Posted by: 3937522?
Posting time: 5 months ago on
Last edit time: 5 months ago on
Archived on: 10/21/2020 10:00:00 AM
Views: 1038
SCP: 40
43 upvotes, 3 downvotes (93% upvoted it)
~91 user(s) here now
Subverse anonymized: usernames are hidden and votes don't count.
NSFW: Yes
Authorized: No
Anon: Yes
Private: No
Type: Default
view the rest of the comments →
[–] 24859646? 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago (edited ago)
Find out ways to get the news out without mentioning the targeted words. As a matter of fact, what you can do is start taking bad news and inserting Trump's name instead. Pentagon worker found with nude photos on his computer? Just switch out the names in your post so it says it was found on Trump's PC. The normies will get all excited and click, only to realize that the only thing determining whether they believe an article or not is who committed the crime. This is a good way to get our headlines out as well. Just pretend that Trump is the perp in your post and supply a link to the accurate article. I bet this wakes more people up.
While we're at it, we can start swapping colors too. Swap "Black Lives Matters protestor caught shooting into car" with "White nationalist caught shooting into car". People will click on it because it agrees with the MSM narative, and read through half the article before they realize their mistake. By then it's too late. They will have read the truth - in some cases against their will, but sometimes the truth needs to be read.
[–] 24866733? ago (edited ago)
" start taking bad news and inserting Trump's name instead" I would urge people following Q to NEVER DO THIS. Why should we put out false news when we have worked so hard to produce the very opposite? Most people only read the Headlines anyway. We would totally discredit out movement by " Changing headlines" and reversing the subjects. Holy Sh-t. You must be a shill. GO AWAY.
[–] 24876036? ago
Are you kidding me? This would be information warfare at its finest. People read articles that agree with their pre-made narrative. Articles that do not agree, orworse, that challenge those narratives, are ignored or discounted. People only read the headlines of the articles that they DISAGREE with. They gleefully dig in to those articles with headlines that they agree with, which is exactly what we want.