I wrote an article called "Is Pinterest a Haven for Copyright Violations?" that covered the hidden catches buried in Pinterest's Terms of Use. The article went viral, and a firestorm ignited on Twitter when my article and two others on Pinterest and copyright came out at about the same time (search "Pinterest copyright" on Twitter).
Apparently what I said resonated with many. The comments I received on both sides of the argument are worth reading. That was actually my intention in writing it: I wanted to present one side of the story as clearly as possible, and was hoping for the debate that followed.
On a tangent, the "how to" side of things: this is only the second time I've had an article go viral. In both cases, I tapped into an issue that a lot of people cared passionately about, and which was rising in popularity. In both cases I used a Magnetic Headline posing the topic as a question designed to provoke an emotional response. I didn't know it would go viral, but just in case it did draw traffic, I posted it on Hubpages which pays better for individual impressions than Squidoo does. (I think Squidoo is better for pages that people click links on and/or buy things from.) Hubpages also has a cleaner, more professional-looking skin for a reader unfamiliar with the site, which I find makes a difference in op-ed and informational articles.
However, I didn't post the article just to get traffic. I posted it to deliver important information on an issue I care about. I was terrified that I'd be virtually tarred and feathered, but I was gratified to find some people in the comments making my points better than I could make them myself. Of course, many commenters argued the other side of the debate, and some of them had important things to say, too. I urge you to read it, and them.
