Free AI web copilot to create summaries, insights and extended knowledge, download it at here

Abstract

ticle (what, how, where, why) — how to’s, what to do’s, why xyz… and so on. (Even this article doesn’t escape it.)But is that really the writing that we really want to be doing? No, of course not. That’s generally not the kind of writing that fills the soul and allows the soul to fill the page. But it does pay the bills (sort of).What’s to be done? For most of us, it’s balancing the two types of writing: the writing for your soul and the writing for your profile and readership numbers.Miss out on the former and you’ll burn out, lose your purpose and meaning. Miss out on the latter and… well, perhaps you already know the consequences of that already. (If you don’t, bully to you, but for the rest of us it can mean scribbling in obscurity, not making anything from your writing and generally reaching only a small number of people.)It’s important to keep this in mind next time you dip the pen into ink. What are you writing for?It may just be that you have to be prepared to sacrifice readership to pour your best work on the page. And, conversely, it may be that you have to put aside your more dramatic turns of phrase and your more robust political thoughts to bring the readers in. After all, you can lead a horse to the water of quality writing, but you can’t make it drink — it’s probably had its fill on the 20 listicles it bounced between before arriving at your watering hole.I’l

Options

l put it simple: to write articles people will actually read, you have to writing things that they want to read.Even if that’s not what you want to write.Remember to keep the two in balance, for that is what will keep you sane and relevant. The more cynical way to think of it might be of quality of readership; or, to put it another way, you can please some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time.Those who read your lengthy, detailed analyses will no doubt appreciate your work in a different (note that I didn’t say better, even if I wanted to) way than those who tune in just for your ‘puff’ pieces.You may, of course, have different goals than wanting to be read by a wide number of people. You may be content with small but dedicated readership that values what you have to contribute. So long as you know you won’t have the numbers piling in to read your stuff, you can be happy.But don’t forget that you always have to give the people what they want.Scott Colvin is an internationally acclaimed writer and lawyer based in Melbourne. His award-winning work has appeared in The Sydney Morning Herald, The Australian Financial Review, The Huffington Post, and a variety of other national and international publications. Scott writes on culture, politics and the economy.</article></body>

How to Write Articles People will Read

And it’s not what you think

I have written a lot in my time.

Long articles, short articles, news articles, analytical articles, interviews, ghost-written pieces, book reviews, op-eds, attack pieces, defences, personal pieces, polemics, lifestyle and culture — you name it, I’ve probably written it.

If this one thing I’ve learned, it’s that you can’t guarantee what people will enjoy.

I’ve had articles in which I have poured my soul onto the page and really given the world a piece of my personal life. I have also written absolute rubbish, humorous pieces, lighthearted nonsense.

The reality is, the things that I am most proud of, that I think have the most penetrating analysis or make the most grave point, have probably, on the whole, been the least successful things that I have written.

On the other hand, the emptiest articles have been the most successful.

It seems that if you want to write something people will read, it needs to be a listicle or a ‘doing’ article (what, how, where, why) — how to’s, what to do’s, why xyz… and so on. (Even this article doesn’t escape it.)

But is that really the writing that we really want to be doing? No, of course not. That’s generally not the kind of writing that fills the soul and allows the soul to fill the page. But it does pay the bills (sort of).

What’s to be done? For most of us, it’s balancing the two types of writing: the writing for your soul and the writing for your profile and readership numbers.

Miss out on the former and you’ll burn out, lose your purpose and meaning. Miss out on the latter and… well, perhaps you already know the consequences of that already. (If you don’t, bully to you, but for the rest of us it can mean scribbling in obscurity, not making anything from your writing and generally reaching only a small number of people.)

It’s important to keep this in mind next time you dip the pen into ink. What are you writing for?

It may just be that you have to be prepared to sacrifice readership to pour your best work on the page. And, conversely, it may be that you have to put aside your more dramatic turns of phrase and your more robust political thoughts to bring the readers in. After all, you can lead a horse to the water of quality writing, but you can’t make it drink — it’s probably had its fill on the 20 listicles it bounced between before arriving at your watering hole.

I’ll put it simple: to write articles people will actually read, you have to writing things that they want to read.

Even if that’s not what you want to write.

Remember to keep the two in balance, for that is what will keep you sane and relevant. The more cynical way to think of it might be of quality of readership; or, to put it another way, you can please some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time.

Those who read your lengthy, detailed analyses will no doubt appreciate your work in a different (note that I didn’t say better, even if I wanted to) way than those who tune in just for your ‘puff’ pieces.

You may, of course, have different goals than wanting to be read by a wide number of people. You may be content with small but dedicated readership that values what you have to contribute. So long as you know you won’t have the numbers piling in to read your stuff, you can be happy.

But don’t forget that you always have to give the people what they want.

Scott Colvin is an internationally acclaimed writer and lawyer based in Melbourne. His award-winning work has appeared in The Sydney Morning Herald, The Australian Financial Review, The Huffington Post, and a variety of other national and international publications. Scott writes on culture, politics and the economy.