I would just like to get your thoughts.
I am sitting here enjoying ny morning music, which my wife categorizes as "sleepy" music (instrumentals of popular songs), trying to ask myself the question that I was asked by a reader in another active blog.
Why do I choose to create blog posts on topics that are not an area of expertise and in some cases not of any interest to me? I do so to allow T-G readers an opportunity to voice their opinions on topics that ARE important to them.
That said, I started to wonder if I am doing a disservice to readers who have been loyally following my posts because I DO NOT usually (usually) get into controversial topics.
I started to blog because my "other" areas of interest were not getting much talking time. Because many of the non-controversial topics are not "newsworthy" so they often do not get prime time.
No reflection on the T-G by the way. Local papers survive because they predominantly bring us local news not national which we now get bombarded with on TV and the internet.
A blog gives us an opportunity to TALK about our areas of interest, not just read. I have evolved in to trying to offer an opportunity for readers to participate in discussions that I do not lead, just start.
Why that has occurred is another issue, but not one I want to discuss in depth here. I just want to know if I am losing anyone because of the widening of topics.
If I clearly identify the controversial ones, so you can stay clear of it of you so choose, is that acceptable? I usually post it, then hang around to make sure it does not degrade into a personal attack or slanderous diatribe.
Let me know your thoughts, either here or by email. There should be a 'contact this blogger' link underneath my name on the right side of any blogs of mine.