What Do JREF'ers Think Would be Optimal Messaging for WE ARE CHANGE?

[metamars]

Here is a question for the intellects, great and small, of JREF to ponder.

Which messaging by WE ARE CHANGE, in their street actions, would result in the most subsequent research by passers-by that see their signs?

Would "911 was an inside job" or "Google WTC7", stimulate more subsequent research? Or, would signs that say

"Google FALSE FLAG ATTACKS" stimulate more subsequent research by passers-by?

[dtugg]

You forgot the planet x option so I will refrain from voting.

[Edx]

How about..

"We don't understand building collapses, firefighting, explosives or sound... but please give us a new 9/11 investigation!"

...probably a bit wordy.

[newton3376]

Originally Posted by metamars

Here is a question for the intellects, great and small, of JREF to ponder.

Which messaging by WE ARE CHANGE, in their street actions, would result in the most subsequent research by passers-by that see their signs?

Would "911 was an inside job" or "Google WTC7", stimulate more subsequent research? Or, would signs that say

"Google FALSE FLAG ATTACKS" stimulate more subsequent research by passers-by?

The last thing a truther should want is for someone to do research....

If you look at both sides of the debate it doesnt take long to figure out which one is likely correct and which one is the rantings of morons and linatics......

[sadhatter]

How about being honest

" We missed out on the punk movement and need to be P***ed off about something. Hate the government. "

[Dog Town]

Originally Posted by dtugg

You forgot the planet x option so I will refrain from voting.

Me as well.

[A W Smith]

just a FYI, these are the Google results for False Flag Attacks

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&s...&aq=f&aqi=&oq=

nothing 911 related appears on the first page of results. Almost as if the conspiracy theorists are hiding in a church basement somewhere in Manhattan on Thursdays.

[MikeW]

Originally Posted by metamars

Would "911 was an inside job" or "Google WTC7", stimulate more subsequent research? Or, would signs that say

"Google FALSE FLAG ATTACKS" stimulate more subsequent research by passers-by?

The first is old, anyone likely to be interested will have seen it already. The second is too cryptic, unlikely to attract attention, plus it's also easily misremembered. The third is less well known, and easy to remember, so is probably the easiest option.

Let's not pretend that We Are Change really want people to do research or think for themselves, though: they're out to sell the truther line. A more honest approach might be to point potential recruits at www.wearechange.org, where they can be told what to believe.

[carlitos]

There are 2 key measures in advertising media - reach and frequency.

Taking the second first, sadly, "9/11 was an inside job" would be more effective. Repetition is one of the keys to enabling your audience to remember your message. Since 9/11 truth is invisible outside of the internet, probably 9 of 10 people haven't heard that phrase, but at least you have the 10% where you can repeat and reinforce the message. Keep it fresh and top of mind while you attempt to grow your base.

As to reach, "we are change" should probably hijack some singles / dating / pr0n URLs and recruit unsuspecting internet users have lots of people at big marches that have a chance of being noticed by the public.

This message would be more accurate though.

[Thunder]

"We hate the FDNY/NYPD"

"Bloomberg did 9-11"

"Da Joos did it!!!!"

"Got 9-11?"

"No judge, no jury, just kill the bastards!!"

[sadhatter]

" Where is Zog?"

[Donal]

Quote:

What Do JREF'ers Think Would be Optimal Messaging for WE ARE CHANGE?

Man, talk about hanging the curveball. Fine, I'll swing:

"Bring back Psycho Dad!"
"Lose Weight Now! Ask Me How!"
"Honk if you love cookies!"

[Thunder]

"Blonds love 9-11 Truth"

"Hot chicks dig Truth"

"If you ain't got Truth, you might as well die"

"9-11 Truth= free pizza!!!"

[metamars]

Originally Posted by A W Smith

just a FYI, these are the Google results for False Flag Attacks

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&s...&aq=f&aqi=&oq=

nothing 911 related appears on the first page of results. Almost as if the conspiracy theorists are hiding in a church basement somewhere in Manhattan on Thursdays.

I suppose I should have been clearer. When I wrote

Quote:

Which messaging by WE ARE CHANGE, in their street actions, would result in the most subsequent research by passers-by that see their signs?

I didn't want to suggest that the research resulting from the "Google FALSE FLAG ATTACKS" had to lead to 911 specific topics, nor even We Are Change.

Since most everybody knows about 911, and I assume most of the adult population also knows about the "911 was an inside job" meme, I assume that many Americans, if they knew the history of false flag attacks, will make the connection, without having to be told about it explicitly, anyway. After all, 'false flag attack' and '911 was an inside job' bear the superclass:subclass relationship. You'd have to be a little dense not to realize that, on your own.

Whatever the case may be, I am curious as to which sort of messaging would actually affect the behavior of passers-by more, regardless of what it leads to next.

I can think of a low cost experiment that would speak to the issue, though not directly answer it. If you designed an experiment where there was a background messaging, a captive subject (who was not aware of the true purpose of the experiment), and ready access to the internet during the, say, 1 hour of 'captivity', you might get useful data.

[carlitos]

Quote:

Since most everybody knows about 911, and I assume most of the adult population also knows about the "911 was an inside job" meme, I assume that many Americans, if they knew the history of false flag attacks, will make the connection, without having to be told about it explicitly, anyway. After all, 'false flag attack' and '911 was an inside job' bear the superclass:subclass relationship. You'd have to be a little dense not to realize that, on your own.

You are making a lot of assumptions based on some tenuous information, my friend. The fact that you are one of the more articulate adherents to this belief system probably explains its "success" thus far.

[metamars]

Originally Posted by carlitos

You are making a lot of assumptions based on some tenuous information, my friend. The fact that you are one of the more articulate adherents to this belief system probably explains its "success" thus far.

While I've met people who thought the idea was nutty, I don't think I've met any adult, in the last 5 years, who hadn't heard of the idea, itself.

Then again, I don't get out, much.

[A W Smith]

Originally Posted by metamars

Since most everybody knows about 911, and I assume most of the adult population also knows about the "911 was an inside job" meme, I assume that many Americans, if they knew the history of false flag attacks, will make the connection, without having to be told about it explicitly, anyway. After all, 'false flag attack' and '911 was an inside job' bear the superclass:subclass relationship. You'd have to be a little dense not to realize that, on your own.

Yet the connection is not as obvious within Google search results. Therefore, street action participants simply holding up signs asking passers by to "Google False Flag Attacks" won't necessarily be led to support beliefs of a 911 inside job conspiracy. WHAT YOU NEED is evidence of such a conspiracy. and you have none.

[Dumb All Over]

How about "Laser Beams Brought Down the Towers."

That ought to pack 'em in.

[twinstead]

Yes, I have to agree with AW, metamars. Why on Earth are you debating on what your signs should say when what you REALLY need is support of any respected scientific community, main-stream media, academia, or law enforcement agencies? Alas, for that you need real evidence. No, not the crap you folks CALL evidence, but the real stuff that gets real people who can make things happen to pay attention and....well....make things happen. You know, the kind you don't have.

Going about it your way insures your delightful little movement continues its fall into obscurity.

[Macgyver1968]

I wouldn't use "False Flag Attack". I never even heard that term before talking with CT's. I don't think the average Joe would even know what you were talking about.

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by metamars

Here is a question for the intellects, great and small, of JREF to ponder.

Which messaging by WE ARE CHANGE, in their street actions, would result in the most subsequent research by passers-by that see their signs?

Would "911 was an inside job" or "Google WTC7", stimulate more subsequent research? Or, would signs that say

"Google FALSE FLAG ATTACKS" stimulate more subsequent research by passers-by?

Off to AAH. great and small? Good job JREF member.

We Are Change, but we have dirt dumb Delusions; join up we attrack a lot of neoNAZIs, so education is not needed! Join now, no need to think later..

[switchpoint]

I hate for this to be my first post here but I am a big South Park fan, how about

FREE HAT!

kind of worked for them.

[Thunder]

"Support 9-11 Truth, or you killed Kenny!!!"

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by switchpoint

I hate for this to be my first post here but I am a big South Park fan, how about

FREE HAT!

kind of worked for them.

That would be better than referencing the beliefs they push.

[Mr.Herbert]

I think small, light, reading materials should be passed out at each intersection where the massive protests take place!

[DGM]

How about:
"Help WAC become respectable, Give $"

That way maybe you could get more donations from people that don't know what they're all about.

[Brainache]

Originally Posted by Mr.Herbert

I think small, light, reading materials should be passed out at each intersection where the massive protests take place!

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o...ox/truther.jpg

The Complete Idiot's Guide To Being A Complete Idiot...

As to a slogan for WAC:
"We Are WAC!"
"I'm WAC, You Can Be WAC Too!"
"It's The WAC-key To The TRUTH!"

[A W Smith]

Originally Posted by Brainache

As to a slogan for WAC:
"We Are WAC!"

A bit redundant. Instead of acronyms just let them come out and admit it?
"We Are Challenged"

[sadhatter]

" 9/11 truth, because not everyone is big enough to be a skinhead."

[Myriad]

"We get our expertise for free on the Internet, instead of hiring professionals!"

This thread being a case in point.

Respectfully,
Myriad

[sadhatter]

Actually my favorite would be

" no one is stopping me from doing this."

[carlitos]

Originally Posted by Myriad

"We get our expertise for free on the Internet, instead of hiring professionals!"

This thread being a case in point.

Actually, here at the JREF, they get lots of advice from professionals. They just ignore or dismiss it. Case in point - my notes to metamars on media messaging. I get big bucks for my advice on these subjects. Or take the rude, arrogant dismissals that truthers give to the many engineers, pilots, scientists, etc.

The best phrase for it is 'willful ignorance.'

[metamars]

Originally Posted by Mr.Herbert

I think small, light, reading materials should be passed out at each intersection where the massive protests take place!

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o...ox/truther.jpg

Just to be perfectly clear, are you saying that truthers are so dumb that they would spell "Trutherdom" as "Trutherdome"?

[carlitos]

Yes.

[Mr.Herbert]

indeed You ARE pretty bright... for a truther!



edit... aw **** I wanted my 1,000th post to have a little more substance..Thanks metamars.

[Thunder]

"9-11 Truth: its not just a hobby, its an obsession"

[Myriad]

Originally Posted by carlitos

Actually, here at the JREF, they get lots of advice from professionals. They just ignore or dismiss it. Case in point - my notes to metamars on media messaging. I get big bucks for my advice on these subjects. Or take the rude, arrogant dismissals that truthers give to the many engineers, pilots, scientists, etc.

I agree completely... but no matter how good the advice or how qualified the advisors, it's still free expertise from the Internet. Without the critical thinking ability to separate good advice from bad or meaningless advice, how can they believe anything they're told?

The time-honored solution to how to get more trustworthy advice is to pay for it. If they don't believe what you're saying, there are thousands of other public relations, marketing, advertising, and communications professionals available for answering exactly the kind of question the OP poses. These professional are versed not only in the basic principles involved in arriving at answers, but also in methods of testing those answers so that no one has to take their word for it.

Unwillingness to use hired expertise to resolve questions is exactly the reason why the truth movement is stuck in stasis, with no ability to reject false conclusions, or accept truthful ones. (It's not the reason they haven't been able to make their case to professional journalists, university faculty, historians, scientists, or prosecutors. That reason is, they're wrong. But their contempt for expertise is what prevents them from learning they're wrong.)

Respectfully,
Myriad

[carlitos]

Well said, Myriad.

[defaultdotxbe]

Originally Posted by metamars

Here is a question for the intellects, great and small, of JREF to ponder.

Which messaging by WE ARE CHANGE, in their street actions, would result in the most subsequent research by passers-by that see their signs?

Would "911 was an inside job" or "Google WTC7", stimulate more subsequent research? Or, would signs that say

"Google FALSE FLAG ATTACKS" stimulate more subsequent research by passers-by?

this is something of a trick question, we are change and other truthy groups actually DONT want to stimulate research, they want people to take them at their word for everything they say rather than look up facts for themselves

[T.A.M.]

metmars, you forgot option 3,

"Sieg Heil!"

TAM