After last week’s post about Seth Godin and Tom Peters on Blogging, it was suggested in the comments that ‘we should be writing when there’s something to say.’

It got me thinking, how do I know when I have something worth sharing?  I don’t.  The value of what I write here is dependent on the eye of the reader.

Or the value may be for me.  Writing can be therapeutic and transformative.  As Godin and Peters suggest, writing can be a way to work through ideas.

So depending upon the day there’s hopefully something here for both of us.

Like most bloggers, I live with the temptation to serve red meat.  I know precisely what draws traffic to 33 charts.  But I want to avoid a vapid barrage of linkbait, lists and SEO optimized titles that promise tactical solutions to our social health woes.  Michael Arrington at Techcrunch has referred to this as social psychomanipulation.  Too often we play to our audience in a way that isn’t healthy.  We involuntarily evolve our writing in response to a feedback loop that tailors content for maximum positive regard.  Short-term it makes for exciting traffic, long-term it stifles fresh thinking.

I’ve got lists and solutions.  But I’m going to try to keep it fresh with ideas that look at medicine and social media as part of something bigger.  I’m not sure it’s worth reading but it’s where I’m at and how I’m thinking.