MistNovel - Read Web Novel Stories & Fiction Online

Kevin spends a full week researching and analyzing dozens of commentary channels before he selects his target. The channel is called Deeper Look, and it is run by a man named Marcus Chen, who has built a respectable following by methodically investigating viral stories and deconstructing complex internet narratives. His brand is one of sober, evidence-based analysis, a rare commodity in the chaotic world of online commentary.

“Marcus has two critical weaknesses that we can exploit,” Kevin explains, his face illuminated by the cool, blue glow of his central monitor. “First, he is genuinely smart and prides himself on his journalistic integrity, which means he will take the time to verify sources and present information responsibly. He will not run with unsubstantiated rumors. Second, he is desperate for a breakthrough story. The algorithm has not been kind to him lately, and his channel’s growth has stagnated. He needs something big to stay relevant.”

“And we are going to give it to him,” I say, watching as Kevin compiles the digital evidence into a single, encrypted file.

“We are giving him the foundation,” Kevin clarifies, his tone precise. “He will build the house himself, convinced that it was his own brilliant investigation from the very beginning.” He shows me the package he has prepared. It is a USB drive, nondescript and untraceable, containing a carefully curated selection of the evidence we have gathered against Louis. The charity donation discrepancy is there, complete with the official tax documents. The old forum posts showing his pattern of stealing credit are included. A handful of the most damning screenshots from Sarah are present, but with all of her identifying information meticulously removed. Finally, he includes the initial thread of evidence connecting Louis to DataTrace Analytics.

“Nothing in this package is unverifiable,” Kevin says, his confidence unnerving. “Everything can be checked and confirmed through independent means. But the evidence is arranged in a specific order, designed to lead him toward a particular conclusion without ever explicitly stating it. We are not giving him a story, we are giving him a roadmap.”

“How do you plan to get it to him?” I ask, my stomach fluttering with a mixture of excitement and fear.

“An anonymous tip, delivered physically to eliminate any digital trail.” Kevin holds up a cheap, disposable burner phone. “Marcus has a post office box listed on his channel for story submissions and business inquiries. I am sending the drive there via a courier service, paid for in cash. The package will include a simple note explaining that Louis Cole is not the person he pretends to be, and that everything on the drive is verifiable public information.”

“Will he trust an anonymous source?” I ask, the potential for failure looming large.

“He will be intensely skeptical at first,” Kevin concedes. “But journalists, even internet journalists, are fundamentally driven by curiosity. They cannot resist a story that checks out, especially one this explosive. He will investigate, find that every piece of our evidence is legitimate, and then his professional ego will take over. He will believe that he discovered this all by himself, and he will pursue it with a vengeance.”

The package is mailed on a Tuesday. Kevin, using a series of proxies and public Wi-Fi networks, tracks its delivery, confirming that Marcus received it on Friday afternoon. Then, we wait. The silence is deafening. For four days, there is nothing. I begin to think our plan has failed, that Marcus dismissed the tip as the ramblings of a conspiracy theorist. Then, on Tuesday evening, Deeper Look releases a new video. The title is simple and direct: “The Louis Cole Charity Scandal: An Investigation.”

Marcus’s presentation is exactly what we had hoped for. He is not accusatory or emotional. He is methodical, walking his viewers through each piece of evidence with the calm, measured authority of an investigative journalist uncovering a difficult truth. He shows the tax documents, carefully explains the donation discrepancy, and traces Louis’s past incidents of taking false credit for the work of others.

“I want to be absolutely clear,” Marcus says, looking directly into the camera with an expression of grave seriousness. “I am not calling Louis Cole a con artist. I am presenting a body of information that raises serious, deeply troubling questions. The internet has elevated this man into a symbol of integrity, a survivor who rose above a toxic relationship and now uses his platform for good. But what if that image, that entire narrative, was meticulously constructed? What if the reality is far more complicated, and far more sinister?”

He does not mention my name. He does not have to. The implication hangs in the air, undeniable and powerful. The video gets modest traction at first, but then larger, more influential channels begin to pick it up. Drama commentary accounts, pop culture critics, and other online journalists, smelling blood in the water, begin to do their own digging, looking for their own angle on the rapidly expanding story. The narrative spreads organically, each new iteration adding its own investigation and commentary. Louis’s name trends again, but this time, the conversation is fundamentally different. People are asking questions.

Kevin and I monitor it all from his apartment. “What if he spins this again?” I ask, my anxiety a persistent hum beneath the surface.

“He will try,” Kevin says, his eyes darting between multiple screens. “But this time is different. Last time, we attacked him directly, and he could easily paint us as bitter, obsessed haters. This time, the information is coming from a credible, neutral source conducting a legitimate investigation. He cannot dismiss Marcus Chen without looking defensive and guilty.”

Louis’s response comes three days later, and Kevin was right. He cannot use his usual playbook. He looks less composed than I have ever seen him, a visible layer of frustration cracking his polished facade. He addresses the evidence point by point, but his explanations are weak and unconvincing. The charity donation was a “simple misunderstanding with his accountant.” The old forum posts were “taken completely out of context from years ago when I was just a kid.” His tone is defensive, and he justifies himself far too much. His followers notice. The comments on his response are different this time. While still mostly supportive, the dissenting voices are louder and more numerous. His approval rating, which Kevin tracks with obsessive precision, drops from ninety-two percent to seventy-eight.

“We are in his head now,” Kevin says with a grim, predatory satisfaction. “He is reacting instead of controlling the narrative. That is when people make mistakes.”