column-editorial - SKILL.md Agent Skill

context: fork name: column-editorial description: "Writes argumentative columns, editorials, and op-eds with contrarian thesis, steelmanned counter-arguments, and layered evidence. Use when user asks about column writing, op-ed, editorial, opinion piece, thought piece, 칼럼, 오피니언, 사설, 논평, or 기고문." platforms: [claude-code, gemini-cli, codex-cli, cursor] level: 3 triggers: - "column" - "op-ed" - "opinion piece" - "editorial" - "contrarian piece" - "argumentative essay" - "칼럼" - "오피니언" - "사설" - "논평" - "기고문" agents: - "content-marketer" - "doc-updater" tokens: "~4K" category: "marketing" depends_on: - copywriting - long-form-writing suggests: - voice-reference - ai-slop-reviewer - marketing-strategy

Column & Editorial Writing

When This Skill Applies

Writing B2B newsletter columns with a named opinion owner
Drafting industry-publication op-eds where the thesis contradicts consensus
Composing company-blog editorial pieces that commit to a position instead of surveying options
Converting internal point-of-view memos into public-facing argument pieces
Refining draft columns that read as neutral analysis when a stronger stance would serve the reader

A column is not a survey, not a listicle, and not a feature report. It commits to one argument and defends it.

Core Guidance

1. The Contrarian Thesis Hook

A column earns its first ten seconds by contradicting something the reader believes. If the thesis would not surprise the reader's boss at dinner, it is not a column thesis — it is a briefing.

Ten-Second Reader Rule: Within the first 100 words the reader must see (a) a claim they disagree with or have not considered, (b) a reason to believe you can defend it, and (c) the shape of what comes next. If any of the three is missing, the scroll wins.

Thesis Form	What It Commits To	What It Risks
Industry-contrarian	"Everyone says X, but X is wrong because Y"	Strongest form; demands real evidence
Sub-segment contrarian	"X is right for most, but for segment Z the opposite holds"	Narrower but defensible; easier to prove
Reframing	"Everyone is arguing X vs not-X, but the real question is Z"	Elevates the conversation; must land the new frame
Under-stated position	"A point everyone agrees is minor is actually central"	Depends on demonstrated stakes
Timeline reversal	"The change people think is coming already happened"	Requires evidence the shift is live, not forecast

Avoid thesis forms that collapse on first read: "It depends", "Both sides have a point", "We need more research". These are abstentions, not arguments.

2. Stakes-Credibility-Preview Opening (100-150 words)

The opening paragraph is not scene-setting. It is the audition for the reader's remaining two minutes. Three beats, in order:

Beat	Purpose	Word Budget	Failure Signal
Stakes	Show why the argument is worth having now	40-60 words	Reads as news recap
Credibility	Explain why this author or dataset can speak to it	30-50 words	Sounds like a resume
Preview	Name the two or three supports coming in the body	30-50 words	Gives the whole argument away

Stakes answers "why does this matter this month." Cite a concrete pressure: a recent policy change, a quarter of traffic data, a decision a reader is about to make.

Credibility answers "why should I believe you specifically." The author's first-person experience, the dataset's scope, the operating role held. One sentence, no flattery.

Preview answers "what am I in for." Two or three supports named, no more. The reader should finish the opening knowing the destination and the stops, not the mileage.

3. Four-Stage Body Structure

A column earns trust by modeling the argument it would face across the table.

Stage	Function	Target Words	Key Move
1. Thesis	State the contrarian claim sharply	200-300	No hedging; commit
2. Steelman	Present the strongest opposing view fairly	250-400	Name a real counter-holder; use their best form
3. Counter	Show why the steelman fails or is bounded	400-600	Evidence-led, not rhetoric-led
4. Implications	Draw the consequence for the reader's decisions	200-350	One action frame, not a to-do list

The body's center of gravity is stage 3. A column that short-changes the counter is an assertion, not an argument.

4. The Steelman Requirement

Every column must include a paragraph that opens with the functional equivalent of "The strongest case against my position is...". This is not politeness. It is the mechanism by which the reader decides to trust you.

Steelman quality checklist:

Criterion	Pass	Fail
Sourced	Names a real person, institution, or tradition holding the view	"Some would argue..."
Best form	Presents the opposing view in its sharpest version, not a weak version	Strawman that is easy to knock over
Proportionate	Given enough space that the reader feels the pull	Two sentences then dismissed
Charitable	Grants any point that is in fact correct	Concedes nothing
Concluded	Ends by stating what the steelman does and does not explain	Left dangling before refutation

If after writing the steelman the author notices the column's original thesis is weaker than they thought, the correct response is to revise the thesis, not to weaken the steelman.

5. Evidence Layering

Not all evidence carries the same weight in a column. The higher the tier, the more the argument earns.

Tier	Evidence Type	Column Weight	When to Use
1	First-party data (own operations, own experiments)	Highest	Available; column moves the field
2	Named third-party dataset or research paper	High	Tier 1 absent; rigor needed
3	Quoted expert or practitioner on record	Medium	Supports a structural claim
4	Historical precedent or analogy	Medium-Low	Illustrates pattern; cannot prove
5	Personal anecdote	Low	Illustrates stakes; never proof

A column built entirely on tier 4 and tier 5 evidence reads as a blog post. A column that leads with tier 1 and supports with tier 2 and tier 3 reads as publishable argument. Stage 3 of the body should carry at least one tier 1 or tier 2 citation.

Anti-pattern: Piling five tier-5 anecdotes and calling the weight of them proof. Three anecdotes rhyming is still three anecdotes.

6. Closing: Reconsideration, Not Action

A column closes by asking the reader to see the world slightly differently, not by asking them to click or buy.

Closing Frame	Example Pattern	When It Works
Reframed observation	"The next time you see X, notice whether Y is actually present"	Leaves a durable lens
Bounded forecast	"If the pattern holds, expect Z within the year"	Stakes a claim readers can check later
Inversion challenge	"The question is no longer X; it is its opposite"	Forces position-taking
Stakes recapitulation	"The cost of continuing to believe X is Y"	Works when stakes opened the piece

Closings to avoid: "Time will tell." "It remains to be seen." "What do you think? Comment below." These forfeit the argument the column just built.

7. Korean Column Practical Ranges

Operating ranges observed across Korean B2B and industry-column formats. Treat as defaults, adjust to house style.

Element	Range	Notes
Title	25-35 characters	Thesis-forward, not summary-forward
Lead (리드)	200-300 characters	Covers stakes + credibility + preview compressed
Body (본문)	1,500-2,500 characters	3-5 subsection headers
Subsection headers	3-5 total	Each introduces one stage or one piece of evidence
Close (맺음)	100-150 characters	One reconsideration sentence, one stakes sentence

Long-form English equivalents typically run 900-1,400 words for newsletter columns, 1,400-2,000 for industry-magazine op-eds.

8. Voice and Pronoun Discipline

Voice Choice	When Appropriate	When It Becomes a Problem
First-person singular	Personal experience anchors the argument	Used to pad opinions with "I think"
Editorial "we"	Represents a publication's position	Hides the author; avoid in signed columns
Second-person "you"	Frames the reader's decision in stage 4	Used in stage 1 or 2; sounds preachy
Third-person analytic	Policy and market arguments	Used to dodge ownership of the claim

A signed column uses the author's "I" in stages 1 and 4, and third-person analytic voice in stages 2 and 3. Mixing "I" into the steelman collapses the structural contrast the reader is tracking.

Output Format

COLUMN DRAFT PACKAGE
====================
Title:          [25-35 chars KO / 8-14 words EN]
Thesis Form:    [industry-contrarian | sub-segment | reframing | under-stated | timeline-reversal]
Target Reader:  [segment + decision they face]
Length:         [word or character count]

OPENING (Stakes-Credibility-Preview)
------------------------------------
[100-150 words covering all three beats in order]

BODY OUTLINE
------------
| Stage       | Headline                         | Words | Key Evidence Tier |
|-------------|----------------------------------|-------|-------------------|
| Thesis      | [sharp commitment headline]      | ~250  | Framing           |
| Steelman    | [counter-view headline]          | ~350  | Tier 2-3          |
| Counter     | [refutation headline]            | ~500  | Tier 1-2          |
| Implications| [consequence headline]           | ~275  | Reframed lens     |

CLOSING
-------
[One reconsideration sentence + one stakes sentence]

EVIDENCE LEDGER
---------------
| Claim           | Evidence Tier | Source Form                  |
|-----------------|---------------|------------------------------|
| [claim summary] | [1-5]         | [first-party / named study]  |

Quick Reference

Four Stages: Thesis → Steelman → Counter → Implications Opening Beats: Stakes → Credibility → Preview (100-150 words) Evidence Tiers: First-party > Named dataset > Expert quote > Precedent > Anecdote Close Form: Reconsideration request, not action CTA Korean Ranges: Title 25-35자 / Lead 200-300자 / Body 1,500-2,500자 / Close 100-150자

References

See ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../copywriting/SKILL.md for headline formulas that apply to column titles
See ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../ai-slop-reviewer/SKILL.md to scrub hedge-stacks and affirmation openers before publication