Jason Hawes and JV Johnson Go Live: Your Questions, Real Answers, and the Truth About Paranormal Investigation
“My first job on any investigation is to debunk. If I can explain it, I will — and I'll tell the client that, even if it's not what they were hoping to hear. That's what makes the cases we can't explain so much more significant.”
— Jason Hawes
There's nothing I enjoy more than sitting down directly with the people who've followed this work for years and just talking — no script, no production schedule, just honest conversation. JV Johnson and I jumped on a live stream to do exactly that, opening the floor to your questions about paranormal investigation, the philosophy behind TAPS, and what decades in this field actually looks like. If you missed it, here's what we covered and why it matters.
I've been doing this long enough to know that the questions people ask reveal just as much as any investigation I've ever run. When JV and I went live, the conversation went exactly where it needed to go — into the real mechanics of how we approach a case, why skepticism isn't the enemy of paranormal research but the foundation of it, and what separates serious investigators from people chasing a good story. That's the kind of dialogue I think this community genuinely needs more of.
One of the things that comes up almost every time I talk to fans and fellow investigators is the misconception that being skeptic-first means you don't believe in anything. That couldn't be further from the truth. What it means is that I'm not willing to hand someone a paranormal explanation for something that has a perfectly reasonable, natural cause. When TAPS walks into a location, my first job is to debunk. Check the pipes, test the EMF near the electrical panels, look for drafts that could move curtains or doors, identify infrasound sources that might cause feelings of unease or dread. If I can explain it, I will. And I'll tell the client that, even if it's not what they were hoping to hear. That kind of honesty is what builds trust — and it's what makes the cases we can't explain so much more significant.
JV brings a perspective to these conversations that I really value. We've known each other long enough to push back on each other, and that's exactly the kind of dynamic that produces clear thinking. During the live stream, we talked about the evolution of investigation techniques, how the technology has changed over the years, and — honestly — what still frustrates me about the way paranormal content gets produced and consumed today. There's a lot of noise out there. A lot of people performing investigation rather than actually doing it. My approach has always been the same: treat the client with respect, treat the location with respect, and treat the evidence with integrity. If something makes it into a findings report, it's because it withstood scrutiny.
The live format is one of my favorites precisely because I can't control where it goes. Someone asks something unexpected, and suddenly we're deep in a conversation about a case from fifteen years ago or debating the merits of a piece of equipment I haven't used in a decade. That spontaneity is real. It's the same instinct that drives good field work — staying present, staying curious, and never deciding what you're going to find before you find it. JV and I both agreed that the community around this work is one of the most thoughtful, passionate groups of people out there, and sessions like this live stream are a reminder of exactly why we keep doing it.
Whether you've been following the work of TAPS since the beginning or you're just starting to explore what serious paranormal investigation actually looks like, conversations like this one are where the real education happens. JV and I plan to keep doing these — because the questions you're asking deserve straight answers. Keep them coming.