Unfortunately, the framing also matter a lot. When the Cambridge Analytica story blew up and Facebook was the main character of the week, I spent an entire 3 h

Unfortunately, the framing also matter a lot. When the Cambridge Analytica story blew up and Facebook was the main character of the week, I spent an entire 3 hours in a weird state of shock. Not because of the contents of the story. I was shocked because this story had broken like eight months prior and everybody shrugged then. But then it was framed politically, and suddenly people gave a shit. It was surreal. So if you want to get people to talk about it, and be emotionally invested, simply frame it as evidence of [Specific Politician] mishandling [Specific Element of News Story]. It doesn't matter much which politician you slot in there, but current and former presidents on opposite parties can work with different audiences. For example, make unsubstantiated allusions to an alleged stolen laptop and connect the dots through some vague sense of poor data security practices and you can get them to repeat it with fervor. For prior art, look at how that "litter boxes in public schools" hoax got started: https://soatok.blog/2022/04/06/the-dark-truth-about-the-furry-protocol/#origins https://soatok.blog/2022/04/06/the-dark-truth-about-the-furr... (I realize I'm risking devolving this thread into a politics discussion here. I'd like to avoid that if possible. I'm more interested in the "how to motivate people to care about this story" angle, with references to prior art, rather than the specifics of any particular party, person, or scandal.)