I saw the parallel with Heather Cox right away. Not a fan anymore, she presents as a trustworthy historian yet sends out political commentary. I understand what you are saying that the data points help derive the bigger picture. Yet you guys were hitting your stride in articles 3-4 months ago, in depth stuff. Its ok to just turn off the writing and go to the library to read for two weeks! This war is not going anywhere.
Only modeled after HCR in the sense of recognizing demand for meatier articles versus more limited casual mainstream media pieces that average between 700 & 1,000 words.
Our structure is different than hers. Plus, it will remain apolitical. Our criticisms are solely basis on our assessments of XYZ actions or decisions affecting U.S. national security & never because a D or R is making them.
Also, unlike HCR, we are offering choices. The longer Intel Report is there for those who want to dig deeper.
Our weekly columns in The Hill & elsewhere are there for those prefer less.
Ray, thanks. We appreciate the input. Our goal for the daily INTREP360 Intelligence Report is help interested readers build a cumulative knowledge base over time of global issues affecting U.S. national security.
It is also intended to help connect the dots of seemingly unrelated distant events.
E.g., pointing out that Russian operations in the Sahel are designed in part to fund the war in Ukraine. E.g., that Chinese support of Russia’s actions in the Sahel is to in part gain votes at the U.N. while at the same time benefiting from newly installed dictatorships who become addicted — bribed! — on Beijing’s Belt & Road initiative.
The genesis of the Intel Report was that we were capturing a significant amount of data points from across the world on pen & paper as background research for our columns, TV appearances, etc. to ensure sure we stay well informed & up-to-date.
Yet only 5% of that research hits our columns.
Rather than let that research go to waste, we decided to package it. As a side benefit, it actually helps streamline our workload, not increase it.
Certainly, the Intel Report is not for everyone. It is modeled after a Heather Cox Richardson approach to providing in-in-depth 1,500 to 2K word bedtime or morning coffee articles.
There is huge demand in general on Substack for those type of readers who want more than a brief USA Today like summary.
Granted, her audience — partisan politics — will always be much broader than our niche coverage of U.S. national security.
Hopefully, as we continue to build out our Substack model, it will be an ala carte menu for readers to pick & choose from based on what they are looking for & how much time they want to spending reading up on XYZ.
I saw the parallel with Heather Cox right away. Not a fan anymore, she presents as a trustworthy historian yet sends out political commentary. I understand what you are saying that the data points help derive the bigger picture. Yet you guys were hitting your stride in articles 3-4 months ago, in depth stuff. Its ok to just turn off the writing and go to the library to read for two weeks! This war is not going anywhere.
Only modeled after HCR in the sense of recognizing demand for meatier articles versus more limited casual mainstream media pieces that average between 700 & 1,000 words.
Our structure is different than hers. Plus, it will remain apolitical. Our criticisms are solely basis on our assessments of XYZ actions or decisions affecting U.S. national security & never because a D or R is making them.
Also, unlike HCR, we are offering choices. The longer Intel Report is there for those who want to dig deeper.
Our weekly columns in The Hill & elsewhere are there for those prefer less.
You guys are going to burn your readers and yourself out. Perfect your deep dive articles yet what do I know. I hated having to write INTREPs!
Ray, thanks. We appreciate the input. Our goal for the daily INTREP360 Intelligence Report is help interested readers build a cumulative knowledge base over time of global issues affecting U.S. national security.
It is also intended to help connect the dots of seemingly unrelated distant events.
E.g., pointing out that Russian operations in the Sahel are designed in part to fund the war in Ukraine. E.g., that Chinese support of Russia’s actions in the Sahel is to in part gain votes at the U.N. while at the same time benefiting from newly installed dictatorships who become addicted — bribed! — on Beijing’s Belt & Road initiative.
The genesis of the Intel Report was that we were capturing a significant amount of data points from across the world on pen & paper as background research for our columns, TV appearances, etc. to ensure sure we stay well informed & up-to-date.
Yet only 5% of that research hits our columns.
Rather than let that research go to waste, we decided to package it. As a side benefit, it actually helps streamline our workload, not increase it.
Certainly, the Intel Report is not for everyone. It is modeled after a Heather Cox Richardson approach to providing in-in-depth 1,500 to 2K word bedtime or morning coffee articles.
There is huge demand in general on Substack for those type of readers who want more than a brief USA Today like summary.
Granted, her audience — partisan politics — will always be much broader than our niche coverage of U.S. national security.
Hopefully, as we continue to build out our Substack model, it will be an ala carte menu for readers to pick & choose from based on what they are looking for & how much time they want to spending reading up on XYZ.
Best!
Mark