Skip to main content

Influence Tactics Analysis Results

17
Influence Tactics Score
out of 100
72% confidence
Low manipulation indicators. Content appears relatively balanced.
Optimized for English content.
Analyzed Content
X (Twitter)

Bitcoin Archive on X

Bitcoin's monetary policy for the next 100 years is set in stone pic.twitter.com/EjGqMnos4F

Posted by Bitcoin Archive
View original →

Analysis Factors

Confidence
False Dilemmas 1/5
No binary choices presented; single positive claim.
Us vs. Them Dynamic 1/5
No us-vs-them; implicitly contrasts Bitcoin with fiat but without explicit division.
Simplistic Narratives 2/5
Presents Bitcoin as immutably superior ('set in stone') versus changeable fiat policies, a basic good-vs-unreliable framing without nuance.
Timing Coincidence 1/5
Timing appears organic amid ongoing Bitcoin price discussions (e.g., consolidation below $87k, 2026 predictions) with no correlation to major non-crypto events like protests or conflicts in Jan 19-22, 2026; historical repost from Oct 2025 viral meme.
Historical Parallels 1/5
No resemblance to known propaganda; common educational chart on Bitcoin halvings, absent from state-sponsored disinfo reports or psyops patterns.
Financial/Political Gain 2/5
Vague benefits to Bitcoin promoters like @BitcoinArchive via engagement and YouTube traffic, aligning with pro-crypto ideology but no specific politicians, companies, or funding ties evident.
Bandwagon Effect 1/5
No claims of universal agreement or 'everyone knows'; standalone statement without social proof.
Rapid Behavior Shifts 1/5
No urgency or pressure for opinion change; recirculated meme without sudden trends, bots, or astroturfing in recent X posts.
Phrase Repetition 2/5
Phrase replicated across pro-Bitcoin accounts since Oct 2025 viral post, with similar charts (e.g., '114 years in one pic'), but typical meme propagation without verbatim coordination.
Logical Fallacies 3/5
Implies absolute immutability ('set in stone') without addressing fork possibilities, a mild overgeneralization.
Authority Overload 1/5
No experts or sources cited; relies on image alone.
Cherry-Picked Data 2/5
Highlights fixed supply favorably but ignores debates on protocol upgrades or security models.
Framing Techniques 3/5
'Set in stone' uses strong, positive language to frame Bitcoin's policy as reliably permanent versus fiat flexibility.
Suppression of Dissent 1/5
No mention of critics or labeling dissenters.
Context Omission 4/5
Omits risks like potential hard forks, network consensus changes, or miner incentives post-2140, focusing only on issuance schedule.
Novelty Overuse 3/5
'Next 100 years' emphasizes the long-term fixed issuance schedule, which is technically accurate but hyperbolic to highlight scarcity compared to fiat, potentially overstating unchangeability.
Emotional Repetition 1/5
No repeated emotional triggers; single short phrase without redundancy.
Manufactured Outrage 1/5
No outrage expressed or evoked; factual claim without criticism of alternatives or inflammatory rhetoric.
Urgent Action Demands 1/5
No demands for immediate action or purchases; the statement is declarative without calls to buy, share, or act now.
Emotional Triggers 2/5
The content lacks fear, outrage, or guilt language, simply stating 'Bitcoin's monetary policy for the next 100 years is set in stone' with an image, presenting a neutral factual claim about Bitcoin's protocol.
Was this analysis helpful?
Share this analysis
Share on X Facebook LinkedIn
Analyze Something Else