Correction: I would have a typo in the headline - which should have read "ties in together" not "ties into together."
I've now corrected that and a few other typos I always catch after I hit "send." This doesn't bother me as much as it used to because I now know from my Substack-provided metrics that the vast majority of my readers actually do not come from my subscribers. (That is, the typos will be corrected when these non-subscriber readers finally discover this article).
Only about 33 percent of my subscribers now read or open one of my articles. A typical recent story might generate 4,600 reads. Of these "reads" only about 1,800 are from my subscribers. I don't know how the other 3,000 or so people get my articles. I assume from "shares," cross-posts and people who just visit my home-page and never bother subscribing.
This is another Substack oddity I'm going to explore in an upcoming analysis about changing Substack trends.
Even if people do have "Covid fatigue" or have over-subscribed to Substack newsletters, some of these trends or metrics are difficult to explain.
at least in my case, I am overwhelmed by the sheer number of e mails I get every day. I usually can't even get through them all and have to discard or save e mails I want to go back to. I usually never go back to them because there is always something new or more pressing.
I'm reading a lot of similar posts, Wilson. This makes sense, but even if there are no "nefarious" operations occurring to slow the growth or reach of "Contrarian" or "freedom" writers, this is a bad/disconcerting trend for Substack authors like myself.
This suggests Substack is NOT going to be the "solution" some of us hoped it might be. We need a better model/platform - for readers and writers.
How do you measure open rates? Loading embedded graphics? (Fwiw, spammers invented that technique. Sometimes the graphic to be opened was a single pixel.)
As I understand it, it's just people who click on an article in their email in-box ... or click on articles that are saved via their Substack "ap."
I now have 6,071 total subscribers, of which about 1,850 actually read or open my articles. I had almost as many "subscriber readers" 14 months ago (when I had 3,000 subscribers). Bottom-line: My growth in subscribers isn't translating to more regular "readers." I'll illustrate an example in my next Substack article.
Clicking on an article, as though to read it, whether or not you actually do, loads all the embedded graphics. I suppose even your bio picture would do it.
I think there may be another less sinister reason for open rates declining if i can use myself as an example - since i started reading substack articles, i now subscribe to many more authors than what i did at the start. There are now many more articles in my inbox than i have time to read and therefore many go unopened. Also, a lot of authors will cover the same subject (as an example, biden’s dementia) - again, once i’ve read a couple of those articles, i’ll usually not open others covering the same subject matter. Substack has been such a breath of fresh air for the last couple of years, i genuinely hope that it isn’t being manipulated
That's no doubt true. I'll address that point in future articles on Substack trends.
Substack is also, presumably growing. That is, new people are finding Substack (the pie of "potential subscribers" is now larger). Also, Substack users find new authors they like every day or week. Have these people all decided, "Yes, I like this writer, but I've already got enough subscriptions so I'm not going to subscribe to any more Substacks?" - even if these Substack subscriptions are free?
I think my working hypothesis is that "yes, many people are over-subscribed, but does this explain the dramatic decline in total subscriptions, story reads and open rates?" Maybe these trends partially explain these trends, but the changes shouldn't be this pronounced ... IMO.
Bill, as a Targeted Individual (see TargetedJustice.com/ for information about that term) I know without a shadow of a doubt that you are being targeted, probably not only via your Substack but in many other nefarious ways as well. Most TIs never become conscious that they are being targeted. This is intentional. The "deep state" is able to do whatever it wants from the shadows. They have trillions of dollars of "dark" money to use however they desire. I wish I could communicate with you in private but because of the harassment to which I am subjected that is impossible. Please investigate the website TargetedJustice.com.
Thanks for your quick reply, Bill. Just an FYI, if comments for your Substack articles—and others, including Alex’s—are right up my alley—thoughts I agree with or viewpoints I find intriguing—I usually just hit like (heart) rather than repeating the same ideas in my own voice. I find “perusing” the comments often helps me digest the article’s content better, and I must say I am often encouraged by the like-minded community I find both with your substack as well as Karen Hunt’s, and now even with Alex’s, especially with those readers who continue to razz him about being a former (?) Biden supporter and TDS leftie—he was the first journalist I found speaking out against the Plandemic and the devious, criminal jab efforts. I love Gov. Huckabee as well since his substack has a true Biblically-sound evangelical Christian perspective, but I was severely disappointed with the fact that he wouldn’t speak out against the jab, nor report the proven adverse events for at least the first year of the Plandemic. That saying, I followed you because of your comments which I did see on various Substacks, and I have followed links to others from your articles, though I am currently only a paid subscriber on yours and three others. You are a breath of fresh air! I find I concur with much that you write, and believe I probably hold the same worldview. We are in a battle with evil, and it’s becoming more apparent every day. But, I believe what the Bible says: God wins!🙌
Thanks, Judy. Making all those posts at other sites paid off with a great subscriber and supporter.
I almost always read the Reader Comments. My take-away is that there are millions of very smart people left in the world.
The market of "smart people" who didn't drink the proverbial kool aid is pretty dang big. We might not be the majority, but our numbers aren't insignificant either.
I always noticed how substantive, thoughtful, and well-written your comments were, in the early days of Substack. They were exceptional in their seriousness, depth, and intelligence.
I think my frequent posting at other sites did help me grow my numbers in the first year or so of my Substack newsletter. Not so much in the last nine or so months of my Substack - although I'm still opining away at other sites.
What changed? The deep state, aka the Mafia, aka Evil Incarnate, is onto you. As I said earlier today, I am extremely sorry to be the bringer of bad tidings. No one wishes this were not so more than I. TargetedJustice.com/
Paid subscriber here. Found you in the comments section with Karen Hunt, and others I’ve followed links to since I first started with Gov. Huckabee’s Substack about a year ago.
Question for you: if I read your substack from my email, then open it to click Like, Restack, and/or read comments, can you tell I’ve opened and read it—even though I don’t actually read your article ON Substack, since I’ve already read it from your email. Confusing to me here. 🤔
Thanks, Judy. I'm not sure I understand your question. Once someone opens my email that is/was the only "open" that Substack would count (per my assumption). In other words, hitting "like" or making a comment or re-stacking wouldn't add to my number of "opens" or "reads."
You actually don't know if when someone opens your article from email or their ap if they then go ahead and actually read the article. I assume most people who click on an email at least skim the article.
As far as monitoring or quantifying who actually reads or opens a given article, there might be a several-step process you could apply to discover this. It would be a good and interesting project.
I have been able to tell (from Substack metrics) who makes Reader Comments at my newsletter and how many comments these subscribers made. I've been surprised to learn that only about 1 percent of subscribers actually make comments.
I'd also be interested in learning what percentage of readers regularly read or persuse the Reader Comments section (even though they never personally make comments).
I routinely make comments at the sites of other Substack authors. These are often thoughts that occurred to me that I thought were germane to the article. However, truth be told, I am also trying to increase my Substack "brand" by making posts at other Substack newsletters. I've always thought people that liked my comments might be more likely to check out my Substack and then become subscribers. In other words, this is a way to market or advertise my Substack and grow my readership and subscriber numbers.
I can also tell where my readers and subscribers come from (from what sites). I've recently concluded that many posts at, say, Alex Berenson's extremely popular site - are NOT translating to more subscribers for me.
This used to happen - so this is another odd or new change on Substack.
Alex has 250,000 subscribers. If a typical article has 200,000 "views" or "reads" how many of these readers are also going to the Reader Comments section? If they are - and I can 'reach' these people with my posts - that's a significant number for me. If, over time, I could convert, say, just 1 percent of these readers into subscribers art my site - I'd have far more subscribers than I currently have. My thought is: These readers are my "target audience." They think like i do. They might like my Substack.
Alas, in the last 90 days, I got a grand total of four (free) subcribers from Alex's readers. in my first 90 days as a Substack author, I got 25 subscribers from the same site (including three paid subscribers). That's a note-worthy change.
Oh, and perhaps you might do a formal survey of sorts to actually determine who peruses and/or reads your articles, how often, whether they’ve followed you from comments or links from other Substacks, and why/why not they make comments, etc. I expect you’ve already thought of this, but just thought I’d throw it out there.
Excellent idea. In the future, I will come up with a few "poll questions" that will help me better understand the profile or characteristics of Substack readers and my "market."
I think many news organizations did away with Reader Comments because too many people were reading them. The Reader Comments often debunked the bogus story written by the MSM salaried journalists.
Since those comments were getting almost as many "reads" as the story proper, those had to go.
The companies that kept Reader Comments often "moderate" them (which is a euphemism that means only the posts that align with the authorized narrative will get published).
Could your numbers be fixed without the actual number of people reading/signing up being less than usual? It's done by a computer program, no? And who knows what "they" could do with that, without - in fact - keeping people from reading your Substack. There's also just numbers. There are so many people I'd like to support on Substack but alas - very limited income.
Maybe. Something seems "off." I've also wondered if some of my "subscribers" are AI "bots."
One metric Substack provides tells authors where new subscribers discovered our writing (from what other Substack). The sites where I make the most posts and am probably best-known are NOT translating into new subscribers. Other sites I wouldn't think would produce so many new subscribers are producing most of my new subscribers.
There's several trends/observations I'm still trying to figure out. That's one reason I keep posting about this hypothesis ("something has changed at Substack.") My hope is that my readers might have some good theories that better explain some of these trends.
I know for a fact that some of your subscribers are "people" who are trying to dupe you. "They" succeed because you have no idea who they are. I know one of them. She uses multiple "handles" on your Substack. She probably has hundreds of different "handles" by which she subscribes to your (and many others') Substacks. "They" (it's just one psychopathic person) sends you lots of replies to your posts that are designed to make you think they greatly appreciate your work, when in fact they utterly despise you and are actively working to sabotage you and your family. You have no idea of the magnitude of the evil which we are up against. I am sorry to be a bringer of bad tidings. This person I'm speaking of is messing with my computer as I write this reply, as a matter of fact. She replied to this post today under a new "handle," and you naturally believed her laudatory reply. No one can know who is genuine or fake, or honest or evil, on the internet. That may be its greatest threat to humanity.
My basic thought is any conspiracy to "mess with" Substack authors like myself would entail some effort to make us think this wasn't happening - or make it as hard as possible to "prove."
It's a great intellectual exercise to try to come up with ways to prove this. I've already convinced myself that some trends don't make any sense. If an elaborate and sophisticated effort has been launched to manipulate or throttle the access of Substack authors like myself, this would be quite sinister stuff.
It would also be theft as the bottom line is this is decreasing my Substack revenue - by fraudulent or criminal means.
People can't say, "Oh, the government or Censorship Complex would't do that." Of course they would. They've already done it to hundreds of thousands if not millions of social media users. They've de-platformed and de-monetized people ... and have significantly curtailed an author's "reach" by shadow banning (algorithm manipulation).
It might take a class action lawsuit to prove this - and then try to get civil damages .... but good luck with that project.
Yes, it is also theft, which is another thing with which I'm extremely well-acquainted with as a Targeted Individual. Many tens of thousands of dollars have been stolen from me over the 3.5 decades during which I've been a TI. We're up against a hidden, secret, superpowerful mafia. Why did your dryer recently break down? How much did you pay the repairman? Was he extorted to give a certain percentage of his fee to these dark powers? I realize this sounds paranoid, but I'm very sorry to say it is not. The perpetrators extort VAST sums of money from workmen, appliance repairmen, handymen, plumbers, etc. The magnitude of the evil which we are confronted with is unimaginable to honest people.
Thank you, Bill, for replying to my post. I can't tell you how intensely I'd like to communicate freely with you, which I can not do over the internet. Every word I write on the internet, every single word I speak in my home or over the telephone, is recorded by the people who are harassing me. I have zero privacy. All I can say here is that I pray for you and your family, I send you blessings, and I expect to meet you as a friend of truth, justice, goodness, and holiness, in the other realm.
You might consider linking your articles in “The Citizen Open Thread” daily open thread @ Citizen Free Press. Kane has been doing some in person stuff recently in Detroit and I’ve noticed that he’s not been linking to Substacks that he used to link to in the past (he’s working triple time imo to help have a MAGA election) but he’s never limited linking to stuff in the open thread he tosses out there every day. It’s pretty much the only place his faithful have to leave comments anymore and I’d bet it gets seen.
I do send many of my stories to Citizen Kane - by posting links in the Reader Comments Open Thread. He used to routinely link to my stories, which I greatly appreciate. But in the last several months, he hasn't been linking to my stuff.
I also often send story links to Zero Hedge, which once in a while (but not often) runs them. Zero Hedge did pick up my very-first "Biden has dementia" story. The Tylers improved the headline to "Our Emperor has no brain" (a line I used in the piece).
That story got more than 100,000 "reads." So when they do link to my articles, my articles do pretty well (getting more "reads" than a typical article at ZH).
My record "read" numbers on Substack - a feature story about a man who died after receiving a vaccine that was picked up by Citizen Free Press - got 75,000 "reads" - which is the highest number I've ever gotten on Substack.
My subscribers might be interested in the fact that a journalist for The Defender used a couple of my quotes in a new story about NewsGuard (one of the fact-checkers that exists to censor dissenting journalism). The headline of this story is that this organization receives government (tax payer) money for its anti-free speech mission.
The article also links to my story from several weeks ago about NewsGuard.
The WaPo and the "Old Grey Lady" and Anderson Pooper's network are all on the government payroll to publish and/or broadcast The Regime's official statements, to which we must adhere and comply. They also serve to sway public opinion, especially before elections. None of these so-called private corporations need show a profit, as all of 'em are well-paid lackeys for TPTB.
The polling companies are on the same Grift Express ... well do I remember El Rushbo pointing out pre-election polls from major and respected organizations that were so obviously wrong that a simpleton could spot the fraud - if only he were so inclined. Rush would track these things, and show us that during the last critical two or three weeks before a vote, the polls would "change" and become accurate - so that the polling companies' credibility would be defensible, and they could land that next fat government contract. Those early poll "results" were designed to influence, not predict, voting.
I think the element of capture that is illustrated best by substack is the algorithm used to determine what is a threat. People who read three page essays without pictures and videos have been written off as a lost cause. No one cares if those people are right because they are less than 15% of the population and can easily be labeled as kooks that are fixating on nonsense .I am a big fan of substack and have spent a lot of time reading many people. Just looking at the covid writers I have seen many talented people who have brought the truth to a small and shrinking audience. The ability to reach out to new readers is restricted and writers end up preaching to the choir that is largely aware of what is going on. Meanwhile, "journalists" making money ,are tricking viewers into clicking on a false story that they spent twenty minutes on. All that takes is a complete lack of moral compass and a willingness to abuse exclamation points like a realtor .Let me give you a classic example ,on dec. 13 2007,I reached the following story because I had to." Ike Turner died at his house in Los Angeles last night from a drug overdose , he was 76 yrs. old. His ex wife Tina, however, is still alive and in good health! In fact Tina is still touring and performing! Here is a recent picture of Tina at the north sea jazz festival!" that was the entire obit. The headline that I clicked on ? IKE TURNER BEATS TINA TO DEATH!
I can’t imagine what the debate will be like. It’s very sad that his own wife is complicit with this; it’s like elder abuse and he has Stockholm syndrome.
there is no elder abuse for these people. there is only money and power. I imagine the handlers are figuring out a new drug regime that will keep biden standing and maybe even coherent for the debate. Along with some fail safes, predetermined traps and attacks to blame the people who hate "democracy".
In the case of the good "Doctor" Jill, elder abuse carries a large paycheck. A re-election will turn that into an annuity for the entire clans of Bidens and Jacobs.
Correction: I would have a typo in the headline - which should have read "ties in together" not "ties into together."
I've now corrected that and a few other typos I always catch after I hit "send." This doesn't bother me as much as it used to because I now know from my Substack-provided metrics that the vast majority of my readers actually do not come from my subscribers. (That is, the typos will be corrected when these non-subscriber readers finally discover this article).
Only about 33 percent of my subscribers now read or open one of my articles. A typical recent story might generate 4,600 reads. Of these "reads" only about 1,800 are from my subscribers. I don't know how the other 3,000 or so people get my articles. I assume from "shares," cross-posts and people who just visit my home-page and never bother subscribing.
This is another Substack oddity I'm going to explore in an upcoming analysis about changing Substack trends.
Even if people do have "Covid fatigue" or have over-subscribed to Substack newsletters, some of these trends or metrics are difficult to explain.
at least in my case, I am overwhelmed by the sheer number of e mails I get every day. I usually can't even get through them all and have to discard or save e mails I want to go back to. I usually never go back to them because there is always something new or more pressing.
I'm reading a lot of similar posts, Wilson. This makes sense, but even if there are no "nefarious" operations occurring to slow the growth or reach of "Contrarian" or "freedom" writers, this is a bad/disconcerting trend for Substack authors like myself.
This suggests Substack is NOT going to be the "solution" some of us hoped it might be. We need a better model/platform - for readers and writers.
How do you measure open rates? Loading embedded graphics? (Fwiw, spammers invented that technique. Sometimes the graphic to be opened was a single pixel.)
As I understand it, it's just people who click on an article in their email in-box ... or click on articles that are saved via their Substack "ap."
I now have 6,071 total subscribers, of which about 1,850 actually read or open my articles. I had almost as many "subscriber readers" 14 months ago (when I had 3,000 subscribers). Bottom-line: My growth in subscribers isn't translating to more regular "readers." I'll illustrate an example in my next Substack article.
Clicking on an article, as though to read it, whether or not you actually do, loads all the embedded graphics. I suppose even your bio picture would do it.
I think there may be another less sinister reason for open rates declining if i can use myself as an example - since i started reading substack articles, i now subscribe to many more authors than what i did at the start. There are now many more articles in my inbox than i have time to read and therefore many go unopened. Also, a lot of authors will cover the same subject (as an example, biden’s dementia) - again, once i’ve read a couple of those articles, i’ll usually not open others covering the same subject matter. Substack has been such a breath of fresh air for the last couple of years, i genuinely hope that it isn’t being manipulated
That's no doubt true. I'll address that point in future articles on Substack trends.
Substack is also, presumably growing. That is, new people are finding Substack (the pie of "potential subscribers" is now larger). Also, Substack users find new authors they like every day or week. Have these people all decided, "Yes, I like this writer, but I've already got enough subscriptions so I'm not going to subscribe to any more Substacks?" - even if these Substack subscriptions are free?
I think my working hypothesis is that "yes, many people are over-subscribed, but does this explain the dramatic decline in total subscriptions, story reads and open rates?" Maybe these trends partially explain these trends, but the changes shouldn't be this pronounced ... IMO.
Bill, as a Targeted Individual (see TargetedJustice.com/ for information about that term) I know without a shadow of a doubt that you are being targeted, probably not only via your Substack but in many other nefarious ways as well. Most TIs never become conscious that they are being targeted. This is intentional. The "deep state" is able to do whatever it wants from the shadows. They have trillions of dollars of "dark" money to use however they desire. I wish I could communicate with you in private but because of the harassment to which I am subjected that is impossible. Please investigate the website TargetedJustice.com.
Thanks for your quick reply, Bill. Just an FYI, if comments for your Substack articles—and others, including Alex’s—are right up my alley—thoughts I agree with or viewpoints I find intriguing—I usually just hit like (heart) rather than repeating the same ideas in my own voice. I find “perusing” the comments often helps me digest the article’s content better, and I must say I am often encouraged by the like-minded community I find both with your substack as well as Karen Hunt’s, and now even with Alex’s, especially with those readers who continue to razz him about being a former (?) Biden supporter and TDS leftie—he was the first journalist I found speaking out against the Plandemic and the devious, criminal jab efforts. I love Gov. Huckabee as well since his substack has a true Biblically-sound evangelical Christian perspective, but I was severely disappointed with the fact that he wouldn’t speak out against the jab, nor report the proven adverse events for at least the first year of the Plandemic. That saying, I followed you because of your comments which I did see on various Substacks, and I have followed links to others from your articles, though I am currently only a paid subscriber on yours and three others. You are a breath of fresh air! I find I concur with much that you write, and believe I probably hold the same worldview. We are in a battle with evil, and it’s becoming more apparent every day. But, I believe what the Bible says: God wins!🙌
Thanks, Judy. Making all those posts at other sites paid off with a great subscriber and supporter.
I almost always read the Reader Comments. My take-away is that there are millions of very smart people left in the world.
The market of "smart people" who didn't drink the proverbial kool aid is pretty dang big. We might not be the majority, but our numbers aren't insignificant either.
I always noticed how substantive, thoughtful, and well-written your comments were, in the early days of Substack. They were exceptional in their seriousness, depth, and intelligence.
Thank you very much, Truthbird.
I think my frequent posting at other sites did help me grow my numbers in the first year or so of my Substack newsletter. Not so much in the last nine or so months of my Substack - although I'm still opining away at other sites.
What changed?
What changed? The deep state, aka the Mafia, aka Evil Incarnate, is onto you. As I said earlier today, I am extremely sorry to be the bringer of bad tidings. No one wishes this were not so more than I. TargetedJustice.com/
Hi, Bill,
Paid subscriber here. Found you in the comments section with Karen Hunt, and others I’ve followed links to since I first started with Gov. Huckabee’s Substack about a year ago.
Question for you: if I read your substack from my email, then open it to click Like, Restack, and/or read comments, can you tell I’ve opened and read it—even though I don’t actually read your article ON Substack, since I’ve already read it from your email. Confusing to me here. 🤔
Thanks, Judy. I'm not sure I understand your question. Once someone opens my email that is/was the only "open" that Substack would count (per my assumption). In other words, hitting "like" or making a comment or re-stacking wouldn't add to my number of "opens" or "reads."
You actually don't know if when someone opens your article from email or their ap if they then go ahead and actually read the article. I assume most people who click on an email at least skim the article.
As far as monitoring or quantifying who actually reads or opens a given article, there might be a several-step process you could apply to discover this. It would be a good and interesting project.
I have been able to tell (from Substack metrics) who makes Reader Comments at my newsletter and how many comments these subscribers made. I've been surprised to learn that only about 1 percent of subscribers actually make comments.
I'd also be interested in learning what percentage of readers regularly read or persuse the Reader Comments section (even though they never personally make comments).
I routinely make comments at the sites of other Substack authors. These are often thoughts that occurred to me that I thought were germane to the article. However, truth be told, I am also trying to increase my Substack "brand" by making posts at other Substack newsletters. I've always thought people that liked my comments might be more likely to check out my Substack and then become subscribers. In other words, this is a way to market or advertise my Substack and grow my readership and subscriber numbers.
I can also tell where my readers and subscribers come from (from what sites). I've recently concluded that many posts at, say, Alex Berenson's extremely popular site - are NOT translating to more subscribers for me.
This used to happen - so this is another odd or new change on Substack.
Alex has 250,000 subscribers. If a typical article has 200,000 "views" or "reads" how many of these readers are also going to the Reader Comments section? If they are - and I can 'reach' these people with my posts - that's a significant number for me. If, over time, I could convert, say, just 1 percent of these readers into subscribers art my site - I'd have far more subscribers than I currently have. My thought is: These readers are my "target audience." They think like i do. They might like my Substack.
Alas, in the last 90 days, I got a grand total of four (free) subcribers from Alex's readers. in my first 90 days as a Substack author, I got 25 subscribers from the same site (including three paid subscribers). That's a note-worthy change.
Oh, and perhaps you might do a formal survey of sorts to actually determine who peruses and/or reads your articles, how often, whether they’ve followed you from comments or links from other Substacks, and why/why not they make comments, etc. I expect you’ve already thought of this, but just thought I’d throw it out there.
I truly appreciate your work!
Excellent idea. In the future, I will come up with a few "poll questions" that will help me better understand the profile or characteristics of Substack readers and my "market."
I think many news organizations did away with Reader Comments because too many people were reading them. The Reader Comments often debunked the bogus story written by the MSM salaried journalists.
Since those comments were getting almost as many "reads" as the story proper, those had to go.
The companies that kept Reader Comments often "moderate" them (which is a euphemism that means only the posts that align with the authorized narrative will get published).
Could your numbers be fixed without the actual number of people reading/signing up being less than usual? It's done by a computer program, no? And who knows what "they" could do with that, without - in fact - keeping people from reading your Substack. There's also just numbers. There are so many people I'd like to support on Substack but alas - very limited income.
Maybe. Something seems "off." I've also wondered if some of my "subscribers" are AI "bots."
One metric Substack provides tells authors where new subscribers discovered our writing (from what other Substack). The sites where I make the most posts and am probably best-known are NOT translating into new subscribers. Other sites I wouldn't think would produce so many new subscribers are producing most of my new subscribers.
There's several trends/observations I'm still trying to figure out. That's one reason I keep posting about this hypothesis ("something has changed at Substack.") My hope is that my readers might have some good theories that better explain some of these trends.
I know for a fact that some of your subscribers are "people" who are trying to dupe you. "They" succeed because you have no idea who they are. I know one of them. She uses multiple "handles" on your Substack. She probably has hundreds of different "handles" by which she subscribes to your (and many others') Substacks. "They" (it's just one psychopathic person) sends you lots of replies to your posts that are designed to make you think they greatly appreciate your work, when in fact they utterly despise you and are actively working to sabotage you and your family. You have no idea of the magnitude of the evil which we are up against. I am sorry to be a bringer of bad tidings. This person I'm speaking of is messing with my computer as I write this reply, as a matter of fact. She replied to this post today under a new "handle," and you naturally believed her laudatory reply. No one can know who is genuine or fake, or honest or evil, on the internet. That may be its greatest threat to humanity.
Egads.
My basic thought is any conspiracy to "mess with" Substack authors like myself would entail some effort to make us think this wasn't happening - or make it as hard as possible to "prove."
It's a great intellectual exercise to try to come up with ways to prove this. I've already convinced myself that some trends don't make any sense. If an elaborate and sophisticated effort has been launched to manipulate or throttle the access of Substack authors like myself, this would be quite sinister stuff.
It would also be theft as the bottom line is this is decreasing my Substack revenue - by fraudulent or criminal means.
People can't say, "Oh, the government or Censorship Complex would't do that." Of course they would. They've already done it to hundreds of thousands if not millions of social media users. They've de-platformed and de-monetized people ... and have significantly curtailed an author's "reach" by shadow banning (algorithm manipulation).
It might take a class action lawsuit to prove this - and then try to get civil damages .... but good luck with that project.
Yes, it is also theft, which is another thing with which I'm extremely well-acquainted with as a Targeted Individual. Many tens of thousands of dollars have been stolen from me over the 3.5 decades during which I've been a TI. We're up against a hidden, secret, superpowerful mafia. Why did your dryer recently break down? How much did you pay the repairman? Was he extorted to give a certain percentage of his fee to these dark powers? I realize this sounds paranoid, but I'm very sorry to say it is not. The perpetrators extort VAST sums of money from workmen, appliance repairmen, handymen, plumbers, etc. The magnitude of the evil which we are confronted with is unimaginable to honest people.
Yes, it is more sinister than you can possibly imagine.
Thank you, Bill, for replying to my post. I can't tell you how intensely I'd like to communicate freely with you, which I can not do over the internet. Every word I write on the internet, every single word I speak in my home or over the telephone, is recorded by the people who are harassing me. I have zero privacy. All I can say here is that I pray for you and your family, I send you blessings, and I expect to meet you as a friend of truth, justice, goodness, and holiness, in the other realm.
You might consider linking your articles in “The Citizen Open Thread” daily open thread @ Citizen Free Press. Kane has been doing some in person stuff recently in Detroit and I’ve noticed that he’s not been linking to Substacks that he used to link to in the past (he’s working triple time imo to help have a MAGA election) but he’s never limited linking to stuff in the open thread he tosses out there every day. It’s pretty much the only place his faithful have to leave comments anymore and I’d bet it gets seen.
I do send many of my stories to Citizen Kane - by posting links in the Reader Comments Open Thread. He used to routinely link to my stories, which I greatly appreciate. But in the last several months, he hasn't been linking to my stuff.
I also often send story links to Zero Hedge, which once in a while (but not often) runs them. Zero Hedge did pick up my very-first "Biden has dementia" story. The Tylers improved the headline to "Our Emperor has no brain" (a line I used in the piece).
That story got more than 100,000 "reads." So when they do link to my articles, my articles do pretty well (getting more "reads" than a typical article at ZH).
My record "read" numbers on Substack - a feature story about a man who died after receiving a vaccine that was picked up by Citizen Free Press - got 75,000 "reads" - which is the highest number I've ever gotten on Substack.
My subscribers might be interested in the fact that a journalist for The Defender used a couple of my quotes in a new story about NewsGuard (one of the fact-checkers that exists to censor dissenting journalism). The headline of this story is that this organization receives government (tax payer) money for its anti-free speech mission.
The article also links to my story from several weeks ago about NewsGuard.
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/newsguard-fact-checking-operations-federal-funding-house-investigation/
The WaPo and the "Old Grey Lady" and Anderson Pooper's network are all on the government payroll to publish and/or broadcast The Regime's official statements, to which we must adhere and comply. They also serve to sway public opinion, especially before elections. None of these so-called private corporations need show a profit, as all of 'em are well-paid lackeys for TPTB.
The polling companies are on the same Grift Express ... well do I remember El Rushbo pointing out pre-election polls from major and respected organizations that were so obviously wrong that a simpleton could spot the fraud - if only he were so inclined. Rush would track these things, and show us that during the last critical two or three weeks before a vote, the polls would "change" and become accurate - so that the polling companies' credibility would be defensible, and they could land that next fat government contract. Those early poll "results" were designed to influence, not predict, voting.
I think the element of capture that is illustrated best by substack is the algorithm used to determine what is a threat. People who read three page essays without pictures and videos have been written off as a lost cause. No one cares if those people are right because they are less than 15% of the population and can easily be labeled as kooks that are fixating on nonsense .I am a big fan of substack and have spent a lot of time reading many people. Just looking at the covid writers I have seen many talented people who have brought the truth to a small and shrinking audience. The ability to reach out to new readers is restricted and writers end up preaching to the choir that is largely aware of what is going on. Meanwhile, "journalists" making money ,are tricking viewers into clicking on a false story that they spent twenty minutes on. All that takes is a complete lack of moral compass and a willingness to abuse exclamation points like a realtor .Let me give you a classic example ,on dec. 13 2007,I reached the following story because I had to." Ike Turner died at his house in Los Angeles last night from a drug overdose , he was 76 yrs. old. His ex wife Tina, however, is still alive and in good health! In fact Tina is still touring and performing! Here is a recent picture of Tina at the north sea jazz festival!" that was the entire obit. The headline that I clicked on ? IKE TURNER BEATS TINA TO DEATH!
Honestly, I’m surprised you haven’t written 27 articles! It’s not like Biden doesn’t provide enough fodder for 60 articles!
Expecting the president to have any authority over your health care choices might be a sign of dementia too.
It's past time to discard the concept of 'public health'.
Anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear can see that Biden has dementia; severe dementia.
I can’t imagine what the debate will be like. It’s very sad that his own wife is complicit with this; it’s like elder abuse and he has Stockholm syndrome.
there is no elder abuse for these people. there is only money and power. I imagine the handlers are figuring out a new drug regime that will keep biden standing and maybe even coherent for the debate. Along with some fail safes, predetermined traps and attacks to blame the people who hate "democracy".
They've already rigged the debate rules to help their candidate out - or at least to reduce the probability this is a train wreck for him.
In the case of the good "Doctor" Jill, elder abuse carries a large paycheck. A re-election will turn that into an annuity for the entire clans of Bidens and Jacobs.
Is that surprising? He's been grooming her since she was 15, after all.
The reporters were allowed to pick on Biden.
The question is who gave the reporters the green light to critique Biden? Or Why the rulers allowed such?
I theorize that the rulers have a second thought about Trump/Biden? The Khazarian rulers like Trump more...he is more zionist than Biden.
Also - they are absolutely throttling - I have long time paid subscriptions that now never show up in either my inbox/feed or my email notifications.