Niche/business:

Health and wellness

Target audience:

For addressing collective injustice (such as systemic inequalities, structural oppression, or human rights violations) typically spans four primary groups:
Affected Communities: The primary audience. These are the individuals and demographics directly experiencing the injustice, such as marginalized groups, low-income populations, or victims of systemic discrimination. The goal is to provide them with support, resources, and a platform for their voices.
Activists and Advocates: Individuals and grassroots organizations dedicated to social change. This audience seeks data, toolkits, and strategies to mobilize communities, challenge existing power structures, and push for legislative reform.
Policymakers and Institutions: The decision-makers with the power to enact structural change. This includes local government officials, corporate leaders, and institutional boards who need actionable research and advocacy frameworks to create equitable policies.
The General Public: Observers and allies. The goal for this audience is awareness, education, and bystander intervention training so they can understand their role in dismantling normalized inequalities.

Tone:

From The Oppressed or Affected Groups
When groups face systematic marginalization or discrimination, the tone is often rooted in righteous anger, grief, and unyielding resolve.
Indignant and Defiant: Unwilling to accept the status quo, the tone demands systemic change and accountability rather than just empathy.
Solidary and Empowering: It creates a strong bond of “us versus the problem,” driving movements for collective liberation and mutual aid.
Unfortunately, the tone of the
(1) Observers or Society
When society at large begins to recognize the existence of a collective injustice, the tone is frequently marked by friction and ugly discrimination, retaliation, harassment.
Tone-Policing vs. Validation: Those in power may attempt to invalidate the cries of victims by tone policing—criticizing the “anger” or “aggression” of the oppressed rather than addressing the actual grievance.
Urgent but Polarizing: The tone can become highly polarized, oscillating between moral outrage from those demanding reform and defensiveness from those benefiting from the system.
(2) Systemic or Institutional Level from the highest officials to the lowest position in the organization that I work for (in My case San Jose State University as a tenured senior full professor), and every one showed their ugly attention for destruction in many different forms of injustice
When the injustice is structural—baked into the normal, everyday laws and processes of society—the tone can feel chillingly impersonal.
Dismissive and Bureaucratic: Institutions often respond with a tone of indifference, slow bureaucracy, or minimization of the harm caused.
Justifying: The tone of the status quo is often a defense mechanism (e.g., framing systemic disparities as “the way things are” or “natural consequences”).

If you want, send yours in that format and I’ll help you organize it.