I’ve been thinking about changing the writing style of the stories I publish on MikeWriting.com.
As I’m reading Malcolm Gladwell’s The Tipping Point for a third time, I realized Gladwell answers the questions he presents to readers. He answers with firsthand accounts, historical data, and challenges to dispute his declarations to name a few.
The point I make is that the writer answers the questions.
Originally, I set out to spark dialogue by provoking readers to answer specific questions — Why do you think this is this way? How would you fix that problem?, etc. I even thought it was good to restate the questions in the conclusion.
I used great questioning techniques. I structured the posts logically and followed solid outlines. These were good ideas.
But they’re good ideas for an open lecture or a facilitated discussion. With audiences is these settings, you can direct a question to a person, wait for a response, then acknowledge the response. Acknowledgement could look like agreeing/disagreeing, asking deeper questions, or inviting someone else to offer a different answer. Now, we get to why I’m considering changing the writing of my blog posts.
The Problem in Writing for a Open Discussion
The audience is not in a place of exchanging information. They are prepared to passively observe your content — in any medium. They(We) want the information wrapped neatly with a bow. That’s to say we want it clear, concise, and complete.
That’s were the bar is set for Internet-based information: it needs to be a complete message. My posing questions without giving answers or a clear path to an answer is a failing formula for a blog post. Failing might not be the best word. Probably better to say that that format won’t sell with an internet audience.
Consider a movie or TV show finale that you labeled bad, because it left you with a bunch of unanswered question. Maybe certain elements were building up, stories were intertwining, or just some thing you couldby put your finger on was missing. When the credits rolled, you thought “That’s how they ended it?!”
While I can’t quantify this, I suspect many of mikewriting.com’s readers felt a similar disappointment.
I adopted a style that didn’t complete the message.
And Then
Now that I’m aware of the problem, how do I adapt my essays to be more talk-about-able? More specifically, how do I offer conclusions without being pretentious?
Maybe it’s in the research and firsthand accounts that could finish the loops. In a way, I think I’ve already gotten the formula from my guy, Malcolm.