A good way to drive traffic is to write controversial posts. I tend not to do that. No particular reason, it's just that the topics I write about generally aren't controversial.
One thing you have to be careful of is becoming identified as a link baiter. Some one who writes nothing but headlines to grab attention will eventually be identified as a link baiter. That can be good or bad I guess. If you are primarily in it for the money, you can wrack up some dollars that way. I'd prefer people to actually want to read my writing. Again, that's just me.
Another issue with controversy is the possibility of moving from attracting attention to attracting lawsuits. Libel is when you write something that is not true and is either embarrassing or damaging to that person. Even truth is not an out because if there is no newsworthy reason to say what you've said, you can still potentially lose a lawsuit.
Let me say right here, just in case it is not obvious, I'm not a lawyer. I just have read quite a bit about slander, libel and defamation.
Even if you win a lawsuit, it will still cost you time and money. So the point is to be careful.
A case in point, yesterday, I was doing a search and ran across a blog entry from a tech blogger. It's not a blog I have read before so I don't know any background on the people involved. The post is fairly long. If you read just the technical aspects, it makes a lot of sense and, IMHO, the author makes some very good points (again, I mean from a technical angle).
The post is 50% to 70% Of all Programmers are con-artists. If you are interested in programming, you can read it. It is interesting. Where it becomes pertinent to this discussion are some of the claims made:
Joanna, if you ever come across this post or someone else finds it for you, let it be known that I'm officially accusing you of being a charlatan.
And they artificially inflate your capabilities which is fraud, if you intent to use your new found prowess for financial gain.
People who have hired you in good faith, should be getting their money back (if they've paid you) for being so thoroughly cheated.
Joanna has her misinformation posted on Articlebase, EzineArticles, GoArticles, and the king of all shameless plugs, Promotion World.
There is actually more of that in the article. I think those are enough to get the point across.
Charlatan, fraud, cheated, misinformation. Actionable? As I said, I am not a lawyer, so I would be hesitant to publish something like that with first speaking with one. If the author can prove those things, and maybe the author can, it would probably be a pretty good defense. But is it worth going to court for?
I wouldn't call this link bait as it is not a (un)popular stand, for or against. I think the author feels very strongly what he wrote. I think if I wrote it, I would have kept the "debunking" but dropped the accusations.
What do you think?
