I’m incredibly grateful to my supporters on this substack. Whatever is happening here, its because you made it possible. There’s now a ‘thing’ going on, which you made happen, where I research some of this past two years, bury myself in the material, and try to report what I find in an engaging and digestable manner.
But here’s the thing: the time spent to produce this work is often just hammering through material trying to build up the picture for myself. Some roads lead to nowhere. I might be writing out two threads at the same time, but as I find more information, the story and the focus shifts.
It gets me thinking, somewhere between the incredible ‘Vanity Fair’ article on the origin of SARS-CoV-2, and ‘a tweet storm’, there’s probably a happy medium. My concern with the ‘train of thought’ approach is that there’s already a lot of it. New people can’t engage with the subject because ‘if you come in late’ then you miss so much that it becomes impossible to catch up. There’s no ‘route’ into the story if all we have are tiny morsels of data.
The other approach produces three or four huge pieces of work in a year. They might be fantastic pieces, but they don’t really fit into the relentless drumbeat of content in 2022. Nor am I sure they make the impact they deserve.
So what is the future model of this kind of investigative style journalism?
The Digger is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Research and write about what interests you. It doesn't even have to be Covid related. Anything "Great Reset" related will do. I don't think anyone expects regular posts. Post when you find something interesting that needs to get out.
I get your point. If you're wondering, perhaps, about how subscribers might feel about your spacing out your posts more, I personally am good with that approach. What about if you do something like a brief semi-monthly post to outline what you're finding or where you're going with your research so we all can have a sense of things, and then quarterly exposes to bring it all together? I think what you're doing is important enough that it merits your taking the time to dig deeper.
I follow a growing number of substack writers and find their contributions (as are yours) incredibly valuable. But the quantity of information I know receive, and attempt to process, every day is daunting - and I’m retired, so I have much more available time than most. Perhaps some flexibility - when crises present, maybe post more frequently; otherwise, a longer, more involved piece, less frequently, could work well. Mind you, we always seem to have a crisis, so not sure if the split will work. Do what feels right to you - your subscribers will follow.
For me, I greatly appreciate the deep and sober dives into the Ivermectin story - because nobody else is prepared to do it. If that means 2 or 3 large & well researched pieces per year then I'm happy with that.
Make presentations on World Council for Health. Also, publish a book of your essays on Amazon. It could be a small one of just a 130 pages or so on the topics which interest you. Include the one on Ivermectin! An excellent example is Sebastian Rushworth book on Covid
It measures 13 х 20 см and has 138 pages. Or just do a kindle version or an ebook.
I think for you Phil, the interesting part starts now.
In my opinion, you have made a compelling case for scientific misconduct on the part of Andrew Hill and Andrew Owen.
You have have also made a compelling case for the retraction of the Together trial.
The challenge now is to ensure that all the relevant parties are held accountable for their actions. I look forward to your description of how you have attempted to make these parties accountable and the various responses you receive.
Unfortunately, I suspect that the Andrew’s Hill and Owen will get away scot free and the Together trial will remain as is.
Either way, hopefully you can document the process and we can follow it and/or offer you some potentially helpful advice
As a Patron of the Arts is not in a position to demand production, I can only think subscribers drawn to your substack appreciate your journalism and accept your work as and when offered. Often, the artist is their own worst critic. Thank you for your professional preparations. Thankful to have the opportunity to experience true journalism. Is it possible to thank you too much?
I really enjoy your deep dive stuff (the podcast with Alessandros taking apart the Together trial was fascinating). I do have the luxury of time to listen to them while driving around the UK. Any shorter updates would also be great. I’ve gravitated to writers/pocasters who are simply looking for the truth and trying to make sense of the world, the format is secondary for me. Thanks for your work.
Whatever you decide. Digging is important. There is a distinct lack of digging. We need more diggers !! A lot of us want diggers, and the future wants more diggers. You have a unique gift.
I don’t know what u ultimately want, but if digging is your passion than keep on digging.
These things take time and work, create your process and then own it, your fan base will buy into you.
Digging can involve more than writing blogs. Build your empire. Good luck on your mission.
Go where your heart and mind takes you. Subscribers will follow the developments. There are such vast material to take from in this world created by people that does not want humankind and spirituality to grow and prosper.
When you find something you know if it talks to you in a way that makes you want to share it.
I'm deeply in your debt for the organization of the Ivermectin series and the clear writing. It provides a framework for discussing Ivermectin that I was frankly lacking. I try to tackle many of these current and crucial topics from a serious, cynical, but sometimes rollicking perspective, that of a lifelong professional gambler trying to bring those instincts and skills to interpreting what we're living through. If you care to take a look -- https://theskepticalgambler.blogspot.com/2022/04/phil-harpers-ivermectin-series.html
It's a non-monetized site. I take looks at many different things. My goal is to offend as many people as possible in the time I have left.
I think there is value in a topic related article that can be added too and developed over time as a solid comprehensive proof of concept.. Paul Alexander 150 studies on the value of immunity is an example..this can be passed on to those who are interested as a solid reference.. you can release updates…
The problem is so few vaccines addicts can be bothered with truth…
I read an an investigative journalism piece the other day that took me more than an hour to read. Meticulously researched, especially well organized - it was well worth reading on so many levels. Much longer than that? I'd probably lose interest.
New folks always have to "catch up". That's OK. I'm always catching up with new topics. I follow you because you are logical, compassionate and try to be as transparent as possible. There NEVER is enough time. Davey's comment about any "Great Reset" topic is spot on! If they succeed with the RESET our kids and grand kids will live in some form of obedience to those who do not care for their well being. As FDR said, " It is common sense to take a method and try it - If it fails admit it frankly - but above all try something"! You Rock Phil!
Perhaps format a box with "In last week's episode..." kind of thing, so people CAN quickly catch up with at least what you're saying, if not the full details of why you investigated and what you found and what you deduced from that etc etc. Just tell them the basics points, such as 'The moon is made from green cheese' and a link to the in-depth stuff, before diving into the current investigation.
Research and write about what interests you. It doesn't even have to be Covid related. Anything "Great Reset" related will do. I don't think anyone expects regular posts. Post when you find something interesting that needs to get out.
I get your point. If you're wondering, perhaps, about how subscribers might feel about your spacing out your posts more, I personally am good with that approach. What about if you do something like a brief semi-monthly post to outline what you're finding or where you're going with your research so we all can have a sense of things, and then quarterly exposes to bring it all together? I think what you're doing is important enough that it merits your taking the time to dig deeper.
I follow a growing number of substack writers and find their contributions (as are yours) incredibly valuable. But the quantity of information I know receive, and attempt to process, every day is daunting - and I’m retired, so I have much more available time than most. Perhaps some flexibility - when crises present, maybe post more frequently; otherwise, a longer, more involved piece, less frequently, could work well. Mind you, we always seem to have a crisis, so not sure if the split will work. Do what feels right to you - your subscribers will follow.
For me, I greatly appreciate the deep and sober dives into the Ivermectin story - because nobody else is prepared to do it. If that means 2 or 3 large & well researched pieces per year then I'm happy with that.
We need you to keep them honest, Phil!
We will be here to welcome and appreciate the results of the work you do and share with us
Just do it! Spend several hours a day on research, and then sit down at the computer and see what happens. You never know what might emerge.
Make presentations on World Council for Health. Also, publish a book of your essays on Amazon. It could be a small one of just a 130 pages or so on the topics which interest you. Include the one on Ivermectin! An excellent example is Sebastian Rushworth book on Covid
It measures 13 х 20 см and has 138 pages. Or just do a kindle version or an ebook.
I think for you Phil, the interesting part starts now.
In my opinion, you have made a compelling case for scientific misconduct on the part of Andrew Hill and Andrew Owen.
You have have also made a compelling case for the retraction of the Together trial.
The challenge now is to ensure that all the relevant parties are held accountable for their actions. I look forward to your description of how you have attempted to make these parties accountable and the various responses you receive.
Unfortunately, I suspect that the Andrew’s Hill and Owen will get away scot free and the Together trial will remain as is.
Either way, hopefully you can document the process and we can follow it and/or offer you some potentially helpful advice
As a Patron of the Arts is not in a position to demand production, I can only think subscribers drawn to your substack appreciate your journalism and accept your work as and when offered. Often, the artist is their own worst critic. Thank you for your professional preparations. Thankful to have the opportunity to experience true journalism. Is it possible to thank you too much?
I really enjoy your deep dive stuff (the podcast with Alessandros taking apart the Together trial was fascinating). I do have the luxury of time to listen to them while driving around the UK. Any shorter updates would also be great. I’ve gravitated to writers/pocasters who are simply looking for the truth and trying to make sense of the world, the format is secondary for me. Thanks for your work.
Whatever you decide. Digging is important. There is a distinct lack of digging. We need more diggers !! A lot of us want diggers, and the future wants more diggers. You have a unique gift.
I don’t know what u ultimately want, but if digging is your passion than keep on digging.
These things take time and work, create your process and then own it, your fan base will buy into you.
Digging can involve more than writing blogs. Build your empire. Good luck on your mission.
Go where your heart and mind takes you. Subscribers will follow the developments. There are such vast material to take from in this world created by people that does not want humankind and spirituality to grow and prosper.
When you find something you know if it talks to you in a way that makes you want to share it.
I look forward to the answer/answers you discover.
Write what you find, even if it’s not linear and comprehensive. Leave the nuggets on the trail for others to follow.
I'm deeply in your debt for the organization of the Ivermectin series and the clear writing. It provides a framework for discussing Ivermectin that I was frankly lacking. I try to tackle many of these current and crucial topics from a serious, cynical, but sometimes rollicking perspective, that of a lifelong professional gambler trying to bring those instincts and skills to interpreting what we're living through. If you care to take a look -- https://theskepticalgambler.blogspot.com/2022/04/phil-harpers-ivermectin-series.html
It's a non-monetized site. I take looks at many different things. My goal is to offend as many people as possible in the time I have left.
Phil. Your link to your website is not working. 👀
I think there is value in a topic related article that can be added too and developed over time as a solid comprehensive proof of concept.. Paul Alexander 150 studies on the value of immunity is an example..this can be passed on to those who are interested as a solid reference.. you can release updates…
The problem is so few vaccines addicts can be bothered with truth…
I read an an investigative journalism piece the other day that took me more than an hour to read. Meticulously researched, especially well organized - it was well worth reading on so many levels. Much longer than that? I'd probably lose interest.
New folks always have to "catch up". That's OK. I'm always catching up with new topics. I follow you because you are logical, compassionate and try to be as transparent as possible. There NEVER is enough time. Davey's comment about any "Great Reset" topic is spot on! If they succeed with the RESET our kids and grand kids will live in some form of obedience to those who do not care for their well being. As FDR said, " It is common sense to take a method and try it - If it fails admit it frankly - but above all try something"! You Rock Phil!
Perhaps format a box with "In last week's episode..." kind of thing, so people CAN quickly catch up with at least what you're saying, if not the full details of why you investigated and what you found and what you deduced from that etc etc. Just tell them the basics points, such as 'The moon is made from green cheese' and a link to the in-depth stuff, before diving into the current investigation.