Controversy Handling Decision Tree

Navigate how to handle this controversial topic:

Topic: {{controversial_topic}}
My position: {{my_position}}
Audience makeup: {{audience_demographics}}

**Branch A: Address Directly Path**
→ Full video on topic
  → Pros: Authority, engagement, relevance
  → Risks: Alienating segments, backlash
  → Mitigation: Balanced presentation, sources
→ Hot take approach
  → Pros: Viral potential, differentiation
  → Risks: Higher backlash, demonetization
  → Best if: Willing to defend position publicly

**Branch B: Avoid Path**
→ Skip entirely
  → Pros: No risk, maintain neutrality
  → Cons: Miss relevance, seem out of touch
→ Address tangentially
  → Mention without deep dive
  → Middle-ground approach

**Branch C: Delayed Response Path**
→ Wait for dust to settle
  → Pros: More informed take, less reactive
  → Cons: May seem irrelevant
→ Summary/analysis later
  → Pros: Retrospective angle, calmer discussion

**Risk Assessment**
For my {{brand_safety}} tolerance, recommend approach with reasoning.