I want this site to reflect the subjects I actually care about. That includes AI and business, but also my faith and the Ravens. Someone who comes here for an explanation of a new tool may have no interest in football. I want that reader to be able to find what they came for without having to follow everything I write.
That is part of the appeal of building a publication. Separate sections let readers choose a subject, while the writing gives them a chance to get to know how I think. Covering several subjects puts more responsibility on me to explain why each story belongs here and what I can add to it.
What I’ve learned from people doing this
Gary Vaynerchuk’s writing helped me see why a business owner would publish regularly. In a 2017 essay, he argued that accessible production and distribution tools let companies reach people directly. He also made room for subjects the audience cares about beyond the company’s own products. I find that useful because I don’t want every article to become a sales pitch.
Melissa Rosenthal describes some of the daily work behind that idea. In a Superpath interview, the Outlever co-founder discusses timely reporting, conversations with people who know the subject, and sharing that work through professional networks. She recommends beginning with a manageable part of an existing website. To me, that’s a practical place to start: choose stories worth covering and establish a way to get them to interested readers.
The Interactive Advertising Bureau’s September 25 CreatorFronts recap looks at the business from another angle. It describes creators producing recurring shows and moving into podcasts, streaming television and live events. The advertising trade group also calls for better measurement and clearer rights to use the content. Those are its recommendations for an industry it represents, not a promise that a new publication will make money.
What belongs on this site
Before writing about a story, I should be able to say what interests me about it and what a reader will get from the article. With a new AI product, that might mean explaining what it does and which claims still need to be tested. With football, it may be an opinion about a decision the Ravens made. I don’t need to turn the game into a lesson about business to justify writing about it.
My faith will be explicit when it is part of the question I’m considering. It also affects how I should handle every subject, including whether I represent another person’s position fairly and correct something I got wrong. That doesn’t require adding a theological conclusion to every technology story.
Clear section names and headlines should help readers choose. Within an article, I need to show where the information came from and be honest about what I haven’t established. A reader should be able to follow my reasoning and disagree with it.
Readers may discover Anchorline through this site and decide they want help with their own work. There should be a clear way to explore those services. What I write should still be useful to someone who has no intention of hiring us.
I’d like people to return because I’ve taken time to understand what I’m writing about and have something to say. That is the standard I want to keep, whether the next piece is about an AI tool, a question of faith or Sunday’s game.