The New York Times public editor, Margaret Sullivan, distills twenty years of experience in this piece written for her Columbia Journalism School students. — Sound advice (if a bit preachy) for anyone who posts to social media.
Yes, when writers talk about their experiences, they should be trying to elicit the same emotional response that they had from their readers, not just reporting on their response. That's storytelling.
Thus is it Sullivan's focus on herself in the first five paragraphs of her article that I find tedious. I don't know her and so I really don't care what she finds interesting. I'd prefer, if she is going to try to fake a conversational style, that she think a bit about her audience: that is, what I the reader might find interesting. She needs to explain the relevance of her piece to my life. She gives a nod to this idea in fourth paragraph but, I think, she should have started with that and expanded on why she thought her piece might be "of some interest" to her readers. Everything before that sounds like idle warming up. Initially I didn't make it through her five paragraphs of backstory on why she wrote the article. She said nothing compelling.
Contemporary marketing attempts to put people at the center of attention rather than the object: people enjoying a cola rather than a photo of the cola. Supposedly, this focus on people provides an emotional connection to the product. However, some examples show that it might work in the opposite way. Studies of popular posts on Pinterest, for example, showed that the most popular photos were the ones with no one in them. (This came as a big surprise to those reporting on the study.)
When no one is in the picture, then readers have an easier time imagining themselves in it. Moreover, if someone is pictured, the connection to your product is immediately constrained by the demographic characteristics of the person in the picture (ads for boys playing with microscopes, implying only boys are interested in science toys) or, worse, communicating that the person pictured is part of the product. (Buy this, you get her.) Other cultural problems arise when you put fake people in the picture. IKEA, who shows families enjoying their products on some pages of their catalogs, had to create separate photo shoots for some countries that didn't cotton to the idea of husbands and wives hanging around in the bathroom together.
While that might sound ridiculous, my point is that you wouldn't have the problem at all if you focused on the product not the people, the message not the messenger.
Does that mean I want everything to be impersonal? Am I so cold? No. Communicating genuine passion comes from focusing on the aspect of the topic which elicited one's own passionate response and sharing that. All the other "storytelling" seems, to me, artificial and unconvincing.