Sign up for The Media Today, CJR’s daily newsletter.
Each day, the Huckabee Post delivers news, commentary, and religiosity to nearly 330,000 Substack subscribers, many of whom pay a subscription fee. Mike Huckabee, formerly the governor of Arkansas, started the newsletter in September of 2016 and, per the about page, has since “covered three presidential elections, two presidential terms, four full Congresses and lots of news in between.” Now that Huckabee is the United States’ ambassador to Israel, the Substack promises, “That isn’t about to change.”
That’s largely been true. Save for the fact that articles no longer run under Huckabee’s byline—there is a slate of other contributors—the Huckabee Post’s tone and tenor remain much the same, and the coverage is decidedly Huckabee-forward, with pieces about Donald Trump, the administration, Israel, Gaza, and, lately, Iran. “Israel shows incredible restraint,” reads a headline from June 16. The post includes “a message from our founder, Amb. Mike Huckabee,” who “reports that there was minor damage to the US Embassy branch in Tel Aviv due to concussions from Iranian missiles.”
But Huckabee’s relationship to the Huckabee Post is complicated. On March 5, ahead of his confirmation as ambassador, he signed a government ethics agreement that included a “newsletter” section, promising to cede editorial and operational control of the Huckabee Post to his adult son. “Upon confirmation, I will cease writing the newsletter, and I understand that I may not perform any services for the newsletter or Substack during my appointment to the position of Ambassador,” he wrote. The arrangement, part of a formal process with federal regulators who police conflicts of interest, was novel—and, as it turns out, has not stopped Huckabee from earning profits from Substack subscriptions that flow into Blue Diamond Media LLC, a private company that he founded.
Following publication of this article, Huckabee wrote in an email that he has “NO conflict since I have NO involvement” in the Huckabee Post. “It’s a NEWS-letter. It covers news. Since I do not select, write, or edit any of the stories anymore, totally at a loss to explain a ‘conflict,’” he wrote. “I always hold myself to the highest ethical standards.” Huckabee chafed at my “bothering me with these questions while I’m trying to serve my country at quite a personal sacrifice” and suggested that I was “being paid and influenced by some unknown source in order to manufacture a story.” He also criticized the Office of Government Ethics, which oversees administration appointees’ ethics agreements, for making “many ridiculous demands that in many cases made no sense.”
Huckabee’s Substack profits are substantial—more than 465,500 dollars in the course of about a year, according to a recent federal financial disclosure. At present, the Huckabee Post inveigles readers not only with standard monthly and annual subscriptions, which cost five dollars and thirty-six dollars, respectively, but also with a “founding member subscription” plan, through which you can choose your own payment. (Substack provided no details about the number of founding members or how much money they generate. Huckabee wrote that he has “no idea.”) Existing subscribers sometimes see a large orange-and-gray bar across the Huckabee Post’s front page that reads “Support Independent Journalism” next to a clickable “Upgrade to founding” button. After Substack’s cut, all of the money goes to Blue Diamond Media.
The Huckabee Post straddles a line, as do many elements of the Trump administration, between government service and media entrepreneurship. “Republicans are just way better at making money off media that is connected to partisan politics—media and politics are not separate at this point for them,” Nik Usher, a University of San Diego communications professor, said. (Consider Fox News pundits and conservative podcasters.) “You can imagine a situation where some Israeli businessman or the sultan of wherever whispers in his ear, ‘Hey, I love the Huckabee Post, and oh, check your bank account,’” Pablo Manríquez, a journalist whose Substack, Migrant Insider, has a robust following, told me. “Ethically, it’s a mess and a scandal to be taking money via Substack, even with whatever systems he’s put in place,” Jonathan Larsen, an accountability journalist behind a popular Substack called The Fucking News, observed. Dark money looking for a way to reach Huckabee, even if he doesn’t want it, is invited to follow this rather obvious path.
Helen Tobin, a Substack spokesperson, said in a statement that the company “applies its terms of service equally to all users, regardless of their professional roles or affiliations.” She added, “Individual publishers are responsible for ensuring their content and practices comply with applicable laws and ethical standards. We encourage all creators to be transparent with their audiences about relevant affiliations and interests.”
But Huckabee’s financial interest presents a curious circumstance for Substack, as a private business that typically takes a 10 percent cut from subscription payments—and thus stands to profit from what’s published, even if the material responds to unfolding events related directly to his position, or skirts ethical norms of the federal government. (In the ethics agreement, Huckabee agreed to step away from another media gig, hosting a show on Trinity Broadcasting Network, a religious TV broadcaster, where he had a contract worth more than 1.17 million dollars.) Tobin confirmed that Substack’s “standard revenue model” allows publishers to keep 90 percent of their subscription revenue (minus credit card fees) and that Substack retains a 10 percent fee. “Beyond those subscriptions, Substack has not made—and does not plan to make—any direct payments to the Huckabee Post or Blue Diamond Media LLC in the form of advances, bonuses, or other non-subscription compensation,” Tobin said.
Plenty of political figures use Substack: Former members of Congress such as Adam Kinzinger and Denver Riggleman. Also-ran presidential candidates such as Beto O’Rourke. Potential White House candidates such as Rahm Emanuel and Pete Buttigieg. Most of them accept subscription payments. But at least for now, none hold elected or appointed government power, nor did they maintain pay-to-subscribe Substacks while they were in office. (I have a Substack account with twelve paid subscribers that primarily promotes my articles and media appearances.)
Then there are Substackers who do wield power, such as Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Representative Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas). The State Department itself—as an ambassador, Huckabee is a member—has a nascent Substack, where it endeavors to “share insights, updates, and deep dives into the Trump Administration’s foreign policy.” But none of these take money. For them, Substack is a social media–style messaging platform, not a profit center.
Huckabee’s situation could perhaps be compared, at least from the perspective of inviting unlimited payments through Substack, to that of Tulsi Gabbard, Trump’s director of national intelligence. Gabbard hasn’t posted to her Substack since October—though she continued to be open to accepting unlimited “founder” payments as of the start of May, when Matt Laslo, a reporter for Raw Story, revealed as much. Following the story’s publication, I checked, and Gabbard appeared to have stopped taking money through Substack. But as of June 17, it was clear that someone could pay to subscribe for six dollars a month or sixty bucks annually—or make a “founding member” payment of a seemingly unlimited amount. (An official with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence who is close to Gabbard said that the acceptance of payments was “some kind of glitch” that was not directed by Gabbard. The official said that only one person had recently subscribed, and that this person received a refund. Gabbard’s office has contacted Substack to resolve the situation, the official said: this is “completely not us.”)
That places Huckabee in an all but singular position. In his federal ethics agreement, he provided a list of personal assets that he agreed to sell in order to avoid financial conflicts of interest. The divestitures included thousands of stock shares across fourteen companies, including Amazon, Exxon Mobil, FedEx, General Electric, Johnson & Johnson, and Wells Fargo. An Office of Government Ethics certificate of divestiture, dated April 22, confirms that the stocks were sold. But Blue Diamond Media was not among them. Rather, Huckabee and the government outlined the terms this way in his certified ethics agreement: “My adult son will continue to write and publish the newsletter, and Substack will continue to pay subscription fees to Blue Diamond Media, LLC for the newsletter,” he wrote. “I will not participate personally and substantially in any particular matter that to my knowledge has a direct and predictable effect on the ability or willingness of Substack to pay subscription fees, unless I first obtain a written waiver.”
Huckabee listed Blue Diamond Media among his “employment assets” in a separate personal financial disclosure document filed with the federal Office of Government Ethics and certified in March. Huckabee indicated in the same disclosure that he was due to earn “anticipated newsletter subscription fees” from Substack in the future. (Their value is “not readily ascertainable,” he wrote.)
In April, Digiday reported that Substack had plans to hire a “head of standards and enforcement” to lead a department for enforcing content guidelines and other ethical matters. (It’s a job that previously fell under the banner of “trust and safety.”) Tobin, the Substack spokesperson, did not directly address a question about this role. But several media ethics experts had notes. “Huckabee had the ability to remove a conflict, and he made a choice not to—and Substack, well, it has some things it needs to work through,” Ryan Thomas, the director of graduate studies at the Edward R. Murrow College of Communication at Washington State University, told me. Both Substack and Huckabee have a responsibility to uphold a higher level of ethics in the name of public trust, said Chris Roberts, the director of the Office of Research in Media Integrity at the University of Alabama: “The law is a minimum standard here.”
Other academics and media ethics experts I interviewed suggested banning public officials from profiting from Substack, or requiring Substacks with government ties to prominently disclose that fact. Kelly McBride, the senior vice president and chair of the Craig Newmark Center for Ethics and Leadership at the Poynter Institute, will be watching how proactive Substack becomes. “It tells you something about their mission whether they do or not,” she said. “A purely commercial corporation that prioritizes its bottom line probably wouldn’t. An organization with a double bottom line that both wants to make money and do good probably would.”
Joe Walsh—a former Republican member of Congress from Illinois, who ran for president against Trump in 2020 and has a popular Substack, The Social Contract—doesn’t think supporters of Huckabee, or Trump, will object to the collection of side income. “Government ethics have not caught up to this brave new world, but yet, Substack is where everybody is going, and in a big fucking way, going to monetize,” he said. Huckabee should have every right to post whatever he wants on Substack, he told me, but “there needs to be a really bright line on the money piece of it.”
Editor’s Note: This story has been updated to include post-publication comment from Huckabee.
Has America ever needed a media defender more than now? Help us by joining CJR today.
