Two approaches to reaching a majority middle ground readership

[Outis]

Copied from elsewhere but I know the auhor who said I could copy it here.

I used to run a blog which was reasonably successful but I felt that most of the visitors were either maps or antis because everyone seemed to have strong opinions in one direction or another. It makes sense because why would anybody who doesn't have a vested interest in the subject bother visiting a map blog let alone read articles and comment on them?

I recently considered starting a new blog that would be more academic but I feel that even a more academic and technical blog on map related subjects would only attract readers with a vested interest. I don't want to preach to the choir or try to convince hardened antis, I'd want to reach the majority sat in the middle ground, those with no axe to grind and nothing particularly obvious to gain.

So I came up with two ideas which I'd welcome feedback on.

1. Reach out to popular blogs and publications.
The best way to reach a wide neutral audience feels like posting guess blogs through popular blogs that focus on other popular subjects, or publications that are not map specific. They could be blogs or publications on LGBTQ, on general subjects, on hobbies, on news, celebrities or anything. But blogs and publications that are popular and have a wide reach and are not afraid to write on more sensitive subjects from time to time.

Draw up a list of popular blogs and publications (have AI help to compile the lists) and reach out to them to see if they would be willing to publish a ghost guest blog or article on a map related subject that is quite academic in nature. They can proof read and reject the article, but create an article that challenges readers to consider some principles, factual with referenced materials. Controversial but legal and not directly advocating anything but presenting a viewpoint and evidence that isn't anti-map and get people thinking and questioning. Ask 100 popular blogs, if only 2 say yes and they have an audience then it's a start.

2. Create a new free speech blog service that invites any bloggers and writers to publish artcicles on any subject, as long as its legal and doesn't advocate hate or harming others. Any subject, so most articles would be tame articles and opinion pieces on totally random subjects, some will be more edgy such as political posts, religious posts, sexuality posts, event far left or far right posts that fit within the constraints of being legal. I mean I read an article recently on controversial activities carried out by Jewish organisations in the run up to WW2 that in a way contributed to the terrible events that followed. Now I'd never read this information but the article had references and links to historical documents but it isn't the kind of article you would see in any respectible site. I suspect in a true free speech service there would be far more controversial posts than academic posts on pedosexuality. The point being that if the content was broad and interesting it could attract a wide readership and provide cover for publishing factual articles on pedophilia to an audience not seeking such articles but open to reading them, in the context of a free speech site.

Thoughts?

[Outis]

To add to that I was reminded of the movie Citizen kane.

In that movie, Kane finds himself running a newspaper and is frustrated to discover most news is never covered. Only "appropriate" stories are reported, only stories good for society, curated stories.

Kane is having nothing of this and publishes a Declaration of Principles where all news is reported without bias, no opinion is wrong, nothing is undeserving of an ear to hear. It's shocking to the industry but he stands by those principles for a long time. When his beloved wife performs as a singer and is terrible in the role he insists that this is reported honestly and accurately, finishing the article himself. Principles of honesty are important, there can be no favouritsm.

Eventually in later life he falls fowl of these principles and a friend sends him his own original hand written declaration of principles to remind him of what he once said and used to believe. There's a tragic ending to his life but what I always held dear was that declaration of principles and Rosebud.

That's what I think of when I talk about a place for free speech. It called be called Kane's or Rosebud but it would have a declaration of principles like Kane had and would show no bias or fear to tread wherever stories went. But invite people to submit their own stories and they could go through an approval process to ensure they met a legal standard, but an article that had a pro opinion of maps that was legal would definitely be published.

In practical terms I would suggest something like the following.

Articles are submitted either by email, through a website or by publishing to IPFS and sending the article CID.
The articles are proof read and approved or rejected or sent back to the poster to ammend to meet legal guidelines. If there were too many articles to review then a local AI could review from a legal perspective.
Then the article is published to IPFS and pinned using our own IPFS node (if the articles was published by IPFS then our node would just pin it to ensure it doesn't go away).

The articles would be read in several ways.
1. A browser extension that retrieved an index or articles and the articles from IPFS.
2. A website with a cached version of those articles for those wanting to read them online.
3. PDF versions for anyone wanting to read on their Reading devices such as Kindles.

Also, encourage others running IPFS nodes to pin the articles so they remain even if one IPFS node is taken down, as well as share the article backups, even consider compressing without graphics and writing to some low cost blockchains as a permanent backup.