless in a relative sense.
Because the statement can't be neutral lest it be time wasting, it de facto correlates profitable writing, only outside of the MSM, to lies.
This is one of the more implausible political statements I've read. You're essentially accusing consumers of supposed non-fiction writing to be tabloid readers. Only outside of MSM consumption, of course.
What accounts for the stark difference in motivation of people paying for true MSM writing and false substack writing? I must be hallucinating the contradiction, because otherwise it would frame your model as nonsense that some might correlate with false-conspiracy thinking.