Always Question "Experts"...Especially When They Don't Provide Evidence!
- Profit
- Dec 23, 2024
- 6 min read
Nobody is Above Reproach...Even Other Substack Writers
Corporate America is not the only problem in the “Employment Industrial Complex” via its obviously rigged, unfair selection processes. Independent content creators, consultants, or “influencers” can spread misinformation or be very misleading to desperate job seekers or broke entrepreneurs about how easy it is to obtain astronomical success.
One of my goals is to slay longstanding untrue cliches, specious information, dubious prevailing wisdom, or wishful thinking so job seekers and entrepreneurs can best navigate the arduous journey it takes to achieve their dreams. From my inside knowledge as a talent acquisition gatekeeper, I seek to give honest career advice appraisals and “hacks” to help fellow Wage Slaves…Even if the hard truth is the polar opposite of one’s shiny and happy false expectations.
Soft People Are Susceptible To Exploitation
Sadly, many influencers would rather appeal to the low-hanging fruit of nauseating positivity because it sells. In a society where parents actually hire “Campus Moms” to cook, do laundry, and bail their creampuff adult children out of jail - honest and helpful critiques merely bring down the vibe! Those precious college angels have it sooooo hard adjusting to the rigors of getting high, drunk, and laid at college!
Positive Lies Are Still Lies
As such, even unfounded positivity appeals to itching ears. Mass propagated lies like “working hard guarantees success” and “you can be anything you want” sell a delusion that you have ultimate control over your destiny - which sets 90% of job seekers and entrepreneurs up for crushing failure. Such empty promises never mention the sacrifice, tradeoffs, or likely failure in pursuing success.
Worse, it takes the Wage Slave’s eye off the real problem, preventing us from organizing collectively to marshall in real institutional change. Such a sea change would legitimately open the playing field for the much-maligned “equality of opportunity” to allow a compassionate meritocracy to thrive. Therefore, influencers spreading misinformation or dubious platitudes need to justify their stances and be held accountable as well!
Pollyanna Influencers Are Dangerous
Recently, I responded to a post from a fellow writer on Substack, Simon Owens. Simon Owens runs a media newsletter, and piqued my BS antennae with a pretty wild claim…
Knowing how hard procuring free subscribers is for a burgeoning newsletter, I sought some “receipts” from Simon to justify this astounding assertion.
Simon’s response was incredibly disappointing. My Goal Was To Learn From Simon’s Expertise I wasn’t suggesting I know or have evidence that those media titans are running million-dollar newsletters.
In my sincere desire to glean some insight from Simon that I can apply to grow my newsletter, I cited those media titans to intercept Simon from using their success stories as an example of “how increasingly common” million-dollar Substack newsletters are - as a red herring tactic.
Quizzically, Simon tried to use my example to justify his rationale somehow, so I pushed more….
Simon’s next response…
Crickets and Tumbleweeds!
Let’s explore 3 possibilities as to why Simon Owens came to such an erroneous conclusion and why he needs a “Reality Check”:
Naivety/Lack of Discernment. Perhaps, Simon really believes that Joe Schmoe from Buttcrack, USA with intermittent Wi-Fi from his double-wide trailer can compete with the 3 famous people I noted; all of whom had achieved mega success across multiple prestigious media platforms for well over a dozen years!
Medhi Hassan - A former TV political talk show host with shows that aired on MSNBC and Peacock. Oh, Hassan has also hit #7 on the New York Times Best Seller list with his smash book, Win Every Argument.
Adam Kinzinger - Former Republican Congressman from Illinois, ex-Fox News contributor, and current CNN contributor. In 2023, Kinzinger had a starring role in the prominently televised “January 6th Hearings” on ABC.
Glenn Greenwald - Former writer for one of the UK’s oldest newspapers, The Guardian, and a frequent Fox News Contributor. Greenwald’s work contributed to the Guardian winning a Pulitzer Prize in 2014, which is the equivalent of a journalist receiving an Oscar!
Reality Check #1
It’s quite transparent these famous pundits have built-in audiences across mainstream legacy media platforms before ever coming to Substack and have access to amazing resources to launch a successful newsletter immediately. Substack was merely a brand extension to cultivate an additional revenue stream for these media heavy hitters.
Simon Contradicts Himself From His Own Blog
Thus, it’s puzzling how Simon can use the success of these media titans as a justification for his flimsy argument, especially considering his 8/9/24 article, notes the power of the New York Times in attracting subscribers vs. pretty much every other publication - large or small.
Legacy media is still significantly more profitable than independent newsletters. Simon’s very own article shows the immediate advantage legacy media - and by proxy, its stars - have over the rank-and-file on Substack. So why the contradictory message?
Unresearched.
If Simon had done a modicum of research, instead of blithely spouting off, he would have discovered in 5.8 seconds that there are only 5 current writers with newsletters on Substack earning $1,000,000 or more as of February 2023. (Chart and information courtesy of Backlinko.)
The cold hard truth: As of February 2023, there's only 5 million dollar Substack newsletters. Reality Check #2
Simon, please explain how “it’s now become increasingly common for independent newsletters to reach $1,000,000 in revenue” - when only a grand total of 5 out of 17,000 Substack-revenue generating writers as of 2023 achieved this feat? Why would you say something so blatantly untrue - especially as a media journalist?
Math Doesn’t Lie
While one doesn’t necessarily have to be famous to achieve success on Substack, million-dollar-generating newsletters are MOST CERTAINLY the exception, not the rule.
If there are 17,000 paid writers per Axios, (with the lion’s share of those “paid writers” barely earning a paltry pittance) and 5 are clearing $1,000,000 in revenue, only 0.00029412% of newsletters meet this threshold of success. Again, how is statistically almost 0% of Substack writers earning $1,000,000 a trend to celebrate and tout?
Arrogance
Perhaps, because of Simon’s self-assuredness in his response and due to his pedigree as a media journalist, was I supposed to realize that his pronouncement is divine media dogma straight from the investigative ghost of Barbara Walters and genuflect?
However, when Simon makes such an unsubstantiated bold claim - one that I have a vested interest in AND have researched extensively - it comes off lazy, irresponsible, and haughty at best… or even dodgy at worst!
Maybe, Simon isn’t used to being challenged in his field of expertise and this is the reason for his flippancy. I get it. Nobody likes to be challenged, but the silver lining of sound critique and open discussion can be a learning experience, where Simon can help his readers by not perpetuating falsehoods.
At least, provide a fact-based, statistical analysis with persuasive reasoning to explain your position - instead of the faulty logic of “the fact that you can think of 3 separate million dollar newsletters off the top of your head, is all the evidence you need.” Spare me your circular logic. It’s not that clever.
You are not above providing supporting evidence.
Your paying audience DESERVES it!
When one refuses to defend their position, their critical thinking skills erode, leaving complacency to emerge in its wake.
Conclusion - The Lesson for the Audience Please don’t mistake my vigor about attacking Simon’s claim and inadequate response as personal animosity. Since Simon, a media journalist, didn’t provide substantive answers and decided to employ a cutesy non-answer instead, I used this interaction to teach my readers to ALWAYS question the experts, especially where no unbiased or supporting proof is presented. Thus, Simon’s initial case remains unproven. In fact, I clearly disproved Simon with facts from reputable sources, mathematical analysis, and cogent logic.
Final Thoughts Experts can be wrong, have an agenda, or possess blind spots. Be wary of experts who deflect and dismiss relevant questions - while relying on reputations over facts and analysis as self-evidence. Blind faith in experts is simply blindness itself!
”Errbody is On Notice” Nonetheless, I will respectfully challenge ANY “Substacker” who spreads inaccurate information or information without justification in my realm of career success and the job search arena. The gauntlet is thrown. Nobody is above justifying their position without facts and logic, even so called media journalists!
Comments