Two approaches to reaching a majority middle ground readership
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2025 10:19 pm
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?
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?