This goes without saying, but if you are not organically drawn towards the subject in hand, you should not write about it. And Nassim Taleb captures this emotion very wel in Antifragile by taking it to a whole new level; and I agree with it completely. You should not go to google looking for ideas, never, never ever. At least to me it is about the serendipity of it, that makes it all worth doing, not the journalistic quest for next news item. See transclusion Transclusion
Serendipity Based outlook as a driver for large Scale personal projects
Goal-oriented outlook for large-scale personal projects seem to be detrimental in a sense that in the absence of an enforcing agent it seems to be contributing to issues like will-power dissolution, decision fatigue, burn-out, guilt etc owing to the disincentives of self-enfo...
Also it further hampers qualitative aspects of life such as creativity. Creativity is a quality without a name and using forced adherence to mechanize what must emerge on its own is just not feasible.
“Further, in writing, I feel corrupt and unethical if I have to look up a subject in a library as part of the writing itself. This acts as a filter–it is the only filter. If the subject is not interesting enough for me to look it up independently, for my own curiosity or purposes, and I have not done so before, then I should not be writing about it at all, period. It does not mean that libraries (physical and virtual) are not acceptable; it means that they should not be the source of any idea.”
— Nassim Nicholas Taleb, Antifragile
Nicholas, Nassim Taleb. (2015). Antifragile