I choose to write as a narcissistic outlet to hear my own voice. I don’t produce much, and nothing of what I do publish is ground breaking.
I don’t have the qualifications or patience to write as a sportswriter, as my articles ooze my opinions. My content is mostly humor with a point.
I don’t mind the niche that my articles fall into. It’s enough that some people want to read them at all.
I don’t choose to pursue the top rankings, I’m happy to leave the analysis and real work to those far more dedicated to the teams and sports than I am.
You’ll find my name somewhere in the middle of the pack and that’s OK. I reside there with a bunch of good writers.
Unfortunately, I have been here long enough to identify the parasitic writers, those that publish only to gain or maintain a high rank.
So you think you have something to say? Does what you have to say add to the overall knowledge of your readers? Or is your intention only to prey on the loyalties of some fan base in order to increase your ranking?
That’s OK; you go ahead and publish your drivel. The locals know what your doing and you can continue to drag in the uninitiated.
In your mind you might have convinced yourself that these articles are all produced in the spirit of debate. This would be a noble cause if it were only true.
If you choose to publish indefensible arguments and enlist a cadre of friends to keep comments and conversations flowing, it is possible to get a lot of attention and reads by antagonizing that sectors faithful followers.
It’s an artificial coup.
This strategy may increase your visibility but it is sure to decrease your believability. You will certainly find that it is easy to raise ire but far harder to win respect.
You fool yourself into believing that your station in life is an indication of the respect that you garner. Fools usually do think this way.
With false popularity, you will find that you are forced to provide fuel to keep the fire going. Perpetuating a dispute without adding true insight leads to a stale conversation.
A presentation offered as fact but which truly is only thinly veiled opinion is quickly identified as fiction.
When you find that you have to publish articles in reverse to your previous stance the question becomes did the emperor discover that his clothes weren’t everything he thought they were? Is it possible that credibility has a value that is far greater than popularity?
It seems that another lesson is in store, as you will soon find that credibility does eventually breed respect, but it does not guarantee popularity.
Respect is grudging so be prepared. If you choose to publish a sports article of debate, take the time to do the analysis. Comparisons should be concise and of equal weight.
An orange is nothing like a plum; do not fall into the trap defending the unequal. Do not insult my intelligence as a reader and try to hide that which is clearly visible.
Make sure that your premises are precise and logical. If even one premise is questionable then the resultant argument can be dismissed.
Consider an argument as a wall and your premises as the bricks. If the bricks are faulty the wall falls. You must be able to concede the argument graciously if your bricks are found inferior.
Emotion has a way of corrupting logic and opinion can ruin a beautiful argument. Temper these and you may find that you have the influence and persuasion to change an open mind.