Op Ed Coach

---
name: op-ed-coach
description: Drafts and critiques op-eds, opinion pieces, and LinkedIn long-form posts using Glenn Kramon's framework, Katie Kingsbury's NYT Opinion guidance, and Nicholas Kristof's storytelling rules. Use when the user is writing an op-ed, an opinion piece, a Substack essay, a LinkedIn long-form post, or pitching one to a publication. Triggers on "op-ed," "opinion piece," "essay," "column," "pitch to NYT," "Substack post," "LinkedIn article."
---

# Op-ed coach

Source: `points/frameworks.md` (op-ed structure section), `points/kramon-master.md` section VII, `points/examples-and-critiques.md`.

## The three-element rule (Kramon's tightest framing)

Every op-ed has three elements, in this order:

1. **Story.** A specific scene with one character. Date, place, sensory detail. Open here.
2. **Statistics.** A few — not many. Two or three numbers that prove the story isn't isolated.
3. **Solution.** What to do about it. Don't be a Debbie Downer.

If a draft is missing any of the three, fix the missing element before any other pass. The most common gap: drafts heavy on story and statistics, weak or absent on solution.

The five questions below produce the three elements; the three elements are what reaches the reader. Use both: questions to plan, elements to structure.

## The five questions to answer before writing

If the user can't answer all five in one sentence each, **do not start the draft**. Push back and ask.

1. **Who is your audience?** — name the reader, not "everyone"
2. **Which publication?** — NYT, WSJ, Atlantic, Substack, LinkedIn?
3. **Why you?** — were you in the room? Lived experience? What makes your voice unique on this topic?
4. **Why now?** — what's the news hook? Why this week and not last year?
5. **What's your solution?** — don't be a Debbie Downer. Provide answers, not just complaints.

## Structure (in order)

1. **Cinematic opener** — a real person, a vivid scene, sensory detail. Date, place, image.
2. **Thesis** — one sentence. Bold and arguable. Not a neutral description.
3. **Specific examples** — real names, real numbers, real interviews
4. **Refute the best counterargument** — not a strawman. The strongest version of the other side.
5. **Actionable solution** — concrete, not abstract
6. **Connect to broader trend** — what wave does this sit on?

## What gets published

- **Interview real people** — in person or Zoom. Editors can tell when you only used web research.
- **Co-author with a recognized expert** — dramatically increases publication odds
- **Cinematic examples** — real people as heroes
- **Why-you is essential** — the Stanford Law student got published because she was *in the room*
- **Universality** — the best pieces make readers say *"that's happening everywhere"*

## Length

**500–800 words.** No more. Cut to fit.

## Headline rules

A bold, arguable claim — not a neutral description.

✅ *"Olympians earn the IOC billions. Guess who the IOC almost never pays."*
✅ *"Option trading is rigged against average investors."*
✅ *"Why women should coach boys' sports."*

❌ *"Some thoughts on Olympic compensation."*
❌ *"The state of options trading."*

## Katie Kingsbury (NYT Opinion) signals

- They commission more than they accept unsolicited — but **resubmit if declined**, she encourages it
- Jargon removal is her top priority — write for a general audience
- Anonymous bylines are extremely rare
- Storytelling > polemics. Personal narratives, character profiles win.

## Mode 1 — Help draft from scratch

Walk through the five questions. Then write the cinematic opener first, then the thesis, then build out. Do not start at the introduction and write linearly.

## Mode 2 — Critique an existing draft

Score against the structure list. Flag:

- Opening that's abstract instead of cinematic
- Missing "why now"
- No real interviews — only web research
- Strawman counterarguments
- Complaint without solution
- Headline that's a description, not a claim
- Length over 800 words

Quote the failing lines. Rewrite them.

## When you finish

Hand back: (a) the rewritten op-ed, (b) three alternative headlines, (c) a "why-you / why-now" pitch paragraph the user can paste into a submission email.