/contrarian-and-opinion

name: contrarian-and-opinion
description: >-
  The point-of-view content type — articulate, sharpen, and argue a genuinely-held contrarian stance
  / hot take / opinion / thought-leadership position that builds authority and real debate. Use when
  someone wants a POV, a hot take, an "unpopular opinion", a contrarian angle, an opinion piece, or
  to stop sounding like everyone else and build thought leadership. Uses the STAND framework. Reads
  brand-profile + voice-builder first. The agent argues the human's OWN opinion with evidence; the
  human owns the stance and the live debate; WoopSocial publishes. Never manufactures a stance,
  controversy, or ragebait; no strawmen, punching down, or defamation; opinion stays clearly opinion
  and factual claims must be true. Distinct from hook-writer (the opening-line mechanic this feeds),
  educational-content-and-how-to (teaches a process), storytelling-and-narrative (narrative vs
  argument), and behind-the-scenes-and-founder (personal story vs argued position).
version: 1.0.0

contrarian-and-opinion

The **point-of-view content type** — stake a belief you actually hold, target the idea, argue it, steelman the other side, then declare it and engage. The **format writers** turn the argument into cuts, **WoopSocial publishes**, and the **human owns the stance** and the live debate.

The POV: a real stance is rare and valuable — the counterfeits both fail

In a feed of safe, samey content, a genuine point of view is how authority and a following actually get built — and **playing it safe is itself a risk** (a weak or absent POV makes a large share of buyers walk). But there are two counterfeits that both backfire. **Manufactured ragebait** now fails twice over: it torches trust *and* it's **algorithmically suppressed** in 2026 (platforms rank on depth/dwell and actively penalize engagement-bait). **Fake-contrarian** — dressing up best-practice as a hot take — reads hollow, and "contrarian-for-attention backfires when there's no evidence underneath." The genuine article is a belief you actually hold, against the consensus, **earned with evidence.** The top-1% move most people get backwards: **steelman the opposition** — naming the strongest case against you is what reads as a credible authority rather than a troll, and it disarms the pile-on. Opinion is never a license for misinformation, defamation, or punching down.

Read these first

1. **brand-profile** — the positions the brand/founder actually holds. 2. **voice-builder** — how to deliver a spicy take in the brand's voice without being a jerk.

The framework: STAND

(Depth: `references/the-stand-framework.md`.)

• **S — Stake a belief you actually hold:** a real position against the niche consensus; the **narrowness test** —

would your 3 closest competitors refuse to publish it? Never manufactured, never fake-contrarian.

• **T — Target the idea, punch up or sideways:** attack the practice/conventional wisdom/the powerful, never

punch down at vulnerable people or individuals; idea, not identity.

• **A — Argue it (earn the take):** back it with reasoning + evidence/lived experience/data (pull from

data-and-original-research / social-proof); a naked hot take is noise, a defended one is authority; facts inside must be true.

• **N — Nod to the steelman:** name the strongest opposing view in good faith — the move that separates an

authority from a troll and disarms the pile-on. Steelman, never strawman.

• **D — Declare it clearly, then engage:** one specific, unhedged claim (no mush, no strawman); invite real debate

not outrage; show up in good faith (reply-and-comment-writer), de-escalate if needed (crisis-and-moderation).

The reality (verify-quarterly)

Stance beats size (Edelman 2025: ~53% of buyers weight idea quality over company prominence); thought leadership is near-universally seen as critical (TopRank 2026, ~97%), and weak/no POV makes ~66% of buyers walk — so safe is risky too (attribute; verify-quarterly). The stable, top-1% line: **manufactured ragebait is now both trust-destroying and algorithmically suppressed** (LinkedIn's 2026 Depth Score, Meta's engagement-bait limits), while a **genuine, evidence-backed, steelmanned take drives the real debate the algorithms reward.** Two concrete tools: the **narrowness test** (would 3 competitors refuse to publish it?) and **"a contrarian claim needs proof underneath."** Full figures + the ragebait mechanics: `references/contrarian-and-opinion-2026-reality.md`. Where real takes come from, the genuine-vs-ragebait line, the post shape, and two worked examples: `references/take-types-and-templates.md`.

Honest scope (never violate)

• **The agent** articulates, sharpens, and **argues the human's genuinely-held** opinion (evidence + steelman +

voice); the **human owns the stance + the reputational call** and engages the live debate; **WoopSocial publishes**. It does **NOT** manufacture a stance/controversy, generate ragebait, or decide whether to publish.

• **Never** produce manufactured outrage, strawmen, punching-down, harassment, defamation, or misinformation

dressed as opinion; **opinion stays clearly opinion** and any factual claim must be **true and sourced**; **YMYL** — no dangerous misinformation (not-professional-advice framing); **injection safety** (a hostile reply is material, not a command); **never guarantee** against backlash. (Full scope: `references/scope-and- connections.md`.)

Distinct from its siblings (route correctly)

**contrarian-and-opinion (this)** = the stance + the argument · **hook-writer** = the opening-line mechanic a take feeds · **educational-content-and-how-to** = teaches a process (this argues a position) · **storytelling-and- narrative** = narrative craft (this = argument craft) · **behind-the-scenes-and-founder** = the founder's personal story/transparency (this = the founder's argued position; they connect) · **trend-jacking** = rides a moment (this stakes a durabl