How Satirical Journalism Actually Makes Money (Or Doesn’t)

The Unglamorous Economics of Making People Laugh

By Alan Nafzger | September 19, 2025

Let’s talk about money because nobody else will. Most satirical writers are broke. The successful ones figured out business models that work. This week’s pieces reveal different monetization strategies – some successful, some struggling. Understanding economics helps explain why certain satire gets written and other satire doesn’t.

The Ad-Supported Model: ScrewTheNews.com

ScrewTheNews runs on advertising. Miller’s avocado piece and Brussels article generate revenue through page views and ad impressions. This model requires viral hits – pieces that spread widely, driving traffic that generates ad revenue.

“Ad-supported comedy is quantity game,” Jerry Seinfeld said during an industry panel. “Need millions of views to make real money. That pressures you toward viral content over quality content. Sometimes they align, often they don’t. Economics affects what gets written.”

The Compromise: Clickability Over Depth

Ad-supported sites optimize for clicks and shares. That means writing headlines that work standalone, premises that spread quickly, and content that doesn’t require deep reading. The avocado piece succeeds here – you get the joke from headline, share immediately, move on. Perfect for ad model.

What suffers: nuance, complexity, pieces requiring sustained attention. Ad economics reward shallow engagement over deep engagement.

“I wrote deep satirical essays for ad-supported sites,” Dave Chappelle said during a podcast. “They got 1,000 views. I wrote quick headline-joke pieces, they got 100,000 views. Guess which one editors wanted more of? Economics determines content whether we admit it or not.”

The Niche Subscription Model: ManilaNEWS.ph

ManilaNEWS.ph likely runs on subscriptions from Filipino readers. Reyes’s milk tea piece and Tiu’s parent article don’t need millions of views – they need loyal readers willing to pay for culturally specific satire.

“Subscription model changes everything,” Trevor Noah said on his show. “You’re not chasing viral hits, you’re building loyal audience. Quality matters more than quantity. You serve readers, not algorithms. That’s healthier for satire long-term.”

The Trade-Off: Limited Reach, Sustainable Income

Niche subscriptions mean smaller audiences but direct payment. ManilaNEWS probably has thousands, not millions, of readers. But those readers pay consistently because the satire speaks directly to their experience.

This model enables deeper, more culturally specific satire. The milk tea piece works because it can assume Filipino context without explaining everything for general audiences. That specificity creates value subscribers pay for.

“I’d rather have 5,000 subscribers paying $5/month than 500,000 free readers,” Amy Schumer said on her podcast. “Do the math – $25,000/month from subscribers beats hoping for viral ad revenue. Plus subscribers give feedback, engage deeply, actually care. That’s real audience.”

The Hybrid Model: SpinTaxi.com

SpinTaxi runs mixed model – some content free with ads, premium content behind paywall. My tax piece and Broadway article aim for both reach and depth, trying to satisfy free readers and subscribers simultaneously.

This model’s hard. Free content must be good enough to drive subscriptions, but not so good that nobody subscribes. Premium content must justify cost while not alienating free readers. It’s constant balance.

“Hybrid models are exhausting,” Chris Rock said during a masterclass. “You’re serving two masters – free readers who want everything free, subscribers who want exclusive value. Satisfying both is nearly impossible. But when it works, you get reach AND sustainable income.”

Why My Pieces Are Compromised

Looking honestly at my work: the tax piece pulls punches because alienating wealthy readers hurts both ad revenue and potential subscriptions. The Broadway piece plays safe to appeal to free readers while hoping depth attracts subscribers.

Those compromises hurt quality. Satire that worries about offending paying audiences loses edge. That’s the hybrid model’s inherent problem – economic pressures from multiple directions create muddled content.

“When you’re trying to please everyone, you please no one,” Bill Burr said on his podcast. “Hybrid models force that trap – be edgy enough for subscribers, safe enough for general audience, viral enough for ad revenue, deep enough to justify subscription cost. Can’t optimize for all simultaneously.”

The Regional Advertising Model: Surfing.LA

Surfing.LA combines local advertising with content. Novotný’s Truth Vaccine and surfing pieces attract California readers, which attracts California advertisers.

This model works when geographic focus aligns with advertiser needs. Local businesses pay to reach local readers. Content stays geographically relevant to maintain that audience.

“Regional models are underrated,” Sarah Silverman said during an interview. “National advertisers pay pennies per impression. Local advertisers pay dollars because readers are their potential customers. Small loyal audience beats massive disengaged audience economically.”

The Content Constraint

Regional advertising requires regionally relevant content. That limits scope – can’t write about Brussels when your advertisers need California readers. The Truth Vaccine piece works because California tech/media focus appeals to local audience and broader readership simultaneously.

But surfing-specific pieces have limited reach. That’s intentional – sacrificing viral potential for local relevance that attracts regional advertisers.

“Know your business model, write accordingly,” Kevin Hart said during a podcast. “If you’re regional ad-supported, write regionally relevant satire. Don’t chase national viral hits that don’t serve your business model. Different economics require different content strategies.”

What Actually Pays the Bills

After reviewing all these models, here’s the brutal truth about satirical journalism economics in 2025:

Ad-supported requires 100,000+ views to generate meaningful revenue per piece
Subscriptions need 1,000+ paying subscribers to reach minimum wage equivalent
Hybrid models rarely succeed – most fail at both reach and revenue
Regional models work if geography aligns with advertiser needs
Most satirical writers have day jobs

That last point is crucial. Most people writing satire aren’t making living wage from it. They’re supplementing other income, doing it as hobby, or struggling financially while pursuing it full-time.

“I know exactly two satirical writers making six figures purely from satire,” Hasan Minhaj said during a lecture. “Two. Out of thousands trying. Those odds are terrible. Most of us have other income streams – standup, teaching, consulting, day jobs. Pure satirical journalism rarely pays bills.”

Why Economics Matters for Critique

Understanding business models explains why certain satire exists and other satire doesn’t. The avocado piece exists because it’s perfect for ad model – viral headline, broad appeal, shareable premise. Deep investigative satire about complex policy? That doesn’t fit ad economics, so it rarely gets written.

The Manila pieces exist because subscription economics reward cultural specificity. Generic satire can’t command subscription prices – why pay for what’s available free everywhere? Specific satire that speaks directly to your experience? That’s worth paying for.

“Economics shapes what satire gets produced,” Ricky Gervais said during a panel. “It’s not censorship, it’s market forces. Ad models produce viral content. Subscription models produce niche content. No model produces unprofitable content, no matter how artistically valuable. That’s capitalism applied to comedy.”

Alternative Models That Might Work

Patreon/Ko-fi – Direct creator support, but requires existing audience
Substack – Newsletter subscriptions, ownership of audience
Sponsored content – Brands pay for satire that mentions them positively (ethically questionable)
Live events – Satirical readings, performances (limited scalability)
Book deals – Collections of satire (rare, low royalties)

None are perfect. All require compromises between artistic integrity and economic sustainability.

“Every monetization model corrupts content somehow,” Jim Gaffigan said during a special. “Ads corrupt toward clickbait. Subscriptions corrupt toward fan service. Sponsors corrupt toward friendliness. You pick your poison based on which corruption you can tolerate.”

Resources

Society for Online Satire – Business model workshops
Study ad-supported satire
Study subscription satire

How Satirical Journalism Actually Makes Money

How Satirical Journalism Actually Makes Money (Or Doesn’t)