It seemed like point-free style to me. "Blog insightful x", where x is {ideas, posts, articles, etc}, but dropping the x.
If you can't put your finger on what's going on here, you need to first learn what an intransitive verb is. Then, that "blog" is such a verb (from the OS X dictionary, which I assume is based on common usage, seeing that it's such a new word). "Sleep" is another example of such a verb. You don't sleep the bed any more than you blog the post (or the cow). That's why we have the word "write".
Now, would you even say "How to write insightful" rather than "How to write insightful posts"? Because if you would, you actually want to be saying "How to write insightfully" - writing insightfully is the act of writing "insightful x", but dropping the x. You see, they already thought of that. Grammar acrobatics should be left to people who have a very strong command of the language - it will destroy your writing otherwise.
The point of the title, as I can read it, was to avoid being parsed as "how to write insightful posts." The author went off on "how to write" as a set phrase because it implied that one was about to talk about the mechanics of writing (grammar, diction, style, etc.) rather than the content. I believe this whole thing could have been fixed as thus:
"How to find insights to blog"
or even more simply:
"What to blog"
or, now that I think about it, the simplest of all, with the least change:
"How to be insightful".
Because that's what the author really wanted to show with the rest of his post—how to be an insightful person that would then have insightful things to blog.
Even if the "blogged X" usage is accepted, having insightful things to blog means you could blog insightful things. Not blog insightful. Otherwise you could also write insightful. That's nonsensical.